Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v613)
In-Reply-To: <list-3179598@logan.com>
References: <list-3179598@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Message-Id: <2C869128-9328-11D8-B637-0003930BF7DE@charter.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: kelseyjewett <kelseyjewett@charter.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: 13B dynafocal mount - was dream time
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2004 17:09:36 -0700
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>

Marc

Do you have a link to the Mistral engine folks.

Kelsey --- who did not go to FIS

On Apr 19, 2004, at 5:41 PM, marc wrote:

> 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
>