RV6A down in Seattle area

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Peter Dohm" wrote

I could probably squirm out by saying that it hadn't actually seem it,
which is true, but the fact is that I simply forgot and I stand
corrected. Tracy Crook, and his work are quite famous (especially in the
RV community) and I would really like to take a look at his installation
to see just how much radiator he needed in a tractor installation with
plenty of ram air--a good look with the pilot/builder present is sure to
be informative and I would like to hear his opinion of other
installations.

His installation that I saw (he has since put a newer engine in) used two
GM air conditioner condensers as radiator, and strangely enough, that is a
pretty popular choice. I don't know if he started that trend, or if he
got the idea from someone else. I have also seen Ford 3.8's and Chevy
4.3's in airplanes with the same setup.

As I recall, he used them parallel in the cooling line, and had them
placed directly behind the standard cowl twin inlets.

I think that you may mean heater cores, which would have a larger water
passage, but I am hoping for a look if I go to SnF this year. The layout
that you mention is very similar to one that I have seen used successfully
on a Subaru conversion in a KR2--although I don't know who may have done it
first.


The other popular radator placements I have seen use the radiator back at
the firewall, with the top of the engine baffled off from the bottom, and
had the cooling air go past the top of the engine, through the radiator,
then into the engine compartment, then out the normal lower outlet.

I would be especially curious what he thinks about pushers with ducted
intakes because consistent cooling has been somewhat elusive in southern
Florida.

Indeed. Use of NACA type of inlets have usually failed, badly. The type
of scoop that works the best is a P-51 type of scoop, mounted above or
below the engine.

The key is to have the air flow through the radiator first, then past the
engine, (or directly out into the air) because if the air picks up engine
heat then goes through the radiator, it is sure to fail.

I think that you are essentially correct, although I don't know how much of
the problem is engine compartment heating and how much is poorly organized
airflow if the air must flow past the engine.


The other key to this type of arrangement is getting the outlet into a
good low pressure area. I have seen some that looked like the twin round
inlets, only they are the outlets. They are indeed tricky to get right,
it seems.

Tricky seems to be an understatement, especially when using airports that
demand an estended ground run!

--
Jim in NC

Peter

Morgans wrote:
"Charlie" wrote

compared to auto conversions where each is nearly unique, and we factor in
the unpleasant fact (sorry guys) that many of the people most willing to
do an auto conversion are the least qualified to tackle it,

If you are trolling, nice try. Otherwise, how do you support this
conclusion?

Nice slap in the face to all those guys that have auto installations humming
happily along. There are bunches of them, and it WOULDN'T be a stretch to
say that they are pretty darn clever bunch, indeed.

Anyone capable of building a kit with all the holes drilled and all the
parts included can hang a Lyconental. It takes a clever person to use an
auto engine. I would hardly classify that as "least qualified."
Not trolling; just stating facts. If I said that the majority of a/c
accidents were due to pilot error, it might feel like a slap in the face
to pilots who don't make mistakes, but it would still be true.

I *want* alternative engines to succeed. I believe that many of them can
succeed, if done right. I've spent years learning everything I can about
one design that I hope to install on a homebuilt one day.

The fact that almost any klutz can hang a Lyc, and it takes a lot more
expertise to do an alternative installation, is precisely my point.

I've concluded, from quite a few years of talking with & observing guys
doing alternative engines, that many do not have any feel for what it
takes to make an engine installation succeed. The 1st clue is wanting to
hang 350-400 hp (& an extra 200 lbs) on a plane designed for 180 hp.
Think about how often you hear that, and see the attempt to do it. There
are lots of specifics, like not being able to either solder or run a
crimping tool, not having any idea of what makes air flow through a heat
exchanger efficiently, etc.

