Jim,
I don't understand how your response relates to my comment about
aircraft engines being safer than auto engines in aircraft since all Rotax
designs that I am aware of are designed specifically for aircraft. As a
mater of fact one of them, the 912 is now a certified aircraft engine in the
United States.
Bob Stone, Harker Heights, TX
rsto...@hot.rr.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <jehayw...@aol.com>
To: <kr...@mylist.net>
Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: KR>RE: 2 strokes
> In a message dated 7/4/03 8:00:46 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
> rsto...@hot.rr.com writes:
>
> << I have never agreed that any engine designed for surface vehicles is
all
> that safe in an aircraft but for those who just cannot afford to use an
> aircraft engine like continental, or Lycoming an out board motor would be
the best
> alternative. >>
>
> FWIW... Rotax makes a very good line of 2-stroke
> engines designed for aircraft use. Most of the ultralights
> use their engines. My wife and I flew our Challenger II
> from western SD to OSH last year... nary a burp out of
> the Rotax 503. That being said, most of us would prefer
> to use a 4-stroke but with weight being a big consideration,
> we go with the 2-strokes. I have also surprised myself at
> how comfortable I've become flying ahead of my Rotax
> (it's a pusher) over the past 3 years and 362 hours. :-)
>
> Jim Hayward
> Rapid City, SD
>
> _______________________________________________
> see KRnet list details at http://www.krnet.org/instructions.html
>
