...Again, I'd ask you to do this test before hand so you know the
results. My wife works for a lawer and it's been said, don't
ask a question you don't already know the answer to [in court]
why do you think this is? No-one wants to get thrown
off balance by an answer they weren't expecting.

Don't do a live demonstration, to which you don't know
the absolute answers to. You'll just end up doing more harm
than good.

Don't miss the forest for the trees.

Jarrett

Jarrett is correct here Keith.

Think about who you are trying to convince- these are mostly ignorant,
short sighted people who have convinced themselves already that rebuilt
air-cooled engines are the only worthwhile and affordable alternatives
in an airplane- it is what they have seen and heard, over and over.
IMHO, who cares what they choose to believe.  They have already prove
themselves incapable of independent thought and averse to true religious
principles ;-) ?   I think the point we should strive to make out is
that Rotary engines are far better aircraft designs than automotive.
Let the comparative numbers do the talking.

My concern is that your demo would prove only two things to them, things
they already believe- that air cooling is safer, and rotary engines are
noisy.  The water demo might raise an eyebrow with the egg heads, but
not with the lycosaurs.  A display showing destroyed Lyco heads, broken
valves, thrown rods, cracked cylinders might have more of an effect, if
placed alongside a disassembled 5000-hour rotary engine, showing little
wear.

IMHO, only one factor will impress this public- that Rotaries are safer
AND cheaper (to install, maintain, and operate) than current Lyco
air-cooled rebuilds and clones.  Id guess it's nearly impossible to
prove the safety factor, due to an incomplete database (that they'd
refuse to consider anyway, since most are convinced that Lycos never
break :-[ or wear out).  The engineer-pilots should see the inherent
advantages that a Rotary provides, with significantly fewer failure
points and solid design of parts.  The public mostly  has incorrect
ideas concerning the weight, output, fuel economy, and system/part
availability advantages from the Rotary camp- that is a teaching
challenge, nothing more.

I believe placing a bunch of outperforming planes under their eyes will
convert more potential builders than anything else will.  An affordable
and prove bolt on FWF kit (or even printed plans using commercial parts)
for the Vans planes would help too :-) :-) :-)   (hint, PL and TC).

Mike Parker



The Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://www.rotaryeng.net
Copyright 1998-2006 All world wide rights reserved.