Rotary Replacement

[TMann]

Ya, do as TMann says, and do as he is doing. build an untested prototype of the long eze with untested landing gear and powered by an untested rotary engine. would you fly it ? he will?

I'll fly what I build. I'm not asking anyone else to take that risk.

 

I'll be using landing gear that has been flown and has been in production for many years.

I'm using a rotary system that has been used in the RV world ..... for many years.

 

WOW, I just realized ..... the only difference between my plane and yours is the rotary.

 

Untested prototype ........ TRULY untested landing gear.

 

We're like two peas in a pod!

[Edge 513]

Sorry to begin this hijack, but what Hp does that 20b put out without a turbo at 5000rpm, TMann? I dont recall you wanting to turbo it...am I correct?

For my ignorance, is the cooling issues...with the cooler placement for a non-turboed rotary or a blowered rotary?

I think Buly was running a non-turbo?

Thanks.

[TMann]

20B puts out between 270 and 300hp N/A.

No Turbo! (keep some simple , simple.)

The cooling is not an issue.

 

Hot water heat for those cold Nebraska winter flights.

[SAF_Zoom]

Here is somewhat of a turn key solution for RV guys..

 

http://powersportaviation.com/

[TMann]

Between the Cozy Girrrls and Tracy Crook at Real World Solutions (www.rotaryaviation.com) , I feel that I'm pretty well covered on the subject ....... but I'm always open to another link for research.

 

Uhh ..... on second thought, these guys are wayyyyy over-priced.

[CBarber]

IIRC, Buly was originally using a turbo but abandoned it. I am not sure why (as I still plan to use one). As most of y'all know, Buly finally abandoned the rotary and went to a Lyc after flying his 13b for a while. Again, IIRC, he stated he still liked and had faith in the engine, however, he did not like the direction the rotary community was moving with much more reliance on electronics, EFI, etc, etc, etc (insert Yule Brenner voice here).

 

That being said, the straw that broke the camels back for Buly was that he had a constant electrical problem he could not nail down. I believe after he made the choice to switch, he discovered the problem and it seemed to be a bit of his own doing. The control module he installed in the IP for the rotary electronics was modified slightly by him AND he installed it in a location that was making contact with the hatch when it was opened and closed, thus giving him an intermentant short/problem.

 

I can understand the frustration, I just had to tear down my newly built rotary 13b cuz I was getting coolant in the combustion chamber. Upon tear down, I discovered an inner O-ring wall at a coolant passage had failed on a BRAND NEW center plate (sending it back to Mazdatrix today). While not unheard of it is also not the norm.

 

My point to that little story (sorry for the continued hijack) is that some failures are universal and not engine specific. Buly's could have just as easily happened on an engine other than the rotary and, rare as it hopefully is, new parts fail.

 

Vlad has also been posting on the rotary list hosted by Paul Lamar. Paul's list is very theoretical (as opposed to the "Fly Rotary" list which is composed more of those actually flying). Paul is good about sharing opinion and "what if's".

 

All the best,

 

Chris

[Marc Zeitlin]

Here is somewhat of a turn key solution for RV guys..

 

http://powersportaviation.com/

Well, it would have been if they hadn't had a crash in 2005 and, IIRC, gone out of business thereafter. I do not believe that they are selling engines currently. I'm willing to be corrected on this, however, but this is the information I have as of two years ago.

[Cozy Girrrl]

-Twin rotor

-Side port intake & exhaust

-Aluminum rotor housing and side plates

-Liquid cooled

-Uses as many oem Mazda parts as possible (oil pan, water pump, oil pump, etc.)

-Custom rear plate for dynafocal or conical mounts

-Custom front plate to fit starter

 

...its called a Mistral and it missed the mark, its overpriced.

[Lynn Erickson]

I'll fly what I build. I'm not asking anyone else to take that risk.

 

I'll be using landing gear that has been flown and has been in production for many years.

I'm using a rotary system that has been used in the RV world ..... for many years.

 

WOW, I just realized ..... the only difference between my plane and yours is the rotary.

 

Untested prototype ........ TRULY untested landing gear.

 

We're like two peas in a pod!

not quite, the gear you have, I was a test pilot on and they still need a lot of work. still not proven to be very good. the gear I have had been tested for many flight hours on several Berkuts and Eracers before I flew mine and has been proven to be a very good landing gear system. as for the rotary, I'm thankful every day I fly that I do not have to flight test a Rotary engine on every flight.

[Cozy Girrrl]

IIRC, Buly was originally using a turbo but abandoned it. I am not sure why (as I still plan to use one). As most of y'all know, Buly finally abandoned the rotary and went to a Lyc after flying his 13b for a while. Again, IIRC, he stated he still liked and had faith in the engine, however, he did not like the direction the rotary community was moving with much more reliance on electronics, EFI, etc, etc, etc (insert Yule Brenner voice here).

 

That being said, the straw that broke the camels back for Buly was that he had a constant electrical problem he could not nail down. I believe after he made the choice to switch, he discovered the problem and it seemed to be a bit of his own doing. The control module he installed in the IP for the rotary electronics was modified slightly by him AND he installed it in a location that was making contact with the hatch when it was opened and closed, thus giving him an intermentant short/problem.

 

I can understand the frustration, I just had to tear down my newly built rotary 13b cuz I was getting coolant in the combustion chamber. Upon tear down, I discovered an inner O-ring wall at a coolant passage had failed on a BRAND NEW center plate (sending it back to Mazdatrix today). While not unheard of it is also not the norm.

 

My point to that little story (sorry for the continued hijack) is that some failures are universal and not engine specific. Buly's could have just as easily happened on an engine other than the rotary and, rare as it hopefully is, new parts fail.

 

Vlad has also been posting on the rotary list hosted by Paul Lamar. Paul's list is very theoretical (as opposed to the "Fly Rotary" list which is composed more of those actually flying). Paul is good about sharing opinion and "what if's".

 

All the best,

 

Chris

OMG Chris! BLASPHEMY! you dare question the veracity of the Pope???

[TMann]

the gear I have had been tested for many flight hours on several Berkuts and Eracers before I flew mine and has been proven to be a very good landing gear system.

I thought you said you made your own gear!

You radical dude, you!

 

I swear ....... it's like looking in the mirror!!!!

[Edge 513]

Was that Pope Lamar, Chrissi? Ther-heretical? =)

Interesting fill-in Chris...All I ever heard from Buly is he changed to a Lyc and is glad to never look back. He wasn't happy with the whole rotary/ hold the rosary, everytime he went flying. Now he is cross-country flying all the time and luvin it. I dont know, I wasnt there.=/ Glad you got that Oring outa there.

[TMann]

Hmmmmmm ........ okay, let's put some of this in perspective.

 

If I decided to rebuild my own Lycoming, what are the odds that I could get a single seal installed wrong?

 

If I opted to have Bruce Turrentine rebuild my rotary, my odds go up for success due mainly to his experience level. Fair enough?

 

As far as reliability goes, it seems Tracy Crook has a lot of hours on his rotary without the previously mentioned anxiety. Before you bring up the 'It's not a canard' argument, how about Perry's rotary powered canard?

 

If you don't want to go the rotary route, then good for you.

 

There is a lot going on in experimental aviation ........ outside of this forum. To think that this represents a viable segment of the canard community is a bit niave.

 

Are you familiar with this 20B powered velocity? (not a participant of this forum.)

 

http://members.cox.net/alg3/airplane.htm

[Cozy Girrrl]

Was that Pope Lamar, Chrissi? Ther-heretical? =)

Interesting fill-in Chris...All I ever heard from Buly is he changed to a Lyc and is glad to never look back. He wasn't happy with the whole rotary/ hold the rosary, everytime he went flying. Now he is cross-country flying all the time and luvin it. I dont know, I wasnt there.=/ Glad you got that Oring outa there.

Thats not entirely correct Edge, Buly even comes to the Rotary Roundup, he changed engines due to concerns over the electronic controls, he loved the performance of the engine and misses the power (Mind you he replaced it with a 200 HP XP-360) and incredible smoothness of his rotary.

He does love the peace of mind his simple 4 cyl gives him.

...Chrissi

[Edge 513]

For the record, I am glad for you guys/gals efforts in the ''experimentation'' dept of EAA. We all are ''experimenting to some degree.

Only good on ya. =)

No harm, no fowl.

[SAF_Zoom]

Between the Cozy Girrrls and Tracy Crook at Real World Solutions (www.rotaryaviation.com) , I feel that I'm pretty well covered on the subject ....... but I'm always open to another link for research.

 

Uhh ..... on second thought, these guys are wayyyyy over-priced.

Nah its in canadian $$$$$

[SAF_Zoom]

Well, it would have been if they hadn't had a crash in 2005 and, IIRC, gone out of business thereafter. I do not believe that they are selling engines currently. I'm willing to be corrected on this, however, but this is the information I have as of two years ago.

You may be right... I have not contacted them... Just something I hace stored in my favorite...

[SAF_Zoom]

To get back on topic here...

 

Most will agree that a mazda 13b is a proven power plant. Even when in an airplane. Rare are the failure directly link to the engine itself. Most problem that lead to engine problems can be trace back to the accessories (water pump, ignition, redrive, etc.).

 

What the rotary engine needs to be better accepted is standerdized accessories that are proven reliable. Some are on the way (or may already be here as Tmann already mentionned (see RWS)).

 

What makes these engine tricky is that most installations are one of the kind. This leave a lot of room for error. So as long as the accessories are not standerdized... well some will be safer than a Lycoming and some will not.

 

Problem is, you will probably ear more of the ones that are not...

[macleodm3]

Most will agree that a mazda 13b is a proven power plant.

To me, the Mazda rotary is NOT a proven power plant.... not by a long shot. The RX-7 twin turbo was at best a 30k mile engine, then it needed full replacement. We are not talking Mazda Miata 4 cylinder reliablilty here. The RX sports cars wear out quick (except for the old low power units of the early and late 80's).

