Mailing List flyrotary@lancaironline.net Message #30204
From: Tracy Crook <lors01@msn.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Why do this? / was Another Rotary failure.
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 09:24:12 -0500
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Interesting, yes, but I doubt it would be encouraging.  I fully acknowledge that this is undoubtedly a relatively risky venture.  Just as private flying is relatively risky compared to commercial flying. 
 
This is a synopsis of the message I give anyone who asks me about the pros & cons of installing an alternative engine:
 
In choosing to do this, you are betting your life that you have the necessary skills and knowledge to develop a one of a kind aircraft propulsion system - not a trivial task, and a far greater challenge than using time proven systems based on conventional aircraft engines.   If your primary goal is to build an aircraft and fly it safely,  buy an aircraft engine from a reputable source and install it to the best of your abilities.   Do not consider cost as the primary reason for doing otherwise.  Only if you have some 'Fire in the Belly' to power your aircraft with some alternative should you even consider it.  If you do, there is no better alternative than the Mazda rotary.  
 
The up-side is the satisfaction gained from successfully meeting the challenge - it is beyond description.   If you save a nickel in the process, consider it a small bonus.
 
Tracy
 
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Another rotary failure

A very interesting comparison would be accident/incident rates for experimental with certified engines vs experimental with ‘alternative’ engines.

 

Al

 

Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Another rotary failure

 

Rusty,

Couple of years ago we lost 3 Cozy's within few months due to Lycoming engine problems. Not landing with engine problem, but total lost of all 3 aircraft. Nobody said a word. Like it was the most ordinary thing?

Bulent "Buly" Aliev

Ser# 066 / N484BD



 

On Feb 13, 2006, at 2:03 PM, Russell Duffy wrote:

 



 

On the subject of failures in general, am I the only one who thinks there have just been way too many of these in the last couple years?  In virtually every case, the engine has been the victim, rather than the cause of the problem, but to the casual observer, it looks bad for the rotary.  I'd hate to calculate the number of flight hours per serious problem for currently flying rotaries.  I'd also hate for the insurance companies to do it.  Let's hope this trend doesn't continue.  

 

Cheers,

Rusty (one rotor, no prop) 



 

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster