[tooseevee]

      Waddayoo call a radial engine (in a plane) where the whole engine spins around to spin the prop instead of the crankshaft spinning it? 

[Arschloch]

The Gnome...

...I think they called it just rotary engine.

[Richard230]

The Gnome...

...I think they called it just rotary engine.

That is right.  Not a favorite engine of pilots flying early powered aircraft.  Once the radial engine was designed and manufactured, the rotary engine went the way of the horse and buggy.

[Arschloch]

Cooling was very good and it didn't even need a flywheel. 

[Bilgemaster]

And if you were wondering what on earth Radial/Rotary Engines might possibly have to do with motorcycles, check out the Megola.

[heloego]

A very interesting WIKI about the Rotary Engines here:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_engine

There was a Gnome on a stand at the school where I got my A&P license, but no parts available for a class rebuild, and it was seriously deteriorated anyway.

[Arschloch]

I am pretty sure the rotary engine powered planes such us the Sopwith Camel or the Focker Dr-1 have been some of the most exciting aeroplanes to command. How did the pilots in WW1 found the time to aim and shoot in the middle of all this excitement?..with the goggles covered  full with unburned castor oil and an engine that may give up on you any time...truly exciting. 

[mattsz]

My local transportation museum has a working static display of an original 1917 example:



Three guys operate it - one to spin it up, one to control the fuel, and one to operate the contact points. The noise level is shocking! Nearly all the spectators' fingers go straight to their ears when it begins to run.  I can't imagine sitting right behind it for any length of time while it drags your ass around the sky.

[mattsz]

Here's a short (2 minute) video:

https://youtu.be/pae7aVu_LgI

The spinning of the engine and propeller combined with the frame rate of the video creates some very interesting movement tricks - sometimes they look like they're moving fast, other times slow or even not at all. This effect isn't new to any of you, but it's cool here, because even though the engine and prop are turning exactly the same speed, there's only 2 prop blades but 9 cylinders, so they sync up with the camera differently and they appear to be turning at different speeds...

[mattsz]

Sorry for the multiple posts, but the forum is screwing with me again, I had to split it up after many tries...

[Guaire]

Now this is a radial engine motorcycle. This machine is in Virginia.

https://thekneeslider.com/the-story-behind-kevin-deshazers-3-cylinder-radial-engine/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aeFKeRTgj8

[tooseevee]

The Gnome...

...I think they called it just rotary engine.

            Radial, Otto. Not rotary 

[tooseevee]

      Waddayoo call a radial engine (in a plane) where the whole engine spins around to spin the prop instead of the crankshaft spinning it? 

        I did not make my question clear enough.

        What I really should have asked is simply WHY did the designers think the radial engine that spins the whole engine around would be better than the radial engine that was stationary and only the PROP turned as with an automotive cooling fan ?

   It would seem to me like trying to fly a Sperry gyroscope 

[Richard230]

I beg to disagree.  The type of engine that rotates with the propeller is a "rotary" engine. The engine that stays fixed to the firewall and rotates the propeller is called a "radial" engine:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_engine

[tooseevee]

If I understood my instructors correctly, the Radial (fixed) Engine would produce such torque that if uncorrected with the flight controls would force the aircraft to roll opposite the direction of the engine rotation.

        But aren't they both radial engines?; the cylinders being configured on the radii of a circle?

         Yes. One's fixed and one's rotating, but they're both radial.

   

[tooseevee]

I beg to disagree.  The type of engine that rotates with the propeller is a "rotary" engine. The engine that stays fixed to the firewall and rotates the propeller is called a "radial" engine:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_engine

      I haven't disputed that and I don't understand what you disagree with. One is fixed, the other rotary, but they are both radial engines the cylinders being laid out on the radii of a circle. 

       All I asked (if you reread my question) is why did the designers think the rotary would ever be any good at all in the first place. All that spinning weight seems silly to me from the get-go.

[Richard230]

      I haven't disputed that and I don't understand what you disagree with. One is fixed, the other rotary, but they are both radial engines the cylinders being laid out on the radii of a circle. 

