X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com
Return-Path: <ceengland@bellsouth.net>
Received: from imf21aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.69] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.8)
  with ESMTP id 984023 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 13 Feb 2006 22:50:57 -0500
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.69; envelope-from=ceengland@bellsouth.net
Received: from ibm63aec.bellsouth.net ([209.215.60.37])
          by imf21aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP
          id <20060214035014.XFCW4163.imf21aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm63aec.bellsouth.net>
          for <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>;
          Mon, 13 Feb 2006 22:50:14 -0500
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (really [209.215.60.37])
          by ibm63aec.bellsouth.net with ESMTP
          id <20060214035012.ESBD5432.ibm63aec.bellsouth.net@[127.0.0.1]>
          for <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>;
          Mon, 13 Feb 2006 22:50:12 -0500
Message-ID: <43F15371.9030102@bellsouth.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 21:50:09 -0600
From: Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Another rotary failure
References: <list-983971@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-983971@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Russell Duffy wrote:

>  One thing my dad drilled in my head was that always have in your mind
>where are you going to land when the engine quits because its not a question
>of if it will happen its a question of when and that was when we were flying
>certified aircraft. 
> 
>Hi Ken,
> 
>All true of course. The big difference in the RV world is that a Lycoming
>installation is totally standardized.  You can buy the FWF kit, and you
>don't have to do anything creative.  All the components have been tested by
>about 4500 people before you.  In that case, you're worried about the off
>chance of an actual engine failure, which MIGHT be more likely than it is
>with the rotary.  
> 
>Unfortunately, we're proving almost monthly that it's far more likely to
>have a problem with the rest of the installation, rather than the actual
>engine.  That puts any alternative engine installation at a severe
>disadvantage. 
> 
>Rusty
>

Weeelllll, I'm still a fence-sitter, but I can't agree that things are 
that automatic even with RV's. If you go to the Matronics RV list & 
search 'oil temp' or 'cylinder head temp' you can spend a very long time 
reading all the posts. Search 'oil cooler' & you'll find hundreds of 
posts about where to mount, how big a hose to feed it with, how big a 
cooler is needed (see 1st search), etc etc. You'll find discussions of 
cracked cylinders due to overheat from casting slag between fins, 
cracked heads between the spark plugs, etc. You'll find discussions on 
how to make the 'standard' baffling  cool each cyl evenly.

Systems cause most of the problems with Lycs, just like the rotary or 
Subaru, or <etc>. I've got a collection of Sport Aviation mags going 
back to the 70's (acquired with various projects) & the early ones are 
littered with accounts of certified engine failures on the less 
'standardized' designs guys were building before Van took over the world 
& helped (but did not eliminate) powerplant problems.

But you are certainly correct that statistically, a much higher 
percentage of Lycs fly without major problems than alternative engines. 
Which is one of the reasons I'm on the fence. :-(

Charlie