Return-Path: <WRJJRS@aol.com>
Received: from imo-m19.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.11] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.8)
  with ESMTP id 616209 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:09:21 -0500
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.137.11; envelope-from=WRJJRS@aol.com
Received: from WRJJRS@aol.com
	by imo-m19.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r3.8.) id q.13e.b18788c (15862)
	 for <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:08:42 -0500 (EST)
Received: from  aol.com (mow-m01.webmail.aol.com [64.12.184.129]) by air-id06.mx.aol.com (v104.17) with ESMTP id MAILINID61-3df641f1371a394; Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:08:42 -0500
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 12:08:42 -0500
From: WRJJRS@aol.com
To: flyrotary@lancaironline.net ("Rotary motors in aircraft")
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: P Port fuel Injection
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <27749A77.14E81895.00051B7E@aol.com>
X-Mailer: Atlas Mailer 2.0
X-AOL-IP: 66.127.99.234
X-AOL-Language: english
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Jerry, 
 With reguard to the injection Alan Tolle was talking about, they were trying to go with a MECHANICAL system thinking that would be better accepted by the avation community at the time. Functionally it is no where near as good as modern electronic fuel injection. They were worried about fuel puddleing on the runners. With a modern FI with a fine spray injector it shouldn't be a big problem.
Bill Jepson