![]() |
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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
TheSeaHawkatwowwayd0tcom says... What would be all the unique parts? Camshaft has to be different. Crankshaft probably is drilled differently for the oil passages. Starter. Oil pump. Magnetos. Vacuum pump, I assume? Prop, obviously. That should be about it? That is interesting. I think nevertheless it is not so much the number of parts variables, but the fact that dual-inventory has to be established through the entire supply and QC chain, all to support an infinitessimal minority that makes it a poor choice. Or, let's say an infrequently adopted choice. As stated above, the only performance difference is the elimination of the concept of the "critical" engine. We are not talking about something as radical as centerline thrust, which introduces net, single-engine performance gains compared with off-center mounts. GF |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Light twins not using contra-rotating propellers | Mxsmanic | Piloting | 120 | December 5th 06 12:49 AM |
Light twins not using contra-rotating propellers | RomeoMike | Piloting | 6 | December 2nd 06 01:47 AM |
Light twins not using contra-rotating propellers | Newps | Piloting | 0 | November 30th 06 07:40 PM |
Light twins not using contra-rotating propellers | Greg Farris | Piloting | 0 | November 30th 06 07:25 PM |
The light bulb | Greasy Rider | Military Aviation | 6 | March 2nd 04 12:07 PM |