Book Review:Maintenance/overhaul guide to Lycoming aircraft engines, Christy

In rec.aviation.owning Richard Riley wrote:
On 22 Dec 2004 15:52:35 -0800, "Denny" wrote:

:If the Lycoming or Continental engine were really more reliable than
:commodity general purpose engines, they'd be used in many other
:applications. They are 1930s designs that if not protected by
:certification would have been out of production for decades. General
urpose production engines have been installed in aircraft, usually by
eople with a lack of resources in manufacturing and design, and yet
:flown pretty well. If a company like Mercury Marine chose to get
:involved in powerplants for experimental aircraft, they could put
:Lycoming out of that market segment in a couple of years.

How about a car company? I mean, if a company that produced high
performance automotive engines got into the business, they'd own it,
right? Especially if they had experience with air cooled engines, so
you wouldn't have the weight or complexity of a liquid cooling system.
They'd use parts that were common to the auto engines, so they'd have
the economy of scale thing going for them And it would help if they
did an opposed engine - you have to see over the cowl, after all, so
opposed or inverted engines have an advantage.

I know, let's get Porsche to get into the aircraft engine business!

Porsche was in the aircraft business; ever heard of the Porsche Mooney?

--
Jim Pennino

Remove -spam-sux to reply.