Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:56 AM - Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? (ar99kid)
2. 02:39 AM - Re: Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? (Keith Palmer)
3. 02:41 AM - Re: Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? (Kym Cleggett)
4. 03:09 AM - Re: Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? (Keith Palmer)
5. 03:51 AM - Re: Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? (Keith Palmer)
6. 06:06 AM - Re: Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? (GREGSMI@aol.com)
7. 06:46 AM - Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? (ar99kid)
8. 07:53 AM - Re: Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? (Sonja Englert)
9. 02:30 PM - Pulsar engine (pulsarbob@comcast.net)
10. 05:33 PM - Re: Pulsar engine (Cd)
11. 07:25 PM - Re: Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? (Kym Cleggett)
12. 07:56 PM - Re: Pulsar engine (Keith Palmer)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? |
thanks for answers ! i am not considering any advise as being harsh because that's
way i have asked here ...anyway in this moment i didn't take any direction
just gathering information and opinions. so as i have said yesterday i went last
evening to the engine and weighted it here it is :
engine + carbs , starter , oil , alternator = 75kg
flywheel , rotax C drive , adapter plate , exhaust 15kg
so total engine is 90 kg plus 5-6 kg water and radiator , grand total 95kg
with the mechanic together we have aproximated the following :
912 motor : 58kg empty + 6kg oil and oil tank +5kg water and radiator +4kg exhaust
. grand total 73 kg
now the real difference is 22 kg 50lbs ! both engines full with water and oil only
without props ...
how is this looking ?
with some reinforcement to the bed and maybe to the firewall and making also a
a cradle to mount the engine on the bed and to the firewall ... a mixed mounting.
ground test ... is it ok to put 400kg weight instead of the engine to test the
structure holding ?
thanks
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=412871#412871
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? |
This group is basically an Amature kit builders Forum - nobody is qualified
to commit themselves to questions like this, I suggest you employ an
Aeronautical engineer, and don't call it a Pulsar try "Kid's Toy"
K'd
----- Original Message -----
From: "ar99kid" <ar99kid@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 11:52 AM
Subject: Pulsar-List: Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ?
>
> thanks for answers ! i am not considering any advise as being harsh
> because that's way i have asked here ...anyway in this moment i didn't
> take any direction just gathering information and opinions. so as i have
> said yesterday i went last evening to the engine and weighted it here it
> is :
>
> engine + carbs , starter , oil , alternator = 75kg
> flywheel , rotax C drive , adapter plate , exhaust 15kg
>
> so total engine is 90 kg plus 5-6 kg water and radiator , grand total 95kg
>
> with the mechanic together we have aproximated the following :
> 912 motor : 58kg empty + 6kg oil and oil tank +5kg water and radiator +4kg
> exhaust . grand total 73 kg
>
> now the real difference is 22 kg 50lbs ! both engines full with water and
> oil only without props ...
>
> how is this looking ?
>
> with some reinforcement to the bed and maybe to the firewall and making
> also a a cradle to mount the engine on the bed and to the firewall ... a
> mixed mounting.
>
> ground test ... is it ok to put 400kg weight instead of the engine to test
> the structure holding ?
>
> thanks
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=412871#412871
>
>
>
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? |
To be honest with you I would not consider the Subaru engine just on the weight
alone besides the issues with actually getting it to fit and getting the cooling
to work. To have any fuel to fly with you would in effect be building a single
seat aircraft to stay within max weight.
22 kg extra in this small aircraft is a LOT and to get any way close to weight
and balance you would be adding weight back in the aircraft in addition to the
battery further reducing the payload to stay within max weight. You would also
be adding weight to the aircraft with additional material to reinforce the firewall
area. You also need to consider if you can keep the engine no further
forward otherwise that just makes the weight issue worse.
I had a Pulsar SP100 and after a write off accident and being sold by the insurance
company it was rebuild with a Subaru engine by the new owner. On the test
flight it was almost uncontrollable and was porpoising after it left the ground
and after a few hundred metres crashed. Fortunately it only got to a few feet
off the ground so the pilot walked away - and no it was not me as I had nothing
to do with rebuild.
While it may seem like an inexpensive way to power an aircraft it is fraught with
danger and how much is really needed to be reinforced to make it strong enough.
You will be putting quite a lot of load on various parts of the airframe
including the area of the fuselage directly behind the wings. In the end you are
likely to end up with an aircraft that is outside of the design parameters
with potential structural loads that could cause failure and a crash.
Look around for a used Rotax 912 engine with some hours to run and go that way.
It will be a lot safer and the aircraft will have a resale value.
be safe
Kym
Australia
RV6A
On 12/11/2013, at 8:22 PM, ar99kid wrote:
>
> thanks for answers ! i am not considering any advise as being harsh because that's
way i have asked here ...anyway in this moment i didn't take any direction
just gathering information and opinions. so as i have said yesterday i went
last evening to the engine and weighted it here it is :
>
> engine + carbs , starter , oil , alternator = 75kg
> flywheel , rotax C drive , adapter plate , exhaust 15kg
>
> so total engine is 90 kg plus 5-6 kg water and radiator , grand total 95kg
>
> with the mechanic together we have aproximated the following :
> 912 motor : 58kg empty + 6kg oil and oil tank +5kg water and radiator +4kg exhaust
. grand total 73 kg
>
> now the real difference is 22 kg 50lbs ! both engines full with water and oil
only without props ...
>
> how is this looking ?
>
> with some reinforcement to the bed and maybe to the firewall and making also
a a cradle to mount the engine on the bed and to the firewall ... a mixed mounting.
>
> ground test ... is it ok to put 400kg weight instead of the engine to test the
structure holding ?
>
> thanks
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=412871#412871
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? |
Kym,
To add to this the SP100 was also built to take a heavier engine, I
don't know the SP's MAUW. must be 1200lb plus ?
K'd
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kym Cleggett" <kymc@internode.on.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:38 PM
Subject: Re: Pulsar-List: Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ?
>
> To be honest with you I would not consider the Subaru engine just on the
> weight alone besides the issues with actually getting it to fit and
> getting the cooling to work. To have any fuel to fly with you would in
> effect be building a single seat aircraft to stay within max weight.
>
> 22 kg extra in this small aircraft is a LOT and to get any way close to
> weight and balance you would be adding weight back in the aircraft in
> addition to the battery further reducing the payload to stay within max
> weight. You would also be adding weight to the aircraft with additional
> material to reinforce the firewall area. You also need to consider if you
> can keep the engine no further forward otherwise that just makes the
> weight issue worse.
>
> I had a Pulsar SP100 and after a write off accident and being sold by the
> insurance company it was rebuild with a Subaru engine by the new owner. On
> the test flight it was almost uncontrollable and was porpoising after it
> left the ground and after a few hundred metres crashed. Fortunately it
> only got to a few feet off the ground so the pilot walked away - and no it
> was not me as I had nothing to do with rebuild.
>
> While it may seem like an inexpensive way to power an aircraft it is
> fraught with danger and how much is really needed to be reinforced to make
> it strong enough. You will be putting quite a lot of load on various parts
> of the airframe including the area of the fuselage directly behind the
> wings. In the end you are likely to end up with an aircraft that is
> outside of the design parameters with potential structural loads that
> could cause failure and a crash.
>
> Look around for a used Rotax 912 engine with some hours to run and go that
> way. It will be a lot safer and the aircraft will have a resale value.
>
> be safe
>
> Kym
> Australia
> RV6A
>
> On 12/11/2013, at 8:22 PM, ar99kid wrote:
>
>>
>> thanks for answers ! i am not considering any advise as being harsh
>> because that's way i have asked here ...anyway in this moment i didn't
>> take any direction just gathering information and opinions. so as i have
>> said yesterday i went last evening to the engine and weighted it here it
>> is :
>>
>> engine + carbs , starter , oil , alternator = 75kg
>> flywheel , rotax C drive , adapter plate , exhaust 15kg
>>
>> so total engine is 90 kg plus 5-6 kg water and radiator , grand total
>> 95kg
>>
>> with the mechanic together we have aproximated the following :
>> 912 motor : 58kg empty + 6kg oil and oil tank +5kg water and radiator
>> +4kg exhaust . grand total 73 kg
>>
>> now the real difference is 22 kg 50lbs ! both engines full with water and
>> oil only without props ...
>>
>> how is this looking ?
>>
>> with some reinforcement to the bed and maybe to the firewall and making
>> also a a cradle to mount the engine on the bed and to the firewall ... a
>> mixed mounting.
>>
>> ground test ... is it ok to put 400kg weight instead of the engine to
>> test the structure holding ?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=412871#412871
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? |
Kym,
I should have also mentioned a 'maiden' flight by a great friend
Dave Lentle approved test pilot and Com on 737's, done in a Dragonfly with a
Subaru engine. Crashed after 50km with major engine problems and oil all
over the canopy, crash landed because of visibility.
Read his book on a near death experience and years of recovery before being
certified to fly again.
"Lift your Life" 'A true story to inspire and encourage' by Dave Lentle.
ISBN 9780620519359 or eISBN 9780620549417
Learn a point or two on how life can kick you in the teeth when helping a
friend.
Regards
Keith
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Palmer" <kdpalmer@mweb.co.za>
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:06 PM
Subject: Re: Pulsar-List: Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ?
>
> Kym,
> To add to this the SP100 was also built to take a heavier engine,
> I don't know the SP's MAUW. must be 1200lb plus ?
>
> K'd
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kym Cleggett" <kymc@internode.on.net>
> To: <pulsar-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:38 PM
> Subject: Re: Pulsar-List: Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ?
>
>
>>
>> To be honest with you I would not consider the Subaru engine just on the
>> weight alone besides the issues with actually getting it to fit and
>> getting the cooling to work. To have any fuel to fly with you would in
>> effect be building a single seat aircraft to stay within max weight.
>>
>> 22 kg extra in this small aircraft is a LOT and to get any way close to
>> weight and balance you would be adding weight back in the aircraft in
>> addition to the battery further reducing the payload to stay within max
>> weight. You would also be adding weight to the aircraft with additional
>> material to reinforce the firewall area. You also need to consider if you
>> can keep the engine no further forward otherwise that just makes the
>> weight issue worse.
>>
>> I had a Pulsar SP100 and after a write off accident and being sold by the
>> insurance company it was rebuild with a Subaru engine by the new owner.
>> On the test flight it was almost uncontrollable and was porpoising after
>> it left the ground and after a few hundred metres crashed. Fortunately it
>> only got to a few feet off the ground so the pilot walked away - and no
>> it was not me as I had nothing to do with rebuild.
>>
>> While it may seem like an inexpensive way to power an aircraft it is
>> fraught with danger and how much is really needed to be reinforced to
>> make it strong enough. You will be putting quite a lot of load on various
>> parts of the airframe including the area of the fuselage directly behind
>> the wings. In the end you are likely to end up with an aircraft that is
>> outside of the design parameters with potential structural loads that
>> could cause failure and a crash.
>>
>> Look around for a used Rotax 912 engine with some hours to run and go
>> that way. It will be a lot safer and the aircraft will have a resale
>> value.
>>
>> be safe
>>
>> Kym
>> Australia
>> RV6A
>>
>> On 12/11/2013, at 8:22 PM, ar99kid wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> thanks for answers ! i am not considering any advise as being harsh
>>> because that's way i have asked here ...anyway in this moment i didn't
>>> take any direction just gathering information and opinions. so as i have
>>> said yesterday i went last evening to the engine and weighted it here
>>> it is :
>>>
>>> engine + carbs , starter , oil , alternator = 75kg
>>> flywheel , rotax C drive , adapter plate , exhaust 15kg
>>>
>>> so total engine is 90 kg plus 5-6 kg water and radiator , grand total
>>> 95kg
>>>
>>> with the mechanic together we have aproximated the following :
>>> 912 motor : 58kg empty + 6kg oil and oil tank +5kg water and radiator
>>> +4kg exhaust . grand total 73 kg
>>>
>>> now the real difference is 22 kg 50lbs ! both engines full with water
>>> and oil only without props ...