My point, which I believe Ron's answer supports, is that the 2X accident
rate for alternative engines is driven by the lack of adequate expertise
on the part of (some) builders, not the engines themselves. This is not
a knock on all alternative engine installers. I'm just saying that those
who truly understand the challenges & would probably have a better
chance of success, often choose Lyc because they really do understand
the challenges. Many (not all, but many) who forge ahead with
alternative installations do so with no understanding of what it takes
to do a successful installation.

I hope that you'll see this like telling a low-time pilot friend that he
really shouldn't take off in a 200 mph homebuilt on a long cross country
under a 1000 ft ceiling & unstable weather. You aren't putting him down;
you're just asking him to realistically evaluate his experience &
abilities, relative to the task at hand.

Charlie

On Feb 20, 2:21*pm, Charlie wrote:
Morgans wrote:
"Charlie" wrote

compared to auto conversions where each is nearly unique, and we factor in
the unpleasant fact (sorry guys) that many of the people most willing to
do an auto conversion are the least qualified to tackle it,

If you are trolling, nice try. *Otherwise, how do you support this
conclusion?

Nice slap in the face to all those guys that have auto installations humming
happily along. *There are bunches of them, and it WOULDN'T be a stretch to
say that they are pretty darn clever bunch, indeed.

Anyone capable of building a kit with all the holes drilled and all the
parts included can hang a Lyconental. *It takes a clever person to use an
auto engine. *I would hardly classify that as "least qualified."

Not trolling; just stating facts. If I said that the majority of a/c
accidents were due to pilot error, it might feel like a slap in the face
to pilots who don't make mistakes, but it would still be true.

I *want* alternative engines to succeed. I believe that many of them can
succeed, if done
Charlie- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

to do a successful installation. on the part of (some) builders, not
the engines themselves. This is not
a knock on all alternative engine installers. I'm just saying that those
who truly understand the challenges & would probably have a better
chance of success, often choose Lyc because they really do understand
the challenges. Many (not all, but many) who forge ahead with
alternative installations do so


There is a reason we call these Experimental homebuilt planes...
According to the FAA we build them for the "educational and
recreational aspect. Hell, a trained monkey can assemble any one of
the new quick build kits on the market, all it has to do is cleco,
rivet and fly....

Ben ( an auto engine junkie) Haas
www.haaspowerair.com
N801BH,

PS, I just got a video camera and shot some footage this mornin of my
beast. If I can figure out how to load it to YouTube or something
similar you can view an auto engine powered homebuilt boring holes
through -6 f skies here in Jackson Hole....

"Charlie" wrote

I hope that you'll see this like telling a low-time pilot friend that he
really shouldn't take off in a 200 mph homebuilt on a long cross country
under a 1000 ft ceiling & unstable weather. You aren't putting him down;
you're just asking him to realistically evaluate his experience &
abilities, relative to the task at hand.re are


OK; I'll take your comments at face value, with the attitude of not being a
put-down, but don't throw the baby out with the bath.

You need to keep in mind all the people that do not enter an alternate
engine installation with rose colored glasses, and do their homework. It
seems like many people with exceptional mechanical skills are ones that
forge ahead, and make their installation a success. No doubt that there are
people that do get in over their heads, but please, don't forget the people
that are intent on making a special display of their mechanical abilities.

They deserve all of the special recognition they can get. I've seen some
pretty spectacular alternate engine installations. Works of art, describe
them well.

I guess I am sensitive because I hope to one day engineer a system. I will
definitely be ready for it, if/when I do it. Part of my plan is to build an
air boat, and run the snot out of the system on the water, where if
something does not work, the result will be getting a trolling motor out.
One of the ones that run on a battery, not a newsgroup! g

I wish you luck if you end up putting something together. It would be a
source of great pride for you, I'm sure.
--
Jim in NC

"stol" wrote

There is a reason we call these Experimental homebuilt planes...
According to the FAA we build them for the "educational and
recreational aspect. Hell, a trained monkey can assemble any one of
the new quick build kits on the market, all it has to do is cleco,
rivet and fly....

Jim: - - - Well, at least a dedicated trained monkey, anyway!

