spridgets
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Spridget Safety rant again.. now vintage WW1 aircraft stuff?

To: "cfchrist@" <earthlink.netcfchrist@earthlink.net>, Lester Ewing <lewing@sport.rr.com>
Subject: Re: Spridget Safety rant again.. now vintage WW1 aircraft stuff?
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 02:46:17 GMT j3Q2kXrQ026452
Cc: spridgets@autox.team.net
Yep...

I know for sure the Camel had a gravity
feed emergency tank. And it makes sense
that they all did, at least after 1916 or so I
would think around the time the Nieuport
17's made their appearance with their
110HP LeRhones. 

I read that on the Camel, very often the fuel
pressure gauges would break under the
loads of high speed dives and there went
the fuel pressure from the main tank.

I think the gravity-fed tank provided about
10 minutes or so of flying time (which was
usually enough to get the fighters to their
side of the lines in the event, I guess) but I can't seem to find a definitive 
time period
on these.

I like the crack about a "total loss" oil system....very funny, Chuck! :):)

I read that while the rotaries 
were basically "on/off" motors,
you could do a little fine tuning with the
fuel/air controls and vary power just a  bit...course if you got it slightly 
wrong in
this respect...it simply quit entirely.

I  gotta do more reading on these...fascinating engine design. But they
produced a good deal of power for their
weight. At least the later ones did. 300lbs
or less and 130-150HP at all of about 1200
rpm. Not bad for the day! :)

Cap'n Bob
Basic Frog





<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>