| |
In lugnet.build.sculpture, Joel Hart writes:
> --- DaveG <peagreen@intergate.ca> wrote:
> > In lugnet.build.sculpture, Lindsay Frederick Braun
> > writes:
> > > In lugnet.build.sculpture, George Haberberger writes:
> > > > In lugnet.build.sculpture, Mike Case writes:
> > > > > On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 05:19:42 GMT, "Mark" • <snowleopard@foxinternet.net>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > It is a nice kit, very detailed. Just one gripe, • this baby packs tons of
> > > > > > torque, when you spin the props, the engine spins • with it. I thought it
> > > > > > was kind of a cheap maneuver but it does look good • and there certainly are
> > > > > > ways to work around it if you want the prop to spin • freely.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Wasn't this an intentional part of the design? I had • thought that the
> > > > > radial engines of that era rotated around a central • shaft just like
> > > > > the model.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike
> > > >
> > > > If the engine spins with the propellor, then it is a • rotary engine, and it
> > > > is correct, see this link for more detail,
> >
> > > http://www.theaerodrome.com/aircraft/gbritain/sopwith/camel.html • .
> > > >
> > > > In reality, the rotary engine packed so much torque • that inexperience pilots
> > > > routinely crashed flying the Camel. Experienced pilots • knew how to
> > > > compensate for it, and used the torque to their • advantage, amking the Camel
> > > > extremely manueverable. Often, a pilot would turn 240 • degrees one way to
> > > > make a 120 degree turn the other way, there was that • much torque.
> > > >
> > > > There was a discussion about rotary and radial engines • in lugnet.military
> > > > not too long ago.
> > >
> > > I've been trying to find a diagram of the old rotary • engine,
> > > but searches always bring up the Wankel engine, which • isn't
> > > nearly the same thing. I'm trying to get a sense for • how
> > > much of the engine rotated, and how fuel delivery was • done if
> > > the cylinders were spinning. To be honest, I didn't • think that
> > > the engine *did* spin, but I've never seen a running • rotary
> > > engine (!!) so I can't speak from experience.
> > >
> > > Anyone have any good information/references?
> > >
> > > best
> > >
> > > LFB
> >
> > Try "radial engine" or "radial rotary engine"
> > the more correct term for the engine type in
> > your search.
> >
> > Best
> > DaveG
>
> I have two great books I found at Borders Books a few weeks
> ago. They are the "Illustrated Encyclopedia of Military
> Aircraft" and "Illustrated Encyclopedia of Civil Aircraft"
> both by Enzo Angelucci. Between these two books they have
> most every fixed wing craft ever built. In the first book
> a number of engines are highlighted. The Gnome Monosoupape
> 100 hp, Clerget 9B and Le Rhone 110 hp, are three examples
> of rotary engines used by the Allied powers. All three were
> developed in France. I found this website
> http://www.keveney.com/gnome.html using the first engine
> on the net. Hopefully this helps!
It sure does--thanks to all. I just needed a graphic
explanation of how the engine stroked. :)
I've always passed Angelucci up, only because he goes for
breadth over depth. But for comparative discussion that's
more valuable, no doubt about it.
best
LFB
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
11 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
