Message-ID: <02fa01c42672$98197930$2402a8c0@EDWARD>
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-3179598@logan.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: 13B dynafocal mount - was dream time
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 20:58:28 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I actually did ask about the front cover casting.  I was told that while
they are apparently willing to consider selling the PSRU separate from the
engine, that the front cover casting was unique to their adaptation on the
rotary, implying that it was not compatible with the standard 13B but
providing no details on what the difference might be.

Might be worth another person asking.

Ed Anderson
RV-6A N494BW Rotary Powered
Matthews, NC
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "marc" <cardmarc@charter.net>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 8:41 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: 13B dynafocal mount - was dream time


> Mike,
> Mistral Engines(who was at sun n fun) with their prototype info on the
> 200hp rotary and cs gearbox have already done that. Ask them if they
> will supply the rear (front on car) cover to you. It fits the 13B
> housings. Won't be cheap tho.
>
> Marc Wiese
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net]
> On
> > Behalf Of Michael McGee
> > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 6:50 PM
> > To: Rotary motors in aircraft
> > Subject: [FlyRotary] 13B dynafocal mount - was dream time
> >
> > At 08:39 2004-04-19, you wrote:
> >
> > > > the puzzle. It seem there is a lot of re inventing
> > >the wheel. I
> > >
> > >
> > >I was thinking that, too.  Then I realized that what
> > >is going on is parallel developement.  Something you
> > >will probably never see in a corporate lab.  Lots of
> > >slightly different ideas being worked on at the same
> > >time.
> > >
> > >What I see happening right now is that a lot of
> > >these ideas that have been on the workbench for
> > >years are coming out of developement and into long
> > >term testing.  I think over the next year or so you
> > >will start to see a lot more consensus on what works
> > >best, as the different approaches get tested and
> > >we're able to see what works best in the real world.
> > >  Then you'll start to see people willing to bet the
> > >farm on a business venture to create firewall
> > >forward packages.
> >
> > Speaking of dreaming..
> >
> > What do you guys think of the viability of a front cover cast into the
> > form
> > of a standard Lycoming dynafocal-1 mount?
> >
> > A loose collection of my thoughts so far:
> >
> > I think it would sell well enough to get the price under $500 for the
> > kit.  I was bs-ing with the local rotary engine builder the other day
> and
> > he showed me a very nice third-gen oil pan that was cast as a
> torsionally
> > stiff replacement for the stamped steel original.  The reason behind
> the
> > pan is another story but the casting work looked great (from this
> > engineer/
> > non-casting expert's perspective anyway).  He insists that he has a
> > casting
> > guy that is capable of making what we need if I can get him a proto
> type
> > part.
> >
> > The thought here is a Dynafocal mount would open up more of the market
> to
> > those who would convert to rotary engines (like I'm doing) if it
> didn't
> > require changing the motor mount.  I realize that we can make a decent
> > mount without it and use something like the Schertz beam or the bell
> > housing that the ACRE group is working on.  The Dyna-1 mount would be
> an
> > effort towards more of a standardization for aircraft use.
> >
> > I've been toying with this for the last couple of weeks and while it
> needs
> > some serious planning for water pump and alternator accommodations,
> I've
> > got a bit of it worked out.  As expected it isn't as easy as
> originally
> > thought.  Of course if it was it would already be done.  It would be
> > supplied as a package with water pump system and alternator mount.
> >
> > This does require using a remote water pump like what Paul Lamar
> created
> > and which isn't a bad idea.  It gets the pump down lower for better
> > performance.  If you use a 3rd gen water pump with its own remote pump
> > housing it could be mounted co-axially with the crank and get rid of a
> > water pump drive belt.  (3rd gen pumps run opposite direction to
> earlier
> > pumps)
> >
> > It also would require using the 3rd gen crank angle sensor plate and
> > pickups.
> >
> > There are enough bolts on the front end plate to hold it
> > together.  Additional reinforcements for the aerobatics crowd would be
> > added at the oil pan-to-front cover flange and on the top from the EGR
> > port
> > on the center plate to the top of the motor mount/front cover.  This
> would
> > probably be standard for the 20Bs.
> >
> > -Could be that the sealing surfaces would be a problem as a structural
> > interface?
> > -It would put the prop flange about 2 inches forward of the Lycoming
> > installation.  However that would put the 13B c.g. about the same as
> the
> > Lyc.
> >
> > As an RV-4 owner the thought of a motor mount as compact as the
> dynafocal
> > mount is appealing.  Yes, I know it has been done on an RV-4
> > otherwise.  I'm just looking at future possibilities and.. gee..
> ANOTHER
> > project.
> >
> > Okay, enough for now, you guys shoot holes in this for me....
> >
> >
> > Mike McGee, RV-4 N996RV, O320-E2G, Hillsboro, OR,
> jmpcrftr-at-teleport.com
> > 13B in gestation mode, RD-1C, EC-2.
> > ..need to quit thinking and get some building done...
> >
> >
> >
> > >>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> > >>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>
>
>
> >>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
> >>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html