Ben ( an auto engine junkie) Haas
www.haaspowerair.com
N801BH,

PS, I just got a video camera and shot some footage this mornin of my
beast. If I can figure out how to load it to YouTube or something
similar you can view an auto engine powered homebuilt boring holes
through -6 f skies here in Jackson Hole....

Jim: - - - Right oN! !

Jim: - - - Do something else, for us auto engine junkie admirers. Some time
when you have the cowl off, give a close up video tour of the installation,
and narrate about some of the pitfalls you have had to avoid, what has
worked out well, and what you want to improve on. That kind of thing, you
know. I'm sure you could get creative and make up your own program, but I
can never get enough of poking around a good fire wall forward auto engine
installation, up close and personal!
--
Jim in NC

"Peter Dohm" wrote

I think that you may mean heater cores, which would have a larger water
passage, but I am hoping for a look if I go to SnF this year.

No, I'm pretty sure they were AC condensors.

The layout that you mention is very similar to one that I have seen used
successfully on a Subaru conversion in a KR2--although I don't know who
may have done it first.


Tricky seems to be an understatement, especially when using airports that
demand an estended ground run!

I have never understood why a person would not include an electric fan to
pull air through the radiator, when necessary ground runs do not provide
enough air flow.

That would be 5 pounds well spent, I would think. I will include one if my
installation ever takes place, unless someone could come up with a reason
not to include it.
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:
"Charlie" wrote

I hope that you'll see this like telling a low-time pilot friend that he
really shouldn't take off in a 200 mph homebuilt on a long cross country
under a 1000 ft ceiling & unstable weather. You aren't putting him down;
you're just asking him to realistically evaluate his experience &
abilities, relative to the task at hand.re are


OK; I'll take your comments at face value, with the attitude of not being a
put-down, but don't throw the baby out with the bath.

You need to keep in mind all the people that do not enter an alternate
engine installation with rose colored glasses, and do their homework. It
seems like many people with exceptional mechanical skills are ones that
forge ahead, and make their installation a success. No doubt that there are
people that do get in over their heads, but please, don't forget the people
that are intent on making a special display of their mechanical abilities.

They deserve all of the special recognition they can get. I've seen some
pretty spectacular alternate engine installations. Works of art, describe
them well.

I guess I am sensitive because I hope to one day engineer a system. I will
definitely be ready for it, if/when I do it. Part of my plan is to build an
air boat, and run the snot out of the system on the water, where if
something does not work, the result will be getting a trolling motor out.
One of the ones that run on a battery, not a newsgroup! g

I wish you luck if you end up putting something together. It would be a
source of great pride for you, I'm sure.

I hope to do the same, & I've had the same thought about using a boat
(probably dragging a sea anchor to keep the speed safe) for testing.

I very reluctantly bought a Lyc core last fall for my project airplane.
I may yet sell it & go back to my original goal of alternative power; it
really is frustrating to build a basically pre-fabbed airframe & not do
at least a little experimenting. :-)

Charlie

Peter Dohm wrote:
"Morgans" wrote in message
...
"Peter Dohm" wrote

I could probably squirm out by saying that it hadn't actually seem it,
which is true, but the fact is that I simply forgot and I stand
corrected. Tracy Crook, and his work are quite famous (especially in the
RV community) and I would really like to take a look at his installation
to see just how much radiator he needed in a tractor installation with
plenty of ram air--a good look with the pilot/builder present is sure to
be informative and I would like to hear his opinion of other
installations.
His installation that I saw (he has since put a newer engine in) used two
GM air conditioner condensers as radiator, and strangely enough, that is a
pretty popular choice. I don't know if he started that trend, or if he
got the idea from someone else. I have also seen Ford 3.8's and Chevy
4.3's in airplanes with the same setup.

As I recall, he used them parallel in the cooling line, and had them
placed directly behind the standard cowl twin inlets.

