too many cylinders, boredom Options

[mbseto]

Interesting, yes. But as engines, they kinda suck. Especially the earliest ones that only had one valve. (Gnome "Monosoupape" == "One-Valve".) Valve timing was horrible, mixture control ditto, total-loss oil system that threw castor bean oil in the face of the pilot, zero throttle control...

The only reason they were so popular at the time is because the whole engine acted as a flywheel. So you didn't need a large (heavy!) bolted-on flywheel to keep the engine running somewhat smoothly. Weight saving is absolutely critical in aircraft, especially the early ones.

--DD

You sound like you flew one! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/poke.gif)

It's all perspective. At the time they were great because they were the only thing light enough. It wasn't just the (lack of) flywheel, all parts that you normally think of as reciprocating could be made lighter.

[veekry9]

http://oldrhinebeck.org/ORA/

Have a great time,real examples and (museum quality)replicas as they put on a show.
A Wright Flyer and it's propulsion system,and more.
A world wide draw of interest.

[veekry9]

A syndrome observed in 1903,a flying machine?
This idea is too new,it hurts my brain to think this hard.
Acck!

[veekry9]

1909 'Salon de Locomotion Aerienne' at the Grand Palais in Paris. The Darracq stand is in the centre of the exhibition.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAx69e4GN44

Worldrecordholder 1909

https://www.youtube.com/user/JW0149/feed Check this out,deeply.

http://theoldmotor.com/
Exclusive,rare auto-mobiles


The Great Race
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuxL4WW97Io
http://ffilms.org/the-great-race-1965/

[eyesright]

Interesting, yes. But as engines, they kinda suck. Especially the earliest ones that only had one valve. (Gnome "Monosoupape" == "One-Valve".) Valve timing was horrible, mixture control ditto, total-loss oil system that threw castor bean oil in the face of the pilot, zero throttle control...

The only reason they were so popular at the time is because the whole engine acted as a flywheel. So you didn't need a large (heavy!) bolted-on flywheel to keep the engine running somewhat smoothly. Weight saving is absolutely critical in aircraft, especially the early ones.

--DD

You sound like you flew one! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/poke.gif)

It's all perspective. At the time they were great because they were the only thing light enough. It wasn't just the (lack of) flywheel, all parts that you normally think of as reciprocating could be made lighter.

And the prop acted as a flywheel.

[veekry9]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3elogQimk4

French Machinists 1915-18,Mon Dieu,mon dieu est si bon!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nk9Dl6RZxmQ

The full effect.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHstveVvEnQ

[Dave_Darling]

And the prop acted as a flywheel.

The whole motor--everything but the crank, rods, and pistons--acted as a flywheel! That's why they were so good at turning in one direction only, because of gyroscopic precession due to the huge mass of the effective flywheel.

Once they started getting the whole ignition and fuel mixture thing better sorted out, they didn't need as much flywheel. And then they could make huge improvements on valve timing, compression, and so on. Lots more power--and you could actually have a throttle! (Early rotaries could only run full-throttle; to slow down you turned the ignition off with a "blip switch".)

I never flew one, but I've studied them for many years...

--DD

[veekry9]

Need more cylinders?Have a look.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNzDg_6uLZQ
http://gainingaltitudedocumentary.com/
Early '70s,had a look at the restoration of the Kapuskasing B.

Last saw one fly at the CNE Airshow as a kid,even then was aware of it's beauty.
Later we played on the Merlins,re-enacting John Wayne and Errol Flynn movies.
Just like Spiff and Hobbes.Arriving home filthy we proudly told ma"that's Rolls-Royce grease".
...

(edit:11/06/15)
Revelation!http://www.calgarymosquitosociety.com/feat...9/feature49.htm
Wow!This is in fact the very same B35 #VR796 that the cadets were working on in '73-74.
It is difficult to express what that means to me,having this karmic connection of 40+(56) years of positive thought.
A Mossy that I touched is now airworthy,as I always believed would happen,in spite of it's poor condition at that time.
I always wondered what the fate of the Merlins were,I had some inkling they ended up with the Lancaster at Mount Hope.
Last saw those around '65 in Pinchin's mill yard,tarped and cosmolined,two-stage blowers,up on heavy timber stands.


This is a photo of the aircraft before it decayed,as most of them did.
It would be a fluke if it participated at the airshow in the late '50s.
I will check the log.


http://theprogress.newspapers.com/image/77103531/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd2M21nlw0w
May be of some interest to Mosquito fans.