Camit engines - anyone got one?

[RKW]

Looks like you found a copy of Playboy while searching for the facts I mentioned.

More likely a really bad bottle of fire water!

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

No reason to have you on ignore, but for this topic it's very clear that it wouldn't matter what I said, you're mind is clearly made up. .

Bex

 

I'm very happy in the knowledge that you know more about engines than I do, I don't hold any position wrt to them firm because they just aren't my thing, and my question was very much a case of tell me why you say it doesn't matter whether its a constant load or not, yet in the video the ford guys suggest that dyno running somehow despite your claim crams more real life running hours per dyno hour...if what you say is correct then logically isn't the claims by the ford marketeers wrong?

 

I truly want to understand why the aviators lore that's been round for ages is wrong, yet dyno running which to me most probably closely simulates what we do in aviation , is obviously (if I believe the ford marketeers) hard on an engine....

 

So please if I have it wrong tell me why I truly am all ears in this case.

 

Im well aware that making an argument based on what some marketing organisation tells me is very much shaky ground....

 

Andy

 

 

[gandalph]

 

 

[turboplanner]

The topic is "Camit engines - anyone got one?"

 

I went back to count the numbers, and got as far as"

 

"1" (he thinks)

 

"8 Camit rebuilds/new" - which could mean anything but could well be Jab engines

 

"1"

 

"Ian Bent taking 2 to Natfly

 

By page four there had been no more attempts to produce any numbers, just outrageous promotion which didn't ring true with my past experience at all.

 

I said earlier, none of this was coming from CAMit, and I think this kind of ridiculous promotion has just made a rod for Ian Bent's back.

 

It would be nice to think he has every problem solved, but if he gets some sales, and failures occur, there's going to be an instant reaction.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Unlike some on here, I'm not offering him any advice, and I'm not offering CASA any ridiculous suggestions, and it was the OP who asked the question, not me.

 

Like any other business person, he should be free to pursue his own interests without the peanut gallery making outlandish claims and statements.

 

 

[gandalph]

The topic is "Camit engines - anyone got one?"By page four there had been no more attempts to produce any numbers, just outrageous promotion which didn't ring true with my past experience at all.

 

I said earlier, none of this was coming from CAMit, and I think this kind of ridiculous promotion has just made a rod for Ian Bent's back.

 

It would be nice to think he has every problem solved, but if he gets some sales, and failures occur, there's going to be an instant reaction.

"outrageous promotion" " Ridiculous promotion" Strong words there Turbop.

 

Are you to rejecting as outrageous and ridiculous promotion assessments made by by people who have either been to CAMit and observed changes and improvements made and/or spoken to Ian Bent and discussed improvements and changes. It may well be that the views of people who are impressed by the CAE engine and modifications don't fit with your view or assessment, but they are surely entitled to express their view without such emotive condemnation of their views as you provided above.

 

What is your "past experience" of CAMit's engineering?

 

Your final sentence certainly seems to be damning CAMit with faint praise. To expect that there will not be failures of CAE engines seems unrealistic. Do you have the same expectation of other brands? Really?!

 

 

[gandalph]

Well Turbop, the peanut gallery can be occupied my many people, depending on your view. In the kettle's opinion the pot is black.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I did not damn CAMit with faint praise. I have nothing but the best wishes for them.

 

I simply pointed out that as a result of the hype, buyers' expectations are going to be way above what any manufacturer usually experiences with a new model engine, and so, unfair to the manufacturer, and for that matter to the buyers.

 

 

[facthunter]

It's not a normal situation of someone making a NEW engine. It's the maker of an engine for all time having a different idea of how to improve an engine than the person who has the licence on it. The modifications are done to existing components in response to problems and are really quality improvements, (Materials and design) Nev

 

 

[turboplanner]

Well Turbop, the peanut gallery can be occupied my many people, depending on your view. In the kettle's opinion the pot is black.

That's not correct - I'm not making claims about what a product might be like, with less than 200 or 300 examples in service, and in some cases after someone told me they heard it from someone else.

 

 

[turboplanner]

And therein lies the problem. If I came and looked at it, I'd see the outside of the engine, a few hoses, listen to your story, and be in no position to give anyone any advice on how good it was in terms of a repeatable life cycle for them.

