Return-Path: Received: from [24.25.9.101] (HELO ms-smtp-02-eri0.southeast.rr.com) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c3) with ESMTP id 881911 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 18 Apr 2005 10:18:26 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=24.25.9.101; envelope-from=echristley@nc.rr.com Received: from ms-mss-05-ce0-1 ([10.10.5.94]) by ms-smtp-02-eri0.southeast.rr.com (8.12.10/8.12.7) with ESMTP id j3IEHc0V018361 for ; Mon, 18 Apr 2005 10:17:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from southeast.rr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ms-mss-05.southeast.rr.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) with ESMTP id <0IF500HG6BPE28@ms-mss-05.southeast.rr.com> for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 18 Apr 2005 10:17:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [10.10.1.26] (Forwarded-For: [64.102.45.251]) by ms-mss-05.southeast.rr.com (mshttpd); Mon, 18 Apr 2005 10:17:38 -0400 Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 10:17:38 -0400 From: echristley@nc.rr.com Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Apex Seal Groove Wear and Air Filters was Re: [FlyRotary]... To: Rotary motors in aircraft Reply-to: echristley@nc.rr.com Message-id: <59d23459c4f8.59c4f859d234@southeast.rr.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: iPlanet Messenger Express 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-language: en Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline X-Accept-Language: en Priority: normal X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine I am building my > > intake right now and it will have filtered air with the option of > > switching to ram air at altitude. Do you think this is a good > idea? > Certainly some dust exists even at 10,000 ft. Jerry Jerry, can we examine the basic premise for a moment? You've stated that you'll use filtered air next to the dusty Earth and unfiltered ram air at altitude. The contradiction that I'm seeing is that near the dusty Earth is where you want the extra power that would be supplied with the unfiltered air. At altitude you'll be throttling back for cruise power. How do you view the cost/benefit of the extra complexity of the 'switchable' intake?