It’s a little like trying to discuss fixed wing in a helicopter group. Sure, they are all aircraft, but not the focus of the group.
From: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Gary Orpe
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2010 7:29 PM
To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Can anyone read "Efficiency"
Not a matter of hurt, just facts. Reciprocating engines only need apply.
Gary Orpe
->-----Original Message-----
->From: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
->[mailto:Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of barnabywalker
->Sent: Sunday, December 26, 2010 6:23 PM
->To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
->Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Can anyone read
->"Efficiency"
->
->
->
->--- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, Gary<garyo@...> wrote:
->>
->> You are certainly welcome to join any number of
->experimental groups on Yahoo
->> and design/experiment with anything you want. We are here
->on this group to
->> discuss SLSA type craft and that is the main reason for being here.
->>
->> Some of the latest discusions have been quite interesting
->but do not have
->> anything to do with our subject matters.
->
->
->Alternate Power Plants have NOTHING to do with your subject matter???
->
->By your quite touchy reaction, suggesting we go somewhere
->else to discuss subject of power plants, it definitely sounds
->like "The TRUTH Hurts!
->
->Barnaby
->
->
->> Name calling, put downs, and long
->> useless discertations are frowned upon as a contribution to
->this list.
->>
->> As you all have seen, Helen and I have been quite lenient
->in allowing these
->> threads to continue.
->>
->> Sent via DROID X on Verizon Wireless
->>
->> -----Original message-----
->> From: barnabywalker <barnabywalker@...>
->> To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
->> Sent: Mon, Dec 27, 2010 00:56:58 GMT+00:00
->> Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Can anyone
->read "Efficiency"
->>
->>
->> --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com, b d <gpabruce@> wrote:
->> >
->> > Do you have any info on it?
->>
->>
->> My, my, how a thread can take an interesting turn and allow
->intriguing
->> revelations, if only a Trigger-Happy "moderator" (aka
->CENSOR) would step out
->> of the way!
->>
->> Perhaps we'll be flying with electric motors after all,
->with self-contained
->> power.
->>
->> http://www.solarstik.com/stik_vs_gen.php
->>
->> "Solar" in this case is a brand name for Gas turbines,
->however. Adding very
->> much to the confusion.
->> http://mysolar.cat.com/cda/layout?m=35503&x=7
->>
->> A bit larger than 20 pounds.
->> http://www.generatormart.com/200901232225188538.shtml
->>
->> Still would be interesting to find more details of smaller type on
->> homebuilts.
->>
->> "No quicker way to kill off a group, than with CENSORSHIP"
->> Barnaby
->>
->>
->> > On Sun, Dec 26, 2010 at 10:01 AM, James Ferris <mijniljj@> wrote:
->> >
->> > >
->> > >
->> > > The John Deere solar turbine used on ground power
->units to supply
->> > > electric power to airecraft on the ground have been
->used in small home
->> build
->> > > aircraft (about 100 HP) and weigh about 30 Lb.
->> > >
->> > > ------------------------------
->> > > *Subject:* Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Can anyone read
->> > > "Efficiency"
->> > >
->> > >
->> > > --- In Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com
->> <Sport_Aircraft%40yahoogroups.com>,
->> > > b d <gpabruce@> wrote:
->> > > >
->> > > > Abid,
->> > > >
->> > > > I appreciate your opinion and I can accept and
->respect that as your
->> > > opinion
->> > > > however I also respectfully disagree.
->> > > >
->> > > > Out of curiousity, why do you say "turbine engines
->will not be very
->> > > > efficient on LSA"? I don't agree but I'd like to hear
->why you think
->> that.
->> > > >
->> > >
->> > > I'll defend my rAbid little "buddy" with this statement
->comparing
->> > > reciprocating piston engines to gas turbines.
->> > >
->> > > Turbine engines produce a great deal more power for
->their weight than
->> > > piston engines, but they burn more fuel and are much
->more expensive to
->> > > manufacture.
->> > >
->> > > Shouldn't take more than a line or two from Bruce to
->give a specific
->> > > example of a turbine (even his so-called "scaleable"
->turbine) which
->> gives
->> > > higher horsepower output per pound of fuel burnt than a
->piston engine.
->> > >
->> > > Bruce will most likely find himself striking out when
->the question of
->> > > "efficiency" is asked in such a straight-forward manner.
->> > >
->> > > Barnaby
->> > >
->> > > > My opinion:
->> > > > We have many examples today of successfull power
->technology that can
->> be
->> > > > scaled up or down to fit any need. Gas Turbine is
->only one. We know
->> that
->> > > the
->> > > > weight to power ratio fits the aviation application.
->We have working
->> > > > examples of heat recovery and noise elimination that
->would be
->> conducive
->> > > to
->> > > > light aviation (for lack of a better term for GA and
->LSA and UL) and
->> even
->> > > > heavy aviation. If we combined just the knowledge and
->technology we
->> > > already
->> > > > have and scaled it to fit the application, I believe
->we can have a far
->> > > more
->> > > > advanced power unit than we presently have and many
->varieties. We have
->> > > few
->> > > > choices today and that shouldn't be the case.
->> > > > I can list what we have, or what I know we have. You
->may know of more.
->> > > > If we were then to take that list and scale each
->technology to the
->> size,
->> > > > weight and power that we need for a given aircraft
->(1, 2, or 4 place
->> > > > aircraft) we would see that we far more choices than
->are available
->> today.
->> > > >
->> > > > I won't go into all that right now but I would be
->happy to explore it
->> > > with
->> > > > you if you would like. We can do it off line so as
->not to bore the
->> people
->> > > on
->> > > > the list. It can be an interesting exercise.
->> > > >
->> > > > The main thing is to not be negative about anything
->and to examine
->> > > > everything objectively.
->> > > >
->> > > > Be back shortly, have to get my grandson.
->> > > >
->> > > > Bruce
->> > > >
->> > > >
->> > > > On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 7:44 PM, apollonorthamerica <
->> > > > apollonorthamerica@> wrote:
->> > > >
->> > > > >
->> > > > >
->> > > > > Hi Bruce,
->> > > > > I got your point but I will tell you this as well.
->> > > > > Turbine engines will not be very efficient on LSA.
->> > > > > Battery will still store the energy and power
->electrical motors
->> > > rotating
->> > > > > the prop. That battery may get its re-charge in a
->hybrid fashion
->> > > whether it
->> > > > > be from an idea of Van De Graf generator or simply
->plugging it into
->> the
->> > > grid
->> > > > > on the ground or both or more than both.
->> > > > >
->> > > > > That will be the next step. That's just my opinion.
->> > > > > Best and Merry Christmas,
->> > > > > Abid
->
->
->
->
->
->------------------------------------
->
->Yahoo! Groups Links
->
->
->
__._,_.___
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment