Date:         Sun, 12 Jul 2009 10:12:42 -0700
Reply-To:     Poppie Jagersand <poppie.jagersand@YAHOO.CA>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Poppie Jagersand <poppie.jagersand@YAHOO.CA>
Subject:      Re: aircraft engine NVC
Comments: To: John Rodgers <inua@CHARTER.NET>
In-Reply-To:  <4A58A077.9040306@charter.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

Aircraft engines have some nice features:
Usually good power to weight ratio. 
Various redundant systems for failproofness in the air.

Some have much better efficiency than car engines. For example, the Continental watercooled engine Rutan used in the around the world flight Voyager consumed only 200g fuel per kWh produced. That is an amazing 50% better efficiency than fuel injected car engines of the time (80's).

I'm wondering what the specific fuel consumption is of today's more advanced gas engines? For example, Toyota seems to have the MPG lead in several categories (e.g. Corolla, Echo, Yaris) with their 1.5 and 1.8 VVT engines. Some of this is likely due to superior engine efficiency.

Martin

--- On Sat, 7/11/09, John Rodgers <inua@CHARTER.NET> wrote:

> From: John Rodgers <inua@CHARTER.NET>
> Subject: Re: aircraft engine NVC
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Received: Saturday, July 11, 2009, 10:23 AM
> Hmmm!
> 
> Finned cylinder barrels, three port heads with no fins.
> Intake, exhaust,
> and other?  Makes one wonder if this thing has water
> jacketed heads that
> call for use of a cooling fluid  instead of cooling
> air flow?
> 
> John Rodgers
> 88 GL Driver
> 
> Jim Cochran wrote:
> > http://www.pilotmarket.com/products/Aircraft_Engines_for_Sale/listing-1524-11496-59789192.html
> >
> >
> > Used in the Predator pilotless drone, about 160 hp,
> never installed.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> >
> 


      __________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.