We just went through 40 hours today. I say "we" because my friend Josh Knerr took it up for a quick flight after I got back from The Rocket Shop over at L45.Hi Pete, I was wondering how many hours have been accumulated on the test stand and in flight test, it looks like it is progressing well. I think your engine is what BMW would have built if they were still in aero engines.
I was reading through this thread, and know that you have worked with the design for more 5 years now. That is a level of dedication almost unheard of these days. I also noticed that you had a repair on the horizontal stabilizer a couple months back, what factor do you attribute that to? It got me thinking about resonance response, and how a very small input can destroy some structures. It reminded me of a story about Tesla putting a small mechanical oscillator on the frame of a early skyscraper and finding the frequency that nearly brought it down.
I don't care what man designs, there are always subtle nuances to uncover, contemplate, and understand.
Sure looks like one to me. I myself would not fly without one. I look at this gauge more then the RPM gauge. In fact I rarely look at the RPM gauge. I watch the MP gauge. This gauge tells a lot more then the RPM gauge does.
Since the majority of my flying time is behind a fixed pitch propeller, the majority of my flying has been in airplanes without a manifold pressure gauge.I myself would not fly without one. I look at this gauge more then the RPM gauge. In fact I rarely look at the RPM gauge. I watch the MP gauge. This gauge tells a lot more then the RPM gauge does.
Yes, the bottom left gauge is M.P. I agree with N8053H -this gauge tells a lot more then the RPM gauge does. In my humble opinion, MP is an invaluable instrument, even in non-variable-pitch-prop aircraft. I installed one in my Airknocker when I first got it. It makes it so much easier to make power changes because it is instantaneous where the tach is very dependent on airspeed to register different settings. Not trying to start a debate here, it is just a personal preference.
increased compression, lighter pistons and rods, and higher redline.. a stock O-200 makes more than 100 HP if all you do is rev it higher .. lighter pistons and rods alone may allow higher redline, couple that with a redline that is likely conservative to begin with on the O-200.. also I think more care was taken to balance the O-100 than the O-200..One thing I still don't understand is the 57hp rating. If it's essentially half of an O-200, shouldn't it, you know, put out half the power?
Waaay more care was taken.also I think more care was taken to balance the O-100 than the O-200..
Also the smaller VW conversions, at a considerable weight savings. And I say that as a big VW fan.Waaay more care was taken.
Although I am not technically qualified to say how or when it will be done, I'm fairly confident that when there is a good electronic ignition unit developed for this engine, it will be a legitimate 60HP powerplant. In rough terms, that means that it will likely be a viable replacement for the Rotax 532 and 582 engines as well as the 503.