Printable View
Here's a video of a new build Gnome rotary that will be commercially available. It shows how the valve gear/timing works. Engine #1 is very near running. We have a deposit on engine #2 for our little Sopwith Camel replica. Very exciting!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvHrbkYEn0k
That is a very cool engine. I'm very pleased there are guys out there that will undertake projects like this-and those that will support them. I'd love to build a vintage replica and bolt one of these beauties to the front but I'm afraid my finances dictate old airplane and car engines.
I gotta admit, I go through in cycles on this... for a couple of seconds, I'm "Oh, jeeze, that's WAY cool..." then I'm "Oh, gawd, no...." then I'm back to the admiring state again.
To expand on my reaction:
1. This is a really, REALLY neat engineering product.
2. This is really, REALLY neat for people who want 100% authenticity in their replicas.
3. This is a really, really, BAD idea for most of the people contemplating using the engine.
The fact is, these engines are difficult to run (and to keep running), there's no throttle (just the coupe switch to control engine power), and if use don't operate them properly (e.g. use the coupe switch too long), they blow up. Not to mention the gyroscopic effects...
If you want to have a perfect replica you can fly to nearby airshows, the Gnome is fine. If you want a WWI replica sitting in your hangar as your day-to-day fun machine, I might gently suggest a Gnome is not a good pick.
Ron Wanttaja
From the folks I talk to that fly these things, the smaller engines (like this one and the Le Rhône 80) are not hard to fly, just different to fly. Fred Murrin and Paul Daughtery say that you just have to get the concept that you control speed with the coupe (blip switch) and it isn't really that difficult. The larger engines (e.g. 160 Gnome) can be bears. It will be interesting to see with modern metallurgy and lubricants (e.g. modern de-gummed racing castor oil) turn out.
The proof will be in the pudding.
Gday,I would suggest there isn't a large market for this engine as , in reality,it would only be suitable those WW1 types that had them.There are a lot of round engined biplanes,hatz,skybolt etc,around but who would want to put a rotary up front as opposed to a Rotec or something older in the radial type,The question I would ask is, would say the Airdrome aluminium fuse of their Camel be able to handle the torque stresses of the Rotary.Still it is a work of art and if you are building a Sopwith then go for it but be prepared ,it's on or off. Cheers Ross
The market demographic for this engine was never anything but WW1 replicas, I would imagine. It actually is a pretty active and growing group. With original engines prohibitively expensive, this engine (priced about 2xrotec) is a pretty good relative value. Most Airdrome Camel replicas, including ours, are chrome moly steel tube fuselages and we are mating to a steel engine mount .
Here is a nice video of controlling a Gnome without a throttle. After start, one can hear he works to set the mixture, then controls the speed with the blip switch. It is apparent when he is adjusting the mixture and when he is blipping the ignition if you listen closely.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kM_lBROioz4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kM_lBROioz4
I am told by those who fly rotaries that it is not that difficult to get used to in reality, although I will admit it is quite the paradigm shift for those used to a throttle. I'll agree they are not for everyone, but should be immense fun. Hope to have delivery in about year. Watch this space :)
http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/c...o/IMAG0101.jpg
I think these engines will have a decent following for those wanting authenticity without the cost/worry/burden of original engines. I for one would very much like a "real" Pietenpol with a Ford engine-just because they're cool. The older I get, and the longer I fly, the more I like the vintage stuff.
Gday snj5, Now that you say it I did see that the airdrome camel has the steel fuse,I am amazed that it hasn't been done before,well done for something a lot of people have thought "somebody should build some of those". Cheers Ross
Thanks. The Camel really pushed Robert's usual operating norms pretty far. It ended up being the heaviest plane he had at 940 pounds, incidentally almost exactly what an original Camel weighed empty. Once we did the first steel frame, everybody lined up...Quote:
Originally Posted by eiclan
Quote:
Originally Posted by pacerpilot
Me too. I've put a C-85 on my Piet, and it's a great plane and lots of fun. I've flown (or flown in) Piets with other "modern" engines and with vintage small radial engines. They're all great fun.
BUT!
There is nothing like flying a Piet powered by a Ford Model A, especially when flying over the flat upper midwest, where God and Bernard meant for them to fly! The pocketa-pocketa of the Ford, the warmth coming off the radiator, and the leisurely pace of the overall experience (50-60 mph, no matter what you do) really does give the vintage experience.
BTW, they come up on Barnstormers fairly frequently, even with Ford engines, for about $10k.