Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 42

Thread: Is homebuilding right for me?

  1. #31

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,575
    Yeah, I'd be embarassed to be seen in one of those 40 year old (or 70 year old) designs. I sure hope no one gives me something so old fashioned like a Porsche 911 to drive or any of those WWII clunkers like a T-6, P-51, Spitfire, or B-25 to fly. They probably don't have a glass cockpit, fuel injection or even Bluetooth.

    It would be worse than having a house that did not have granite counter tops, oh the shame of it.

    Wouldn't it be great if some hot new genius designer, like Rutan came along with a new race design for Reno Unlimited? Maybe twin engines, twin fuselage, carbon fibre/glass and use modern auto engines which are so far advanced beyond those old, Pratt or Wright or Rolls clunkers.

    It ought to be so easy to show those old guys in the 70 year old designs how it is done.
    Last edited by Bill Greenwood; 04-08-2012 at 10:37 AM.

  2. #32
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    Plus, no more carb icing.
    Three words: "Fuel induction icing"

    A fuel injection system is not a magic bullet to the engine icing issue although it does reduce it significantly.
    Unfortunately in science what you believe is irrelevant.

    "I'm an old-fashioned Southern Gentleman. Which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-***** when I want to be."- Robert A. Heinlein.



  3. #33
    steveinindy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,449
    with a Rotax carbureted 2 stroke engine. It didn't sound too good but ran just fine
    That's one of the big reasons I got away from ultralights. I dislike having an engine that sounds like it's dying. The other big reason was that I got tired of hitting bugs while in flight. After two cicadas to the face (on separate occasions), a bumblebee and a sparrow in the space of one summer, I came to dislike open cockpit flying. LOL

    So much for those who think wearing a chute in a homebulit or experimental is foolish.
    It's not foolish, but in a lot of designs, getting out of the aircraft is next to impossible, especially the canopy equipped varieties where it hinges to the front. Also, it has limited utility since most events leading to crashes happen at altitudes where you won't have time to get out of the aircraft let alone get the chute deployed. That said, I'll never knock someone for wanting to wear one. If I were just flying a single or two seater, personally I'd be talking to Martin-Baker.
    Unfortunately in science what you believe is irrelevant.

    "I'm an old-fashioned Southern Gentleman. Which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-***** when I want to be."- Robert A. Heinlein.



  4. #34

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    FA40
    Posts
    767
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Greenwood View Post
    The fuel injected engine may put out a little more power, but it is also likely to be harder to start when hot.
    the Rotax fuel injection is not the old reliable mechanical Bendix-style fuel injection that is admittedly sometimes problematic on some engines in some installations when the PIC tries to use the cold-start procedure on a hot engine. how many fuel-injected 2012 factory-made automobiles are harder to start when hot? i'm betting exactly that many Rotax 912iS engines will be harder to start when hot. old wives' tales probably don't apply to new technology. your mileage may vary.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,575
    I am not sure what "old wives" or their "tales", you may be associated with. I am the PIC in my Bonaza and when hot I use the hot start procedure, that is boost pump on low, throttle closed and crank as you advance the throttle, no pre priming like on cold starts. In hot weather, the engine may start, but easily tend to die like vapor lock. I don't know the brand of injection system. I can read a start list and have been a pilot for about 30 years.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    FA40
    Posts
    767
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Greenwood View Post
    I am not sure what "old wives" or their "tales", you may be associated with. I am the PIC in my Bonaza and when hot I use the hot start procedure, that is boost pump on low, throttle closed and crank as you advance the throttle, no pre priming like on cold starts. In hot weather, the engine may start, but easily tend to die like vapor lock. I don't know the brand of injection system. I can read a start list and have been a pilot for about 30 years.
    well, that explains it! i'm a lycoming kind of guy. you're a continental gentleman. my limited time in bonanzas and barons and t34b's and t41d's using continentals with bendix injectors (only a few hundred hours over the last 44 years) has been positive when using the published checklist procedures. sounds like your experience in Bonazas hasn't. guess our mileage did vary. maybe Bonazas don't use bendix systems? oh well. maybe when i have your experience, i'll know better.
    Last edited by Mike M; 04-08-2012 at 08:34 PM.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,575
    I owned and flew 2 Mooneys for over 10 years, with Lycoming, one carb, one injected. I don't recall much trouble with hot starts, but then it has been a long time.

    I owned a T-34A for 10 years, and it had a non injected continental engine, O-470 with a sort of pressure carb, I think.
    I have only a flight or two in the T-34 B, but I thought it was mostly the same engine as the A, carb instead of injected.

    My Bonanza will start but easily die in hot weather if you turn off the boost pump right after a hot start.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    FA40
    Posts
    767
    Bill, i apologize for being a smarty-pants but i couldn't resist. and you took the bait. nobody cares how much experience ANY individual has with aircraft mechanical fuel-injection systems because NONE of it applies here. NONE of the ENTIRE aviation community's experience with Bendix fuel injection applies to SportyPilot's questions. NONE. because the rotax in question has electronic fuel injection. totally different. we all have thousands of hours' experience with EFI in automobiles, and i'm betting not a single problem with hot starting. and that's what the 912iS has. EFI. so back on track. does the engine swap increase or decrease the empty weight? will that adversely affect the payload? it will cost extra time and money. amounts unknown. your mileage may vary. again, Bill, sorry for being impish.

  9. #39
    Dana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    933
    Quote Originally Posted by cdrmuetzel@juno.com View Post
    ...we all have thousands of hours' experience with EFI in automobiles, and i'm betting not a single problem with hot starting. and that's what the 912iS has. EFI...
    The engine in my 280Z was EFI (Bosch L-Jetronic), and it often had problems hot starting. Granted, that was 1978 technology, but still...

    I don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if the hot starting problems I experienced (and which were common on that model car) were related to the implementation in that particular car. Other cars with L-Jetronic EFI might have no problems with hot starting, and that's my point... the variances in installation in different model aircraft (or even different builder's installations) could be an issue.

    Then again, the good old carbureted A-65 in my T-Craft always had problems hot starting... on a hot summer day I could give myself heat exhaustion swinging the prop if I didn't let it cool for long enough before restarting.

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    FA40
    Posts
    767
    Quote Originally Posted by Dana View Post
    The engine in my 280Z was EFI (Bosch L-Jetronic), and it often had problems hot starting
    i stand corrected.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •