The crankshaft is very short, stiff and strong. The radial
engine does not use a long whippy camshaft, rather it uses a
cam wheel. The fuel induction system often is into an
impeller which mixes the fuel-air mixture.

In the USA, very few of these engines have been built since
the end of WWII, but they built a huge number.

The air cooled radial is easier to produce in large hp
engines, the in-line engine crankcase casting is more
difficult to make as is the crank and cam shafts. Air
cooling has advantages in arctic weather.

Russia and Poland still have open production lines on radial
engines and western supplies still use WWII P&W and Wright
produced radial engines.

The trend in high horsepower aircraft engines is to the P&W
PT6 series on ag and seaplanes and bush planes.
They sound good.


"Cirrus" wrote in message
ps.com...
| Ok,this is probably an obvious question to many of you,
but I'll ask
| anyway. I usually fly in C172s and C182s with the Lycoming
oil cooled
| engines that many of you are probably familiar with. I
still see planes
| with the large radial engines (for instance, like what you
would see on
| a Dehavilland Beaver) flying around. I had thought maybe
these were
| just old planes that were well taken care of and still
flying after all
| these years.....BUT... It seem like the radial engines are
popular in
| bush flying, and I even see a number of seaplanes with
Kenmore Air
| (local small airline/airtaxi) with them in use.
| 1) are these engines still be manufacture on any new
planes?
| 2) Are there any significant advantages to them over the
"newer"
| engines?
|
| After doing some hunting around for info, I've gotten many
varied
| answers, but nothing concrete. The main answers I've
gotten indicate a
| power advantage and the benifits of air cooling father
than liquid.
| Anything else any of you can think of?
|
| Thanks for your thoughts.!
|