 

Today, the RX-8 is still having major engine issues. They wear out, even in standard street use, much quicker than piston counterparts.

 

Consumer reports shows the reliability on the RX-8 is "poor" in the "Engine Major" category as well as the "Engine Minor" category. These engines wear out fast with low miles and regular street use.

 

I love the rotary concept, and have owned a couple myself. They are just not a strong foundation to start an engine program with. Heck, if Mazda can't get them to be reliable in a 4 door sports car, then what chances do we have in an airplane?

 

Although, 30k miles in a car is still approximately 1000 hours of running time, which may be acceptable to some.

[TMann]

The Rotary that you run in the RX is not the same configuration as it is for aircraft use. Also, the way the engine power is managed is vastly different.

 

I won't elaborate on this beyond the suggestion to acquire both the aviation conversion manual for Real World Solution as well as the rebuild DVD featuring Bruce Turrentine. There is way too much information in there to convey in a forum such as this.

 

Most folks do not get all of the exposure of the full potential of the rotary because they base too much opinion on too little information.

 

The rotary power plant was banned from Le Mans after only one season. It was not banned due to it's lack of reliability. It posed and unfair advantage to those running it.

 

I'll stick with this for my power plant. If I only get 1000 hours out of it, I'm still way ahead of the piston driven alternative. The rebuild costs are much lower.

 

 

It's not for everybody but to suggest it is not reliable would be a bit innaccurate.

[argoldman]

Don't reinvent the turbo-charger mess.

 

John Slade has done a lot of work toward working successfully with the rotary turbo and talks about it, and his failures, at length, in his website "http://canardaviation.com/cozy"

 

This is not to say to blindly follow anybody, but to read somebody who is willing to share his failures as well as his successes puts you in the situation of not avoiding history as a teacher (should you be so inclined).

 

Also, Tracy might be able to help you in this regard, even though he is not using a turbo. Furthermore, contact Bruce Turrentine (rebuilder) for his take.

 

From what I understand, the stock turbo is a NO-NO for aviation uses (doesn't stand up and has possible disastrous effects when it dismantles itself.)

[TMann]

From what I understand, the stock turbo is a NO-NO for aviation uses (doesn't stand up and has possible disastrous effects when it dismantles itself.)

...... which goes back to reliabilty and durability.

Even though John had his turbo go to pieces AND ingest the blades into a rotor chamber, he still flew it home.

[argoldman]

...... which goes back to reliabilty and durability.

Even though John had his turbo go to pieces AND ingest the blades into a rotor chamber, he still flew it home.

 

Ya, T,

 

that is true for most of the problems that happen to rotaries and is a huge safety plus. The disastrous situation, to which I alluded, referred to the necessity of a rebuild due to hard parts clanking around in the trochoids as he was able to fly back to his field, under power, although somewhat reduced. If similar things happened in an engine of the piston persuasion, the results would probably have been immediate engine stoppage.

 

It is also my understanding that with a rotary, in the case of lost coolant fluid and overheating, that because of the difference in metals and the expansion coefficients, between the trochoid and the rotors, that the engine does not seize but allows you to get somewhere and land,(in time for the rebuild:p )

[macleodm3]

The Rotary that you run in the RX is not the same configuration as it is for aircraft use. Also, the way the engine power is managed is vastly different.

True, and most of us with an airplane will take better care of our airplane engines than the general driving public.

 

The rotary power plant was banned from Le Mans after only one season. It was not banned due to it's lack of reliability. It posed and unfair advantage to those running it.

Yeah, it did well (it WON, right?) It also caught on fire alot in some of the races, but it was a real fine race winner.

 

It's not for everybody but to suggest it is not reliable would be a bit innaccurate.

OK, you're right, unreliable is not the best term. Maybe it wears out quicker than it should, but as has been stated, the engine gradually looses power if an internal problem, and usually keeps running. What would a rebuild cost? I'm sure its less than a catastrophic lycoming failute.

 

The Mazda rotary engines are loud and hot, but smooth as silk with a good power to weight ratio. They wear out quick, and that is not a myth. Basically alot like a two cycle engine in several ways.

 

Most folks do not get all of the exposure of the full potential of the rotary because they base too much opinion on too little information.

The street rotary engines have had poor reliability for quite a few years now, stock from the factory. Would I install one if their was a full package (with a few thousand testing hours) for the Cozy? Yeah, I might if the price was reasonable.

[TMann]

They wear out quick, and that is not a myth. Basically alot like a two cycle engine in several ways.

 

I didn't want to get into this but you have stated this several times ..... so I will address it.

 

The Rotary for the street has a valve that controls the cooling oil that is injected into the rotor chamber. In order to meet some of the standards set for American cars, this valve cuts off the flow of this oil until the engine heats up ...... then the oil flows.

 

This causes premature wear on the seals located at the tips/corners of the rotors. This is one of the issues addressed.

 

Tracy estimates a rotary TBO is close to 2000 hrs.