My vote is turbo compound for lower fuel burn.
 Paul Lamar

 Group, keep me honest here, but it is my understanding that one of the
 reasons the rotary runs hot at the turbo junction or exhaust port is
 that incomplete combustion has occurred in the ignition chamber.  If
 this is the case, wouldn't a more complete burn reduce the heat at
 that junction?
 Regards, Gordon

 My wish list is small.  First Turbo compound rotary engine.  Second,
 a real functioning muffler, durable, noise reducing and providing
 high HP output.
 Marc Joseph

 Lower fuel consumption through turbo compound and or other means is a
 high priority.
 Cheers, Brian

 My vote is to eliminate fuels altogether:)
 Doug in Japan

 My input,
 A low cost, light weight PSRU with plenty of HP headroom that can handle
 a CS prop by design. The Mistral design looks great but I've been told
 that they don't want to sell parts anymore. Tracy's is low cost but
 lacks any provision for  Hyd CS. After taht I would be interested in
 turbocompound.
 Bill Jepson

 My vote would be for a backplate (similar to Mistrals) because it solves
 several major issues in one fell swoop.
 David Leonard

 What I want is a reliable, inexpensive conversion kit for the 13B to
 a single-rotor, with adapter plates to mount it to the Notax 2-stroke
 mount and Provision 8 gearboxes -- in other words, to yank the
 2-stroke out from between the mount and PSRU.
 Keith

 As an LSA builder wishing to max out the performance envelop we need a
 light rotary engine/PSRU combination with at least 140hp.
 Regards,
 Dan F

 Part of my wish list would be replumb the coolant circuits so there are
 2 independent systems. The passages would alternate between the 2 systems
 to minimize over heating during the limp back home on one.
 -dave

Verdict:

5 votes for turbo-compound
2 votes for lighter, 100-140 hp engine
1-2 votes for a new constant-speed PSRU

1 vote for a new dynafocal mount accessory plate
1 vote for developing more complete combustion
1 vote for a thoroughly engineered turbo installation
1 vote for a really effective and reliable muffler
1 vote for a redundant cooling system
1 vote for p-porting

0 votes for a perfected induction manifold
0 votes for direct-injection stratification
0 votes for 20B-MSP midblock and crank
0 votes for 26B midblocks and crank
0 votes for lighter engine blocks
0 votes for an improved ECU unit
0 votes for a high-energy ignition
0 votes for an aerobatic dry sump
0 votes for low-compression MSP turbo rotors
0 votes for lighter rotors
0 votes for a FWF package

Ok,

First priority seems to be to develop a real, operational turbo-compound
unit.
Rotrex 10:1 friction drive, connected to compressor side axle on a
commercial turbo unit?
We should look how far we can get with them. hardware costs couple of
thousand USD...

I promise to look at this, at least calculate the probable power
recovery using off-the-shelf turbines.


Second priority is to develop a new, lighter-than-13b engine for LSA and
european ultralight market, currently dominated by rotax 912-914.
Wankel AG has a 2x407cc 75hp unit, that could be just right if converted
to oil cooling? http://www.wankel-ag.de/seite1_e.html

Third priority seems to be the constant-speed PSRU à la mistral.
Can be done, not rocket science. Reliable A357 castings is the key.
I am going to design and proto this anyway. This is important for me,
because of the expected, huge, learning experience :p
btw: You don't seem to think much of IVOprop, do you?
http://www.ivoprop.com/inflightmagnumodel.htm


I think all these 20 development projects are very much worthwhile, but
on what order?

It seems that most of you are quite happy with tracy's offerings and
13B/MSP power and installed weight - Except on applications requiring
lighter weight, higher power, or when seeking better cruise speed at
altitude (CS+Turbo).

Question:
I know that Lancairs have been flying IFR for years, but they have
certified engines, props and instruments.

According to FAA rules, can rotary engined experimental with IFR
instruments and IFR certified CS prop be registered as IFR-certified, or
"IFR approved" ?

Or should the engine be also IFR certified to start with, like eg.
IO-360? This has some connections to PSRU project...

Please comment. Did I forgot something?

Cheers,
Petri

 So, now, please gentlemen, what components/assemblies would experimental
 aircraft builder mostly need from us rotary people? - First, foremost,
 and then nice-to-have...
 Petri




1. A reliable, low cost fuel injection controller.
2. A reliable low cost igniton system, multi-spark if possible, but mostly
reliable and low cost.


Question, what is an "IFR certified" powerplant or prop?

C. Smith