Return-Path: Sender: (Marvin Kaye) To: lml Date: Sat, 18 May 2002 11:27:30 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from vineyard.net ([204.17.195.90] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.0b1) with ESMTP id 1240942 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 17 May 2002 21:32:57 -0400 Received: from direct (FSY15.VINEYARD.NET [66.101.65.15]) by vineyard.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6114591586 for ; Fri, 17 May 2002 21:32:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-Message-ID: <009501c1fe0c$84db1ee0$07416542@direct> From: "Ted Stanley" X-Original-To: Subject: Williams turboprop X-Original-Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 21:37:02 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 If I remember correctly Lance posted an explanation quite a few months back of the why and why nots of using a variety of turbine engine. He noted in particular that the biggest problem with using the Williams turboprop in a Lancair IV is that the engine is too light. The completed aircraft would'nt balance. The other issue is that I believe Williams has made it quite clear that they don't want there engines in experimental aircraft. Ted Stanley Direct Flight, Inc.