X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from frontend1.cwpanama.net ([201.225.225.167] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c5) with ESMTP id 953278 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 22 May 2005 19:52:04 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=201.225.225.167; envelope-from=rijakits@cwpanama.net Received: from [201.224.93.110] (HELO usuarioq3efog0) by frontend1.cwpanama.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.1) with SMTP id 42330980 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sun, 22 May 2005 18:58:34 -0500 Message-ID: <003f01c55f29$231f0320$6e5de0c9@usuarioq3efog0> From: "rijakits" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Crash investigation Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 18:51:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003B_01C55EFF.3A147DA0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C55EFF.3A147DA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit That's an excellent idea! Would it be possible to make a couple of Ground test and flight test props, that could be calibrated on aircraft with known performance? Like Tracy's, Ed's, Dave Leonard, and all the other guys with known numbers. Ground props could be optimized for better cooling on those long ground-check runs. With known static rpm numbers from the named airplanes this should be a good base reference, especially on static rpm comparison. Once the airplane gets to fly there probably will be too many different variables to maintain good comparison, but static runs eliminate about all aerodynamic and weight influence. Thomas Jakits ----- Original Message ----- From: WALTER B KERR To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 2:02 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Crash investigation David S wrote: Preflight and Phase One support would be an important safety tool. There are "cheap" water brake "dynos" out there that can be used to vary loads on the engine to break it in (AND program its ECU) properly from the safety of the ground. Price is in the small thousands, and "leases" are available for around $100/month. Without inferring speculation against the recent accident, can you fathom the benefit of using such a device to determine IF and WHEN your engine will vaporlock? Or to determine EXACTLY how much HP you are making, so you can size the prop for it? Or so you can adequately determine your BSFC and efficiency? Or to know how much heat you really are generating, so you know how much you have to dissipate? Such a device could be loaned/rented to members (or even NON-members for a premium... still cheaper than Dyno time in a race shop) --------------------------------------------- I believe and easier , less expensive way it to check your installation is using Tracy or Ed A's well known performance prop and simple do early testing with it. You will know if you are in the ballpark with total installation, ie intake, exhaust, etc. I did this with Ed's prop and flew off my 40 hours with it. Now have got to get my prop reduced in power consumption and either buy Ed's or fly with mine. Hope to do so soon Ed, thanks for your patience. Bernie ------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C55EFF.3A147DA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
That's an excellent idea!
Would it be possible to make a couple of Ground = test and=20 flight test props, that could be calibrated on aircraft with known=20 performance?
Like Tracy's, Ed's, Dave Leonard, and all the = other guys=20 with known numbers.
Ground props could be optimized for better = cooling on=20 those long ground-check runs. With known static rpm numbers from the = named=20 airplanes this should be a good base reference, especially on static rpm = comparison. Once the airplane gets to fly there probably will be too = many=20 different variables to maintain good comparison, but static runs = eliminate about=20 all aerodynamic and weight influence.
 
Thomas Jakits
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 WALTER B = KERR
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2005 2:02 = PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Crash=20 investigation

David S wrote:
Preflight and Phase One support would be an important safety = tool. There=20 are "cheap" water brake "dynos" out there that can be used to vary = loads on=20 the engine to break it in (AND program its ECU) properly from the = safety of=20 the ground. Price is in the small thousands, and "leases" are = available for=20 around $100/month. Without inferring speculation against the recent = accident,=20 can you fathom the benefit of using such a device to determine IF and = WHEN=20 your engine will vaporlock? Or to determine EXACTLY how much HP you = are=20 making, so you can size the prop for it? Or so you can adequately = determine=20 your BSFC and efficiency? Or to know how much heat you really are = generating,=20 so you know how much you have to dissipate? Such a device could be=20 loaned/rented to members (or even NON-members for a premium... still = cheaper=20 than Dyno time in a race shop)
---------------------------------------------
I believe and easier , less expensive way it to check your=20 installation is using  Tracy or Ed A's well known performance = prop and=20 simple do early testing with it. You will know if you are in the = ballpark with=20 total installation, ie intake, exhaust, etc. I did this with Ed's prop = and=20 flew off my 40 hours with it. Now have got to get my prop reduced in = power=20 consumption and either buy Ed's or fly with mine. Hope to do so soon = Ed,=20 thanks for your patience.
 
Bernie
------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C55EFF.3A147DA0--