Matt Whiting wrote:
Dennis Fetters wrote:



Matt Whiting wrote:

Why? the trouble has never been that one of our Rotax powered engines
quit because it failed from over excursion. Not one Rotax in a
Mini-500
failed from the engine wearing out, ever. The only failures that ever
occurred was from failure to jet the engine according to instructions,
using poor fuel below 86 octane, or running out of fuel, or improper
coolant mix or leak, but never the fault of the engine. Nothing beats
the power to weight of a 2-stroke and the ease of maintenance. It was
the right engine.

So where is this the fault of the designer or the aircraft? It was
made
plan in instructions, AD's and advisories not to make these
mistakes. We
flew the factory helicopters hundreds of hours to prove the design
worked. Sure there were some development problems, but each one was
solved and made available. The truth is that the engine worked well.

Like it or not, your comments are unfounded, uninformed, based on lack
of experience and unappreciated.

Dennis Fetters





Sorry, but that isn't correct. I ran two-stroke motorcycles for
years with no problems. Many outboard engines are two-strokes and
they have excellent reliability records. I think the issues with
two-strokes in aviation has been improper operation.

Matt




Well, sorry Matt, but my statements are right on. In fact, you just
helped support exactly what I said. Thank you.


I actually was trying to support your point, but you reply here messed
up the thread so it appears I was replying to your message when I was
actually replying to the reply to your message. Count the "carats"
along the edge and you will see that you messed up the attribution chain.


Matt


I'm sorry Matt. But I did agree with you too, even when I posted it. I
appreciate you adding your viewpoint, and sorry I misunderstood the way
it was posted.

Sincerely,

Dennis Fetters