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 |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Kevin Horton wrote in message ...
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 00:40:36 +0000, Blueskies wrote: On 21 Nov 2003 21:41:13 GMT, (B2431) wrote: From: (Fred the Red Shirt) (Jay) wrote in message "It's just one of the risks you take when you play the game with a single-engine aircraft," he said. Well said Mr. Swears. OTOH if your two-engine plane is too heavy to fly on one engine alone you face twice the risk you do in a single-engine. FF Some guy named Lindbergh flew a little airplane across a pond a long time ago. He elected to fly a single engine for the simple reason he couldn't see dragging a second engine if one failed. Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired From all I have read Lindbergh wanted a single, reliable engine; that is why he chose the Wright engine. He knew it would run for the required time and he was very careful with the breakin and initial runs... I would imagine that given the large fuel load required, the weight for a significant portion of the flight would have been high enough that the aircraft would not have been able to maintain altitude if one engine failed. So in this case all a second engine would have done would be double the odds of ending up in the drink for a significant portion of the flight. Yes. Lindbergh's decision to fly a single engine aircraft was the example an old engineer used when explaining to me the difference between redundancy and multiple opportunities for failure. -- FF |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Probably a Massey Harris, not a Massey Ferguson and, most likely, a model
101. Same company, but nothing similar to an aircraft engine. Up to about 20 years ago, guys slapped a turbo on them, revved them to about 5500 rpm, and used them for tractor pullers. Stock they had about 50 hp, I've seen them pull over 250 on a dyno running about 20 psi boost. Haven't seen one modded up like that for years, though. Massey used a lot of Continentals and Standard engines as well as their own engines back then. Now that I think about it, though, I do think they used a Continental in the 135 and 235 series of MF tractors, 4 cylinders, something like 35 hp. Anything bigger than that in MF, though, was either a Waukesha, Perkins, or their own. Massey used Continentals in a few things including combines and other equipment. John Stricker "Brian Cox" wrote in message om... Lycoming started life manufacturing piston engines for automobiles and marine applictions. Guess their curraent engines are just auto conversions G Big John +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I once owned a 1938 Auburn with.... LYCOMING STRAIGHT 8. http://www.prime-mover.org/Engines/Pictures.html http://auburn-duesenberg-museum.visit-indianapolis.com/ Kaiser and Fraiser enjoyed.... auto engines by CONTINENTAL. http://www.geocities.com/gaac_oh/195...Manhattan.html Barnyard BOb -- a wealth of useless information My father-in-law has a Massey Ferguson tractor. The nameplate on the engine indicates that it was manufactured by Continental in Kalamazoo, MI. The logo is the same as on my Continental IO-470s. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"John Stricker" wrote in message Now that I think about it, though, I do think they used a Continental in the 135 and 235 series of MF tractors, 4 cylinders, something like 35 hp. Anything bigger than that in MF, though, was either a Waukesha, Perkins, or their own. Massey used Continentals in a few things including combines and other equipment. John Stricker I worked on a friend's MF, and to my surprise, it had a Cessna hydraulic pump, used for the power steering! -- Jim in NC "Brian Cox" wrote in message om... Lycoming started life manufacturing piston engines for automobiles and marine applictions. Guess their curraent engines are just auto conversions G Big John +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I once owned a 1938 Auburn with.... LYCOMING STRAIGHT 8. http://www.prime-mover.org/Engines/Pictures.html http://auburn-duesenberg-museum.visit-indianapolis.com/ Kaiser and Fraiser enjoyed.... auto engines by CONTINENTAL. http://www.geocities.com/gaac_oh/195...Manhattan.html Barnyard BOb -- a wealth of useless information My father-in-law has a Massey Ferguson tractor. The nameplate on the engine indicates that it was manufactured by Continental in Kalamazoo, MI. The logo is the same as on my Continental IO-470s. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:41:37 -0600, Big John
wrote: Corky Have you enough ammunition on auto engines to stop the nit picking in this group? Both Lyc and Con started life with auto engines G Big John Big John, to the best of my knowledge, I try not to nitpick. I try to present facts as I know them. I believe that there are various auto engines that can be successfully converted and I believe it strongly enough that I'm assembling a Ford V6 in my shop that will be the engine I fly behind. You weren't here when this subject was first aired many years ago, but there were many sceptics... actually that's not a strong enough word. There were some extremely vocal critics of the concept who felt that no auto engine would work in an airplane. One of them was an auto engineer, a guy who used to work for the Chaparal Racing Team with Jim Hall. He was absolutely positive that V configured auto engines would disintegrate (literally) under the stress. He also believed they could not cool because the coolant passages were too small and the cylinders too close together. He was wrong. In order to build a reliable auto conversion, you do have to do your homework. You have to safety wire just about everything that could come off including the oil pan bolts. You have to build using accepted aviation practices. There have been guys who screwed gas or oil lines into the block and then ran them to the firewall. They broke. You can't mount pipes solidly to the block and run them for any distance, prop vibration will eventually crack them. The guy who developed the Ford V6 discovered that the stud that holds the air filter can and will unscrew and drop into the engine, if you don't safety wire it. How did he discover this? Because it did. It was one of the many flights in which he coasted back to the runway. By now, many guys have successfully built and flown the Ford V6. One guy accumulated more than 2,000 hours without anything falling off or failing. Others are in the over a thousand hours hobbs time category. For some reason, success stories like this don't seem to matter to those who feel using an auto engine won't work. I do intend to test run the engine extensively. I'm fabricating an engine test stand along with the engine assembly process. While it's true this doesn't exactly duplicate the stresses encountered during flight, it's the best I can do, and better than just hanging it on the airframe and testing the engine during the very first flight. One thing at a time please. Corky Scott |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
To walk before you run.
