On 06/23/2012 12:01 AM, Bud Yerly wrote:
> Lovely design...
Thanks!
> However, my comments are based on an installation that is stock. Takes
> 40 hours from openning the box to engine fully installed and ready for
> start and is reapeatable with only the parts in the box.
My solution would be even faster to build, if they would change the
contents of the box of course. It puzzles me why the contents of the box
has not been changed long time ago, when people started to complain
about inadequate cooling.
> Many do not care to have any auto systems such as heat exchangers which
> may malfunction.
There is no auto system involved. The heat exchanger is just two fluid
channels thermo coupled to each other. No moving parts, no electronic
parts, just similar to a radiator, but now with two fluid channels
instead of one fluid and one gas channel.
> By all means, an extra hundred hours and cost will get you those extra 9
> knots. It just costs money and time.
This argument is silly. Then why applying a finish on the airplane and
not painting the raw fabric? It just costs money and time to apply a
finish, for only 9 knots of speed or so.
9 knots of speed:
1) The difference between a mono and tri gear.
2) equals to 10% fuel savings when flying with equal speeds.
10% fuel saving means:
1) About 10% lower operational costs.
2) About 5 Kg's (10 lbs) of weight saving for the same flying distance
because you need to carry less fuel.
3) A 10% larger range on a full tank.
> The airplane is 20,000 compromises flying in close formation....Choose
> your changes wisely.
If I wanted a stock airplane and didn't care about speed, I would
probably be flying a Cessna 152.
Frans
|