![]() |
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 9, 10:58*am, Monk wrote:
My step mother and my wife's mother both passed on due to cancer so I, for one thought you didn't have much time left Bob. *Glad to hear that yours is treatable. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Welll... I'll tell ya, pard... when the doctor asked me "Do you know what multiple myeloma is?" I swear to gawd my pump damn near stopped right there. Because the answer was 'yes' and the fellow who had it checked out three months later. But that was in the early 1970's. I guess the doctor could see what I was thinking because he jumped right in by telling me the situation wasn't as grime as it was just a few years ago, and started giving me a run-down as to just how bad my case was and what could be one to slow it down, how MUCH they could slow it down and so forth. In fact, he painted a pretty rosy picture that made incurable cancer sound about as serious as a head cold. Reality came along one bullet at a time. Some were hits, some were misses. Some depended on how well I was able to stand up to the treatment, some aspects of which seemed worse than the disease because you had to stand there and take the full bolt, whereas the disease had spent years establishing itself -- and largely destroying some portions of my spine. Multiple Myeloma doesn't have any poster child. MM hits adults and often takes them down about as quickly as a bullet. But if you're lucky enough to be diagnosed early enough there are paths through the mine field. We've been traveling one since I was diagnosed and are presently examining the next patch we need to cross. No sense talking about it. If we make the right choices I'll end up on a well-marked trail. But make the wrong choice... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'd really like to get across the principle behind the ENGINES I was talking about. Most folks don't seem to understand that particular choice and that's a major loss for grass-roots aviation because it defines an engine that is almost a one-to-one match for what's needed to power air frames that are specific to the survival of grass-roots aviation, such as the Teenie Two, any of the KR's, the CX4, BK1.3, VP-1, Double Eagle and so on. Bags of low-end torque which is a virtual guarantee of high propeller efficiency at a fairly low rpm. Developing your power down low also gives you a BIG advantage when it comes to the engine's useful life. But the thing is an orphan. Other than me and one other guy I've never heard of anyone building one. In fact, in talking engines with others who have converted more than a few VW's for flight, some of them had never even heard of the method. And of those who had, the ALL said the customer's wouldn't buy one even if it was available. That might of been true back in the 1970's but I've got a hunch the economic crunch has turned them into believers. At 1700 cc it's not a big engine. But it's more than enough to fly the planes I've listed. What's in its corner is a higher percentage of stock parts. All you need do is swap-out the crank & rods. Jugs, heads, cam... everything else stays STOCK. And there is no machining required. Running stock jugs under stock heads on an engine that needs no machining, you've got an engine that costs only a few hundred dollars more than a stone-stock 1600... except you've upped it to 1700 at the same time you've move the torque-curve down into the region normally occupied by real aircraft engines. (Okay, real but SMALL aircraft engines.) 1700cc is about 103cid. Using the old rule of thumb for normally aspirated air-cooled engines smaller than 500cid, your maximum PEAK hp is going to be 51.8bhp @ 3200rpm. Maximum SUSTAINABLE hp is going to be about 38.85bhp @ 2700rpm. Right about there most homebuilders start easing out of the room because they KNOW a converted VW is good for AT LEAST 80hp... and there's a feller across the way who will sell them one, two. For about six grand. This one would cost less than half that. I guess part of the problem is that no one wants an orphaned engine :-) -R.S.Hoover |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Homebuilt Engine, Part 1 | [email protected] | Home Built | 9 | October 22nd 08 01:44 PM |
[09/12] - P-38 starboard engine detail.JPG (1/1) Part 3 | Waldo.Pepper[_2_] | Aviation Photos | 2 | September 12th 08 04:46 PM |
Double Eagle + orphaned engine = a winner? | Anthony W | Home Built | 18 | July 31st 08 02:58 AM |
Orphaned Engine | [email protected] | Home Built | 17 | July 22nd 08 11:41 PM |
Saturn V F-1 Engine Testing at F-1 Engine Test Stand 6866986.jpg | [email protected] | Aviation Photos | 1 | April 11th 07 04:48 PM |