I think that you may mean heater cores, which would have a larger water
passage, but I am hoping for a look if I go to SnF this year. The layout
that you mention is very similar to one that I have seen used successfully
on a Subaru conversion in a KR2--although I don't know who may have done it
first.

The other popular radator placements I have seen use the radiator back at
the firewall, with the top of the engine baffled off from the bottom, and
had the cooling air go past the top of the engine, through the radiator,
then into the engine compartment, then out the normal lower outlet.

I would be especially curious what he thinks about pushers with ducted
intakes because consistent cooling has been somewhat elusive in southern
Florida.
Indeed. Use of NACA type of inlets have usually failed, badly. The type
of scoop that works the best is a P-51 type of scoop, mounted above or
below the engine.

The key is to have the air flow through the radiator first, then past the
engine, (or directly out into the air) because if the air picks up engine
heat then goes through the radiator, it is sure to fail.

I think that you are essentially correct, although I don't know how much of
the problem is engine compartment heating and how much is poorly organized
airflow if the air must flow past the engine.

The other key to this type of arrangement is getting the outlet into a
good low pressure area. I have seen some that looked like the twin round
inlets, only they are the outlets. They are indeed tricky to get right,
it seems.

Tricky seems to be an understatement, especially when using airports that
demand an estended ground run!

--
Jim in NC

Peter


Actually, they are GM *evaporator* cores, the heat exchanger that's
mounted in the dash to cool the air.

I've seen his installation on average about once a year for the last 10
years, & watched it evolve over the years from carbs to injection & from
the original 13B to the Renesis engine core. I think that if you ask
him, he'd tell you that they were 1. available, 2. affordable, 3. fit in
the stock cowl, 4. actually turn out to be fairly close to the right
thickness for a relatively high speed homebuilt like an RV-x.

His work is sublime pragmatism. A marketing exec would go into cardiac
arrest just looking at it, but everything is carefully engineered to be
good enough with nothing extra. For instance, the intake plenum is a
fiberglas covered plywood box. But inside the box are details (which he
openly describes to anyone who will listen) that almost everyone ignores
when they build an intake system (and almost no one else achieves his
performance). Which brings us back to my earlier posts about too many
people not doing their homework before doing a conversion project.

Charlie

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Peter Dohm" wrote

I think that you may mean heater cores, which would have a larger water
passage, but I am hoping for a look if I go to SnF this year.

No, I'm pretty sure they were AC condensors.

The layout that you mention is very similar to one that I have seen used
successfully on a Subaru conversion in a KR2--although I don't know who
may have done it first.


Tricky seems to be an understatement, especially when using airports that
demand an estended ground run!

I have never understood why a person would not include an electric fan to
pull air through the radiator, when necessary ground runs do not provide
enough air flow.

That would be 5 pounds well spent, I would think. I will include one if
my installation ever takes place, unless someone could come up with a
reason not to include it.
--
Jim in NC

I have wondered about the exact same thing, and am leaning toward the same
solution.

Peter

Peter Dohm wrote:
"Morgans" wrote in message
...
"Peter Dohm" wrote

I think that you may mean heater cores, which would have a larger water
passage, but I am hoping for a look if I go to SnF this year.
No, I'm pretty sure they were AC condensors.

The layout that you mention is very similar to one that I have seen used
successfully on a Subaru conversion in a KR2--although I don't know who
may have done it first.
Tricky seems to be an understatement, especially when using airports that
demand an estended ground run!
I have never understood why a person would not include an electric fan to
pull air through the radiator, when necessary ground runs do not provide
enough air flow.

That would be 5 pounds well spent, I would think. I will include one if
my installation ever takes place, unless someone could come up with a
reason not to include it.
--
Jim in NC

I have wondered about the exact same thing, and am leaning toward the same
solution.

Peter


I would guess because the fan is a liability to flow at speeds over
thirty or forty mph and because a twelve inch 1/8 hp fan has little to
offer over a 54 inch 40hp fan.

Charles