>>>
>>> how is this looking ?
>>>
>>> with some reinforcement to the bed and maybe to the firewall and making
>>> also a a cradle to mount the engine on the bed and to the firewall ... a
>>> mixed mounting.
>>>
>>> ground test ... is it ok to put 400kg weight instead of the engine to
>>> test the structure holding ?
>>>
>>> thanks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=412871#412871
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? |
You are only looking at beefing up the forward part of the fuselage, You
missed the part of my explanation about the tail changes that were made for
each engine change in the Pulsar design. You would have to increase the size
of the tail surfaces and also strengthen the tail area.
This is just too crazy to attempt. It is obvious it will not be safe and
could lead to tragic consequences. At this point you should find yourself a
good aircraft design engineer, preferably one that works daily with
structural load calculations and is familiar with composites, Pay him for his
time, and it will take some time, for him to go through the Pulsar design and
figure out what it will take to fly the aircraft with that engine.
If he takes the assignment and spends more than four hours on it, you can
tell him to stop, you will not be able to afford his time, will not be able
to accomplish the recommended design changes, and if by chance the two of
you come up with everything that needs to be done and actually get it done,
you will have invested a huge some of money in development. The aircraft
will have new wings, new fuselage, new tail, new landing gear, but you may
be able to save the canopy. It will weigh a lot more than the Pulsar and with
that engine, will have terrible performance.
I have seen 700 hour 912 engines for $6,500. If you want to finish this
kit, you should be shopping for a 912 engine. Get rid of the Subaru idea, it
will cost you dearly.
Greg
In a message dated 11/12/2013 3:56:16 A.M. Central Standard Time,
ar99kid@gmail.com writes:
--> Pulsar-List message posted by: "ar99kid" <ar99kid@gmail.com>
thanks for answers ! i am not considering any advise as being harsh
because that's way i have asked here ...anyway in this moment i didn't take any
direction just gathering information and opinions. so as i have said
yesterday i went last evening to the engine and weighted it here it is :
engine + carbs , starter , oil , alternator = 75kg
flywheel , rotax C drive , adapter plate , exhaust 15kg
so total engine is 90 kg plus 5-6 kg water and radiator , grand total 95kg
with the mechanic together we have aproximated the following :
912 motor : 58kg empty + 6kg oil and oil tank +5kg water and radiator +4kg
exhaust . grand total 73 kg
now the real difference is 22 kg 50lbs ! both engines full with water and
oil only without props ...
how is this looking ?
with some reinforcement to the bed and maybe to the firewall and making
also a a cradle to mount the engine on the bed and to the firewall ... a
mixed mounting.
ground test ... is it ok to put 400kg weight instead of the engine to test
the structure holding ?
thanks
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=412871#412871
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? |
well seems that this engine is a REALLY heavy problem ! i will reconsider my options
...from all your inputs here , this is a no no situation . i was hoping
that this body will be stronger and can handle some margin in engine weight .
still 6500 usd which will get here with shipping and all taxes like 9000usd is
too much ! jabiru , maybe vw ...something to get 70-80hp and still be in the
75 kg limit
thanks for your help !
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=412879#412879
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? |
After reading all this, I can confirm the general opinion. The Subaru
is not a suitable engine for a Pulsar. With the 912, it is already
noseheavy, with the battery in the back.
And I am an aeronautical engineer!
Sonja
On 11/12/13, ar99kid <ar99kid@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> well seems that this engine is a REALLY heavy problem ! i will reconsider
> my options ...from all your inputs here , this is a no no situation . i was
> hoping that this body will be stronger and can handle some margin in engine
> weight .
> still 6500 usd which will get here with shipping and all taxes like 9000usd
> is too much ! jabiru , maybe vw ...something to get 70-80hp and still be in
> the 75 kg limit
>
> thanks for your help !
