Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=68.230.241.35; envelope-from=dale.r@cox.net
From: Dale Rogers <dale.r@cox.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>,"Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: More Lycoming Problems
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 13:45:20 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20051011174535.ZWQ11356.fed1rmmtao04.cox.net@smtp.west.cox.net>

Ed Anderson <eanderson@carolina.rr.com> wrote:
 
> I agree, Dave.
> 
>   Even after I lost the apex seals and rotor on way to Sun & Fun in April and flew back on one rotor, I knew that few reciprocating engines would have done nearly as well on only 1/2 their cylinders.  Just  further confirmed my opinion that the rotary - like all things mechanical - can break but does so with the most graceful degradation of performance
> 
> Ed.


   Just playing devil's advocate here.  A lot of the recent failures noted on the two canard lists involve only a single  cylinder.  So they are only losing 1/4 or 1/6 their power output.  OTOH, on the rotary, every *engine* failure mode I can think of will cost the flyer a minimum of two faces - 1/3 the engine's capacity.  

   WRT Dave's failure ... how much of an effect would a broken piston ring yield?  Usually, no the whole 25% which that cylinder is worth on a Lycosaurus 4 banger.

   Nevertheless, Dave's total engine rebuild is going to cost far less than the cost of repairing the damage from a single broken ring on a Lyc.

Dale R.
COZY MkIV #1254 
R13B still mid-build