A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Flying on the Cheap - Wood



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #8  
Old August 13th 06, 01:30 AM posted to rec.aviation.homebuilt
Bret Ludwig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 138
Default Flying on the Cheap - Wood


wrote:




Based on that, you recommend that a homebuilder choose an
engine for which there is no history of use or support in the
aviation communtiy. Compared to sticking with what has proven
successful, while avoiding what has not, that sounds expensive
and unsafe to me.


The Curtiss OX-5 was the "proven" aircraft engine at one time. if
everyone thought like you it still would be. Designing an airframe
around a Lyc today is more chronologically retarded than if Burt Rutan
had used an OX-5 or OXX-6 in the first VariEze. (Do the math: I'm
right. The OX-5 was a 1915 engine and the VariEze flew in 1975 or so.
The OXX-6 came along in 1921 or so and the Milwaukee Tank aircooled
conversion around then. This is 2006, although that probably has
escaped the attention of the Lycophiles.)


If safety is the ONLY
criterion there is only one way to turn a propeller worthy of
consideration, a real aircraft engine: namely, the P&WC PT-6A.


Of course, with the caveat that you keep your toes clear
when you installit. After all, once the airframe has been crushed
by the weight of the engine the plane will never fly.


Two beefy guys can easily lift a PT-6, at least the small series. A
PT-6A-27 weighs 149 kg according to one Web site on Google.


I think your definition of 'real' airplane comes close to excluding
every
homebuilt airplane that has flown successfully.


What does that tell you? MANY homebuilts are marginal airplanes? That
much is true.


...

I only suggested Hondas as a possible solution because of reliability
and the availability of "midtime" factory assembled engines as JDM
pulls, cheap. There may actually be a problem with them but because no
one has put much effort into flying them (save, a decade or two ago,
the BD-5 guys) we don't know. Most turn "wrong way", but that's not a
major issue unless you want to turn a surplus factory prop. Even then a
gear drive could fix that.


Here I follow you as far what could be a fruitful developement effort.
But not a choice for someone who wants to build and fly, without
having to re-invent the aircraft engine, eh?


You have time to build, you have time to solve problems. Don't want to
experiment? Buy a Cessna.


--

FF

P.S. What's a 'JDM pull'?


Japanese Domestic Market. They scrap cars prematurely to artificially
fluff their new car markets.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Newbie Qs on stalls and spins Ramapriya Piloting 72 November 23rd 04 04:05 AM
Wanted: VFR Safety Pilot near Milwaukee, WI - Cheap flying for you Paul Folbrecht Instrument Flight Rules 9 September 16th 04 03:25 AM
Ultralight Club Bylaws - Warning Long Post MrHabilis Home Built 0 June 11th 04 05:07 PM
FA: WEATHER FLYING: A PRACTICAL BOOK ON FLYING The Ink Company Aviation Marketplace 0 November 5th 03 12:07 AM
the thrill of flying interview is here! Dudley Henriques Piloting 0 October 21st 03 07:41 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.