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=412879#412879
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
HI
I have been been building my Pulsar for over 15 years This is serial no 107 ans
was planning in using
the 912 UL (81 Hp) and last month I took it to the avionics shop to have the prewired
panel wired in.
Well I called and Mark Brown the desiner of the Pulsar told me that the 912 engine
was too powerful
to put in the airframe as the structer was covered in 3 oz fiberglass and the vibrationof
the 912 would shake the tail off as well as other problems in building.
and I did not want this problem. I am 82 years old aND
I enjoy life. So now I have a 912 engine, Rick's exhust, EFIS for the 912 , instalation
kit, and all the
acessories for the 912 for sale. Ihave done a lot of extra work that was a waste
of time, All this ifor sale.
Now I have to start over and plan to install a 582 engine and I hope some one has
one for sale
that I can use with all the accesories such as radiators,exhaust systeme etc. Please
advise if you con help
me I still would like to fly the Pulsar and still have a current medical.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Pulsarbob, Bob Taylor
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Pulsar engine |
Hello Bob:
How much are you asking for the 912?
Thanks,
Carlos Duenas
> On Nov 12, 2013, at 3:26 PM, pulsarbob@comcast.net wrote:
>
> HI
> I have been been building my Pulsar for over 15 years This is serial no 10
7 ans was planning in using
> the 912 UL (81 Hp) and last month I took it to the avionics shop to have t
he prewired panel wired in.
> Well I called and Mark Brown the desiner of the Pulsar told me that th
e 912 engine was too powerful
> to put in the airframe as the structer was covered in 3 oz fiberglass and
the vibrationof the 912 would shake the tail off as well as other problems i
n building. and I did not want this problem. I am 82 years old aND
> I enjoy life. So now I have a 912 engine, Rick's exhust, EFIS for the 912 ,
instalation kit, and all the
> acessories for the 912 for sale. Ihave done a lot of extra work that was
a waste of time, All this ifor sale.
> Now I have to start over and plan to install a 582 engine and I ho
pe some one has one for sale
> that I can use with all the accesories such as radiators,exhaust systeme e
tc. Please advise if you con help
> me I still would like to fly the Pulsar and still have a current medical.
> Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> Pulsarbob, Bob Taylor
>
>
>
>
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ? |
Yes Keith it did have a higher weight limit. From what I was told by people that
saw the test flight attempt it appeared that the Subaru engine install was to
heavy and the tail was not large enough to control the extra weight. All in
all it was a disaster and after a couple of minutes it crashed.
I am always amazed that people want to take a proven design that was designed for
specific engines and then want to put something else in. Most times it is to
try and save money rather than it being a better outcome than the designed installation.
There appears to be plenty of example's of car engine installs that
either fail or end up as a money pit and time consumer to try and get them
to fit and get the cooling working correctly. There are examples of RV's in the
US in particular that have Subaru engines removed when they are sold to avoid
any liability from having a car engine as the power plant.
Personally I have no desire to be sitting in an aircraft that has me wondering
if the engine is going to stop or parts of the plane are going to start falling
off in light turbulence.
Kym
Australia
RV6A
On 12/11/2013, at 9:36 PM, Keith Palmer wrote:
>
> Kym,
> To add to this the SP100 was also built to take a heavier engine, I don't
know the SP's MAUW. must be 1200lb plus ?
>
> K'd
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kym Cleggett" <kymc@internode.on.net>
> To: <pulsar-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:38 PM
> Subject: Re: Pulsar-List: Re: pulsar xp with subaru ea81 ?
>
>
>>
>> To be honest with you I would not consider the Subaru engine just on the weight
alone besides the issues with actually getting it to fit and getting the cooling
to work. To have any fuel to fly with you would in effect be building a
single seat aircraft to stay within max weight.
>>
>> 22 kg extra in this small aircraft is a LOT and to get any way close to weight
and balance you would be adding weight back in the aircraft in addition to
the battery further reducing the payload to stay within max weight. You would
also be adding weight to the aircraft with additional material to reinforce the
firewall area. You also need to consider if you can keep the engine no further
forward otherwise that just makes the weight issue worse.