       All I asked (if you reread my question) is why did the designers think the rotary would ever be any good at all in the first place. All that spinning weight seems silly to me from the get-go.

While both engines may be "radial" in design, the accepted convention is to call the engine that spins with the propeller a "rotary" engine and the one that is fixed and spins the propeller a "radial" engine, to differentiate between the two different designs.  Check out the Wikipedia link that I provided in my previous post.   It explains the difference between the two engines and why the "radial" design superseded the "rotary" engine.

[tooseevee]

While both engines may be "radial" in design, the accepted convention is to call the engine that spins with the propeller a "rotary" engine and the one that is fixed and spins the propeller a "radial" engine, to differentiate between the two different designs.  Check out the Wikipedia link that I provided in my previous post.   It explains the difference between the two engines and why the "radial" design superseded the "rotary" engine.

         I read it before you posted it. I've also read the WikiPedia titled "Radial Engines". I think we both know what we're saying and if we were both sitting in lawn chairs in my driveway it would all be fine and dandy. This is a tough way to communicate. I'm reminded of Cool Hand Like.

         My premise is still that there are two macro-types of radial engines; Stationary (fixed) and Rotary.

[Bilgemaster]

So, what's the difference between a Wankel Rotary and a Wanker Notary?
'Cause this thread's getting a little too grim, and that really  screams for a solid punchline.

[gizzo]

So, what's the difference between a Wankel Rotary and a Wanker Notary?

Umm, I'm going with Nothing.
They both make too much annoying noise and waste too many natural resources.

[Stanley]

Brilliant.

[Arschloch]

Umm, I'm going with Nothing.
They both make too much annoying noise and waste too many natural resources.

Umm, and there is a big shortage of natural resources right? But I would agree, better save on the Wanker Notary and put the natural resource to a good use in a lets say nice V8.

[Bilgemaster]

OK...So we're going with:

"None. Both are annoying and a waste of energy."

Right?

[chuychacon]

Geez lets move on to Radical engines

[Chasfield]

Wikipedia is quite helpful on advantages of rotary engines:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_engine#Advantages_and_drawback.

[Arizoni]

The rotary (rotating) engine also had the benefit of the entire mass of the cylinders, pistons and crankcase acting like a giant flywheel.

This was a great in keeping it spinning after the guy who grabbed the propeller gave it a 1/4 turn to start it.

As for the gyroscopic effect, that could be good or bad depending on what the pilot wanted to do.

If someone was on his tail trying to shoot him down he could rapidly turn and dive in one direction but turning in the other direction was more than a little difficult. 
That could allow the pilot in a rotory powered plane to out turn the pilot using a non-rotating engine if the turn was in the correct direction.

[Richard230]

Getting covered with oil while the rotary engine was running with its constant-loss oiling system was apparently no fun, either. 

[Arizoni]

Kermit Weeks video of his Sopwith Snipe not only shows how to start one but it also shows how the rotary engines gyroscopic effect can even make handling the plane on the ground difficult.

If you have 15 minutes for an interesting video, have fun watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VK1OVjloSSY&list=PLc9R0Ar11YH1LJEgfdmZT1-GZ-Vtuted5&index=33

(Fixed link so it would be to right video)

[Chasfield]

I believe the Sopwith Camel too didn't suffer fools gladly. Many of the most effective piston era warplanes would bite the novice pilot but were acceptable for service use because of their fighting qualities. Eg F4U , Me109 and B26.

[gizzo]

Umm, and there is a big shortage of natural resources right? But I would agree, better save on the Wanker Notary and put the natural resource to a good use in a lets say nice V8.

Yes, let's.  Im'a gonna burn lots of natural resources in this on the weekend:

[Arschloch]

Yes, let's.  Im'a gonna burn lots of natural resources in this on the weekend:

That sure is more efficient than a Wankel although there are fans of it too. Not sure exactly what they see in it, simplicity of the concept maybe or the power to weight ratio?

[gizzo]

Power to weight for sure.  At least among rotary fans I know. Plus they love the noise.  Can't see a rotisserie being any use as a boat engine, though!