A question

**sharknet** · 24th April 2009, 15:45

Originally Posted by nudemetalz

be bloody small cylinders.....

I think he meant rotary, not radial...

**sharknet** · 24th April 2009, 15:46

Originally Posted by F5 Dave

To quote both the rulebook & myself. . .

Again using common sense we'd probably let it run until is became over competitive. The rules are fairly clear, but there are already classes for racing lawnmowers over in the states if you are that desperate to. What is wrong that people can't just go out & buy a bike? What next? Racing appliances? Food-processors vs breadknives?

They race belt sanders...

**Sully60** · 24th April 2009, 15:51

Originally Posted by sharknet

I think he meant rotary, not radial...

That's' what I thought but Nudey is correct though not in the sense that Ivan was on about.
You'll find that type of early radial engine had the crank solidly mounted to the airframe and the prop mounted effectively mounted to the crankcase, so the whole engine spins around the crank rather than the conventional method. Engine speed was controlled via ignition cut.

Imagine if that technology took off in buckets!

**marty** · 24th April 2009, 16:45

Originally Posted by Skunk

Yeah, I know. Though you could argue they have a combustion chamber but where it starts and finishes would be open to dispute.

the combustion chamber area is simple to measure in a gas turbine. from inlet to power turbine inlet i would suspect. beauty of a gas turbine is that it doesn't really lose HP with altitude, as you can just keep stuffing fuel into it until it melts

**marty** · 24th April 2009, 16:45

Originally Posted by nudemetalz

Jay Leno has a Turbine bike. It's road-based....shall I go on or will I risk a molotov-cocktail thrown through my lounge window from F5 Dave.....

it's a helicopter engine.

**nudemetalz** · 24th April 2009, 17:15

Originally Posted by marty

it's a helicopter engine.

Bell JetRanger engine I think at that too - Y2K bike...bloody long and ugly !!!

Originally Posted by Sully60

That's' what I thought but Nudey is correct though not in the sense that Ivan was on about.
You'll find that type of early radial engine had the crank solidly mounted to the airframe and the prop mounted effectively mounted to the crankcase, so the whole engine spins around the crank rather than the conventional method. Engine speed was controlled via ignition cut.

Imagine if that technology took off in buckets!

Had terrible torque reaction too because of that. I thought the Guzzi was bad but the old Sopwith Camels that were powered by them were really fast rolling one way and not so the other.