Didn't mean to draw a long history Corky. I've followed the discussion here for a while and inspected and evaluated converted engines, etc. for many years. I just wanted to point out another bit of triva that you could use in protecting yourself from the 'nit pickers' who have taken you to task on the Group. Big John On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:48:22 GMT, (Corky Scott) wrote: On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:41:37 -0600, Big John wrote: Corky Have you enough ammunition on auto engines to stop the nit picking in this group? Both Lyc and Con started life with auto engines G Big John Big John, to the best of my knowledge, I try not to nitpick. I try to present facts as I know them. ----clip---- |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:48:22 GMT,
(Corky Scott) wrote: On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:41:37 -0600, Big John wrote: Corky Have you enough ammunition on auto engines to stop the nit picking in this group? Both Lyc and Con started life with auto engines G Big John Big John, to the best of my knowledge, I try not to nitpick. I try to present facts as I know them. I believe that there are various auto engines that can be successfully converted and I believe it strongly enough that I'm assembling a Ford V6 in my shop that will be the engine I fly behind. Who is the guy near Lakeland that uses, or used the Aluminum small block Chevy in the Lancair IV-P? Think it was just shy of 400 cu inch. He did a lot of testing including dyno work. After he had the front web separate on take off he went out and purchased the equipment to cast his own blocks. He figured the front web was too weak to take the PSRU stresses. I talked to him at Oshkosh a few years back and he figured that he had over 7 figures into the engine operation at that time. Admittedly there are few of us who can afford to do that, but he was developing a lot of useful information the rest of us could, or might be able to use. He had flown the rig to Oshkosh from Lakeland in about 3 hours, so that sucker did haul. Don't know about engine life and durability though. You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?) www.rogerhalstead.com |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 22:40:13 GMT, Roger Halstead
wrote: Who is the guy near Lakeland that uses, or used the Aluminum small block Chevy in the Lancair IV-P? Think it was just shy of 400 cu inch. He did a lot of testing including dyno work. After he had the front web separate on take off he went out and purchased the equipment to cast his own blocks. He figured the front web was too weak to take the PSRU stresses. I talked to him at Oshkosh a few years back and he figured that he had over 7 figures into the engine operation at that time. Admittedly there are few of us who can afford to do that, but he was developing a lot of useful information the rest of us could, or might be able to use. He had flown the rig to Oshkosh from Lakeland in about 3 hours, so that sucker did haul. Don't know about engine life and durability though. You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?) www.rogerhalstead.com That would be Jim Rahm of Enginair. In a former life he was the no. 2 guy behind "HURST" as in Hurst shifters. Auto's and hotrodding were his life, until he discovered aviation. Hotrodding an airplane just seemed a natural to him. You're right, the engine had a LOT of engineering and dyno development and so far has performed flawlessly. The PSRU on the other hand, has been problematic. The PSRU was the one thing he felt should be done by people who knew how to do them, and contracted NIS to develop one. To make a long story short, the PSRU did not work well and things have been in litigation for a while. Making a PSRU to handle 120 to 180 horsepower is one thing, making one to handle over 400 horsepower is something entirely different. Corky Scott |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 12:57:49 GMT,
(Corky Scott) wrote: On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 17:20:55 GMT, (Corky Scott) wrote: The PSRU was the one thing he felt should be done by people who knew how to do them, and contracted NIS to develop one. To make a long story short, the PSRU did not work well and things have been in litigation for a while. Making a PSRU to handle 120 to 180 horsepower is one thing, making one to handle over 400 horsepower is something entirely different. Corky Scott Thanks Corky, I appreciate the info. As I see it (and I don't know squat about PSRUs except their goal) a high ratio PSRU as used in a turbo prop which has a very high ratio (planetary) is easier to build than say the 2:1 or 3:1, BUT the planetary also has the advantage in being used on an engine without pulses being inherent in their operation. The life of a PSRU on a piston engine has to be complicated. It not only has to handle linear torque and thrust, but virtually any other imaginable angle as well. Then it has to be designed to avoid any resonances with those power train pulses AND take the positive and negative torque without beating the snot out of the gears which means next to nothing for slack (which brings its own set of problems). Helical, double helical, spur, planatery...each with it's own set of pluses and minuses. BUT, didn't the big 12 and 16 cylinder Vs in WWII have PSRUs? Course those engines had very short TBOs too. Then again they weren't exactly babied either. Also...How did the guys make out using the Olds chain drive in the Legend? It "appeared" to work great for at least a short time, but they were running 400 to 500 HP through a chain that was used in a drive train that only had about 200 HP on the other end. When I talked to the one guy at Oshkosh some years back he thought it had plenty of reserve. I always like that airplane. Last I saw it had a turbine up front. Sorry, that should be NSI. I know when he used the original "so called" chevy big block aluminum based engine he felt the front web was the weak spot. Course that was right after planting his IV_P off the end of the runway when the web broke. (or did he make it back on that one?) At any rate the web broke and it was a high pucker factor. That sucker sure did go though. The only thing that would have been able to beat him from Lakeland to Oshkosh would have been a jet and it would have had to have been a direct, non stop flight. You'll have to fix the return add due to dumb virus checkers, not spam Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?) www.rogerhalstead.com Corky Scott |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Single-Seat Accident Records (Was BD-5B) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 41 | November 20th 03 05:39 AM |
Objective Engine Discussion | Rick Maddy | Home Built | 26 | October 14th 03 04:46 AM |
FS: O-235C1 Lycoming engine (core) | Del Rawlins | Home Built | 0 | October 8th 03 09:46 PM |
Corky's engine choice | Corky Scott | Home Built | 39 | August 8th 03 04:29 AM |