"Jerry Springer" wrote in message
ink.net...





Better way? New design yes... auto engines no. Sorry I have not been
flying quite as long as Barnyard, only about 40 years for me. BUT every
auto engine conversion I know of has had a failure of some type. Do
Lycosaurs fail? Yes they do, but tell there are some solid percentages
comparing the number flying versus the number of hours Bob is right to
be skeptical. Maybe the engine itself is not to blame, but tell all the
components are tried and test I would not not ask my family or
passengers to ride in an auto powered aircraft over hostile terrain.

Jerry

Building on what Jerry said...

"My" EAA chapter has 3 members with Auto Conversion powered aircraft. One
of them was totalled this spring when the engine failed. A second was
totalled this fall when the gear failed because the stock gear wasn't up to
the task of hauling around all of the extra weight. The third aircraft s
still flying, but has had at least two engine out experiences, both of which
turned out to be problems keeping his engine's electronic brain-box supplied
with electrons. In both cases the aircraft was close enough to an airport
to make an uneventful dead stick landing.

Bottom line, your risks are significantly increased if you use an auto
conversion. Neither the engine or structure is designed with that purpose in
mind, and the systems will (generally) be more complex than a Lyc or
Continental. Sure, it can be done properly, but more are done the *wrong*
way than the right way.

KB