Paul,
   If memory serves me, and sometimes it doesn't, I remember seeing someone
   took a Cessna and replaced the engine with a Mazda rotary. They then
   registered it as experimental.

   Do you, or anyone have info on this?

   Regards,
   Norm Parmley


   The FAA frowns on that big time. Only if you plan on getting an STC
   and first you have to certify the engine. That means you make all the
   parts and you have a paper trail from the iron mine to the air.

   NASA did it but that was NASA.

   You can make a fiberglass mold of a Cessna fuse and use Cessna wings and
   tail.

   That is OK. It is then a experimental aircraft.

   Paul Lamar



   I'll have to disagree with you Paul.  The FAA will not certify an
   airplane assembled from spare parts as an experimental armature built.
   Time was when that would work, but no more.  Even if the wing is toast
   and you totally rebuild it they still will not buy it.


   Mark LaPierre


   Not spare parts from the same airplane. Parts from different airplanes. If that
   were not true you would not be able to use some of  the parts found on some certified
   airplanes.

   Lets take a Bellanca Viking for example. Lets assume the wood wing
   is shot. If you make a new wing out of carbon fiber then it becomes
   an experimental airplane. Arguably you have built 50% of the new
   experimental airplane.

   Lots of people have built experimental airplanes using wings from
   certified airplanes. Quite common in the cub world.
   Only 50% of the airplane needs to be built by you.

   Paul Lamar

    Cessna put a rotary engine on a Cardinal decades ago. I have pictures of it.
They also put forward swept wings on a Cardinal.......but that was Cessna, not any individuals.

Marc

Well send me the damn pictures :)
Yes aviation corporations can get away with stuff like that.

Paul Lamar

Paul,
Seems I have lost my old digital pics of them, but do have printed copies of some stuff.

I paraphrase from "Wings of Cessna, Model 120 to the Citation III, by Edward H. Phillips", page 63. The book is copyrighted 1991.

The engine (or a picture of it) was at one time under the stairs at the Udvar-Hazy Dulles Smithsonian display? I think you have that pic already? The Wankel engine display indicates that a Wankel RC2-60 was first flown in a 1970 Cardinal (not sure this is accurate, or just a picture of a Cardinal for illustration purposes!). Along with the engine and description there was a picture of an RG, tail number N7600V. It does not appear that the N7600V information is accurate from research.

The original Cardinal Wankel test bed was [N3766C (sn661)]?] reported to be in the C-177B prototype (not an RG). The 185 hp (?) Curtiss-Wright engine was installed under a Navy contract for `quiet airplane` research (??? Secret or noise quiet-funny about that?) and had an extensive muffler system. A multi-V belt reduction system drove a slow turning 3 blade 100 inch diameter propeller. Lockheed was a subcontractor. (N3766C is now a Beach aircraft....)

"I was at Cessna as a Design Engineer 210 B, 205, 206 (1960-1963) and Flight Test Engineer 300 and 400 series Twins (1966-1968). Cessna typically flew 500 hour accelerated service tests on new models, generally using the Certification prototypes for single engine and 1st production models for twins. I was able to log a total of over 80 hours of service test time on 6 different Cessna models, including 17 hours on Cardinal N3766C. First flight of N3766C with the CW Wankel was on 7-7-71 with Len Ikerd as test pilot." Quote from Edward H. Phillips.  It was reported to have very little vibration and a low noise level on fly-bys. (!)

  "Cessna`s normal practice for liability reasons was to scrap test aircraft after they had served their useful purpose, so I think that I can safely say that N3766C is long gone."

Other `quiet aircraft` efforts back in that era led to the production
Y03 powered sailplane that was used in Vietnam.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_YO-3


The highly modified wing for the Cardinal was done by the aerodynamics
research dept at University of Kansas.
" At one time the Department of Aerospace Engineering proposed to build
a light aircraft wing that was about a third smaller than the original,
equip it with double-slotted flaps with a lot of `Fowler` or extension
and leading edge devices. They lobbied to obtain a 210 but could only
get the `68 177 prototype from Cessna. The University of Kansas, fearful
that someone would crash the thing, had it recycled years ago. In the
meantime it sat out in various states of disassembly at KLWC (Lawrence,
Kansas)."
I can send you that article if you are interested as well.
I will try to find the 'quiet' Wankel Cardinal pictures somewhere.

Marc W.


Did you get this picture of the Wankel powered Cardinal I sent out previously? Note those exhaust pipes.....too bad they didn't use a planetary redrive.
Marc



 The Rotary Engine News Letter. Powered by Linux.
 ACRE NL web site. http://www.rotaryeng.net
 You Tube http://tinyurl.com/beqqxas
 Copyright 1998-2013 All world wide rights reserved.