>>
>> I had a Pulsar SP100 and after a write off accident and being sold by the insurance
company it was rebuild with a Subaru engine by the new owner. On the test
flight it was almost uncontrollable and was porpoising after it left the ground
and after a few hundred metres crashed. Fortunately it only got to a few
feet off the ground so the pilot walked away - and no it was not me as I had
nothing to do with rebuild.
>>
>> While it may seem like an inexpensive way to power an aircraft it is fraught
with danger and how much is really needed to be reinforced to make it strong
enough. You will be putting quite a lot of load on various parts of the airframe
including the area of the fuselage directly behind the wings. In the end you
are likely to end up with an aircraft that is outside of the design parameters
with potential structural loads that could cause failure and a crash.
>>
>> Look around for a used Rotax 912 engine with some hours to run and go that way.
It will be a lot safer and the aircraft will have a resale value.
>>
>> be safe
>>
>> Kym
>> Australia
>> RV6A
>>
>> On 12/11/2013, at 8:22 PM, ar99kid wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> thanks for answers ! i am not considering any advise as being harsh because
that's way i have asked here ...anyway in this moment i didn't take any direction
just gathering information and opinions. so as i have said yesterday i went
last evening to the engine and weighted it here it is :
>>>
>>> engine + carbs , starter , oil , alternator = 75kg
>>> flywheel , rotax C drive , adapter plate , exhaust 15kg
>>>
>>> so total engine is 90 kg plus 5-6 kg water and radiator , grand total 95kg
>>>
>>> with the mechanic together we have aproximated the following :
>>> 912 motor : 58kg empty + 6kg oil and oil tank +5kg water and radiator +4kg
exhaust . grand total 73 kg
>>>
>>> now the real difference is 22 kg 50lbs ! both engines full with water and oil
only without props ...
>>>
>>> how is this looking ?
>>>
>>> with some reinforcement to the bed and maybe to the firewall and making also
a a cradle to mount the engine on the bed and to the firewall ... a mixed mounting.
>>>
>>> ground test ... is it ok to put 400kg weight instead of the engine to test
the structure holding ?
>>>
>>> thanks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=412871#412871
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Pulsar engine |
I like your spirit Bob, when I did my conversion from GPL to PPL my
instructor was 85 ex WW II pilot. Towards the end of my session, we were
always at a fair altitude? and he would say "could I have her for a few
minutes" and he would do a few aerobatic maneuvers. then say "thanks
that just made my day, come lets go and have a beer"
K'd
----- Original Message -----
From: Cd
To: pulsar-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 3:29 AM
Subject: Re: Pulsar-List: Pulsar engine
Hello Bob:
How much are you asking for the 912?
Thanks,
Carlos Duenas
On Nov 12, 2013, at 3:26 PM, pulsarbob@comcast.net wrote:
HI
I have been been building my Pulsar for over 15 years This is serial
no 107 ans was planning in using
the 912 UL (81 Hp) and last month I took it to the avionics shop to
have the prewired panel wired in.
Well I called and Mark Brown the desiner of the Pulsar told me
that the 912 engine was too powerful
to put in the airframe as the structer was covered in 3 oz
fiberglass and the vibrationof the 912 would shake the tail off as well
as other problems in building. and I did not want this problem. I am 82
years old aND
I enjoy life. So now I have a 912 engine, Rick's exhust, EFIS for
the 912 , instalation kit, and all the
acessories for the 912 for sale. Ihave done a lot of extra work
that was a waste of time, All this ifor sale.
Now I have to start over and plan to install a 582 engine
and I hope some one has one for sale
that I can use with all the accesories such as radiators,exhaust
systeme etc. Please advise if you con help
me I still would like to fly the Pulsar and still have a current
medical.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Pulsarbob, Bob Taylor
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
ot;">www.aeroelectric.com
books.com"">www.buildersbooks.com
quot;">www.homebuilthelp.com
quot;">www.mypilotstore.com
">www.mrrace.com
ot;">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
r-List"">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Pulsar-List
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
//forums.matronics.com
D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
3D
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|