My history in this forum has been very light in terms of comments due to the fact that there are so many "experts" that try to tell me everything I should know, almost every time something is stated.
HBA is no different from the bunch of guys (and gals) who gathered behind my hangar for coffee this morning. Each one has an opinion, that he/she thinks very highly of, and is eager to share it in conversation. The trick is to separate the good information from the BS. That get easier to do once one gets to know the others in the conversation. This morning, Steve (working on his 27th homebuilt, has one going into the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum) was coaching a neighbor, who is assembling a WACO Taperwing kit, on how to splice the leading edge plywood skin. The best information available on the subject; everyone listened.As I continue down this experimental road I would be happy to share experiences. I just will not put up with the "back seat drivers". If those folks haven't done what I am doing then please don't tell me what I should be doing. I will be happy to provide information and receive information. I just have to find the correct person to ask.
Yes, Jan did offer input to the issue. He recommended a larger input. This was not a simple fix as there would be major cowl changes. I was going to do it but fate stepped in and made me change it sooner rather than later.Does Jan offer guidance on these issues other than the recommended temp. say inlet/outlet sizes etc.? .....or does Zenair?
That phrasing kinda smells like 'when did you stop beating your wife'. ;-)
from Aeromomentum website."
If you build an aircraft strong enough to survive all of that, it will be heavier than a main battle tank, and will never be able to fly.Drop it 100 ft on its, nose, drop it flat. Send it at a steep angle into the ground. Find the weak spots, find where it is going to break
it is not about making the aircraft survive, it better understand how when and where the frames breaks and building it so the pilot and passengers survive, or at least have a better chance of it.If you build an aircraft strong enough to survive all of that, it will be heavier than a main battle tank, and will never be able to fly.
I am impressed, AeroMomentum. I know this is supposed to be a thread about a different engine company. I have a thread called Project Bush Demon. I am designing a STOL bush plane. I would like to ask some questions there if you if I could. My thread is totally a design thread, I don't have a pilots license, or funds to build a plane. I am working on sketching designs, and ultimately blue prints for a STOL back country bush plane. I believe I found the power plant I want to base those designs on, and would love your input.I would love to run one of my engines at full power until it fails. A customer (airboat) went 4000 hours. Admittedly, it was not always full power. But also it had very limited maintenance. So 4000 hours at full power with regular oil changes should be possible. Assuming 6gph (on our 100hp at full power) and $3/gal the fuel alone is $72,000.00. We have 8 versions with most being more powerful and thus using more fuel. So about $1,000,000.00. Just for the fuel.
But this is way more than what is required for certified aircraft engines. According to §33.49, engine certification endurance requirements are 150 hours total test run time! Of this 150 hours only 105 hours is at max power. We have done more than this and inspected for wear.
Hello Mark,[...] A customer (airboat) went 4000 hours. [...]