Well as long as you start with 50 million dollars building
 your own Wankel should be no problem. You know what they say
 about aviation. "If you want to make a small fortune start with a
 large one" :)

 Paul Lamar


    Oh yes, that is one very famous quote in auto racing. My personal
 favorite is "I know there's money in racing, I put it there."  Back to
 the subject, $50 million we do not have, and if we did, that large sum
 would be going into certification. Granted, we may be fools for putting
 so much time and money into a project with such a poor history, however,
 we are still willing to go forward with our plans of making an aviation
 rotary engine despite the great opposition involved with such an
 undertaking.
 I am not here to start an argument about what we can or cannot do,
 merely collecting advice and opinions of other aviators to help
 increase our chances of success.

    Vladimir

 You will forgive us because we have seen it all before.
 Keep quiet and produce the goods.
 Just hang in here awhile and you will learn all you need to know.

 Paul Lamar

Vlaldimir,
My personal favorite would be a 150hp single rotor NA @ 150 lbs. - all
aluminium, water cooled.
Wear surfaces are important, det gun seems the best, or steel.
If designing from  scratch, a wider lighter rotor. The Mazda 16X has gone
back to the 12A width but bigger with a larger eccentric.
It can be done- best of luck, looking forward to reading about your
achievements.
George (down under)

Hi Vlaldimir,
   Avoid the mistakes of your predecessors. Mistral Engines is a hugely
brilliant company with an outstanding product line. BUT, look at the
aircraft statistics available thru the FAA. The marketplace is shifting
toward Experimental light sport aircraft. Amateur built new registrations
are rising strongly. Certificated PISTON powered new registrations are
barely stable (even when adjusted for the current economic downturn).
Certificated TURBOPROPS are on the rise but beyond our scope here. The
certificated PISTON powered aircraft industry is mired in it's own
business model and for insurance and liability reasons is unable to
change as Mistral is finding out. The Rotary IS different and anything
different in the certificated world is suspect...no matter how good!

   My suggestion is to tailor your business plan toward the EXPERIMENTAL
marketplace ONLY. If you doubt the profit potential in this market,
google " R V " and check up on Dick VanGruevnson ( 6,000 planes FLYING,
only Dick knows how many kits sold still on the ground). Mistral has a
CERTIFICATED engine package that is a very hard sell into an inflexible
certificated industry and at the same time is way over priced for the
experimental marketplace. Their certification costs have to be amortized
into the engine pricing and that puts them in the same engine selling
price bracket as the venerable old Lycoming or Continental competition.
With no rotary cost advantage, a slightly higher rotary BSFC, and a
customer mindset that history has proven the horizontally opposed
piston engine viable, airframe manufacturer's have no incentive to change.

   BSFC....This is the place where if you seriously want to make a
difference, You CAN make a difference. There are suggestions on this
newsletter that are "application specific". It would be nice to incorporate
some of them but your goal should be to create as broad an accomplishment
as possible for the money invested. Investigate "TURBOCOMPOUNDING". Paul
and others on this list have done extensive background on this subject
and will be here to help you in any way. Successfully done, this will
give ALL rotary applications the advantage rotaries need to give airframe
manufacturers that reason they need to justify designing around the
rotary engine. The Mazda rotary engine work and works well, you can
CHANGE it easily enough, but IMPROVING it will be very difficult. You
can move the water pump, build in an alternator, charge cool it (not
historically successful),etc....so what?

BUT REDUCE THE FUEL COMSUMPTION 25 % and the world WILL notice.

Dave M

Brilliant essay Dave.
Thanks.

Paul Lamar

Vladimir,

And you why TURBOCOMPOUNDING? Because the rotary engine has no exhaust
  valve.  May I remind you :))  That is THE ADVANTAGE   over the other
  aircraft engines.  A LOWER BSFC over ANY other   turbocompouding aircraft
  engine.  Your friend/partner is right Vladimir :))
Marc Joseph

Hi Vladimir,

Sometimes a pictures is worth a thousand words.
http://www.mistral-engines.com/Technology/Design-Benefits
 Marc Joseph

The Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site. http://www.rotaryeng.net
Youtube key word UTUBPLEASE
Copyright 1998-2008 All world wide rights reserved.