 

I wish you every success with it. I think you've done a very smart thing with that aircraft.

 

However let's go back to the thread title.

 

 

[gandalph]

And therein lies the problem. II'd see the outside of the engine, a few hoses, listen to your story, and be in no position to give anyone any adviceHowever let's go back to the thread title.

Exactly!

 

Sadly, lack of knowledge doesn't seem to prevent people giving advice . Yet when people who have some knowledge and experience of the subject they're decried for outrageous and ridiculous promotion. And before you get your hackles up, that comment re lack of knowledge isn't necessarily directed at you.

 

As you say, back to topic.

 

 

[jetjr]

What experience would hat be TP?

 

And youve ignored the fact there are hundreds of solid lifter camit produced engines running foryears

 

 

[turboplanner]

So straight back off topic again.........................

 

 

[gandalph]

So straight back off topic again.........................

Well, sort of ... but you have dodged answering that question twice now, so perhaps you could clear that up and THEN we can get back on topic. Waddya reckon?

 

 

[turboplanner]

It wasn't "sort of" - the thread is "Camit engines - anyone got one?"

 

If you are referring to my post "...............just outrageous promotion which didn't ring true with my past experience at all.", my past experience actually being employed in an Industry where I have to make contractual commitments to very large fleets on the predicted life cycle of engines, commit to the performance of those engines, arbitrate where there are problems, find solutions and meet the requirements of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, and in my spare time build race engines where I work on the engines with my own hands, and have wonderful plans for the new designs.

 

The thread is not about Jabiru engines produced by a supplier; it's time to P!ss or get off the Pot, and start talking about actual numbers of genuine engines.

 

 

[gandalph]

It wasn't "sort of" - the thread is "Camit engines - anyone got one?"If you are referring to my post "...............just outrageous promotion which didn't ring true with my past experience at all.", my past experience actually being employed in an Industry where I have to make contractual commitments to very large fleets on the predicted life cycle of engines, commit to the performance of those engines, arbitrate where there are problems, find solutions and meet the requirements of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, and in my spare time build race engines where I work on the engines with my own hands, and have wonderful plans for the new designs.

 

The thread is not about Jabiru engines produced by a supplier; it's time to P!ss or get off the Pot, and start talking about actual numbers of genuine engines.

Thanks for that. They would be very large fleets of aircraft or were you part of the supply chain for aero engines?? Not trying to be difficult here, just trying to clarify you answer and assess the relevance of your experience so I can use that knowledge to evaluate your posts. You are a prolific poster here and I haven't been able to work out whether you were just sitting at home and talking through your hat or whether you actually had relevant knowledge.

 

 

[turboplanner]

You actually gagged an interesting discussion on engines gandaph to insist on getting back to the topic. [umm... moderated..].

 

 

[gandalph]

However let's go back to the thread title.

You actually gagged an interesting discussion on engines gandaph to insist on getting back to the topic.

Me? Funny. So who's the guy impersonating Turbs and wanting to get back to the topic?

 

 

[Oscar]

And therein lies the problem. If I came and looked at it, I'd see the outside of the engine, a few hoses, listen to your story, and be in no position to give anyone any advice on how good it was in terms of a repeatable life cycle for them.

Just to inform us - who has been asking you to give them advice on how good it was? Verifiable numbers of supplicants, please, with the evidence of same, scrupulously applying your own criteria for reports on CAMit engines .

 

Oh, and which hoses? the inlet tract SCAT tubes, the oil cooler hoses, or the fuel delivery hose? None of which are CAMit products nor a part of the engine.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Just to inform us - who has been asking you to give them advice on how good it was? Verifiable numbers of supplicants, please, with the evidence of same, scrupulously applying your own criteria for reports on CAMit engines .Oh, and which hoses? the inlet tract SCAT tubes, the oil cooler hoses, or the fuel delivery hose? None of which are CAMit products nor a part of the engine.

If you are talking about my post #289, it was a sincere response to a sincere invitation in post #288.

 

Having just read the words again, I think the words themselves inform you.

 

As for the hose, well you can take your pick or I could make it the finning in the vicinity of the No 1 spark plug if that meets your definition of "part of the engine."

 

It doesn't make any difference.

 

My point was that unless I had some supernatural powers, a look at the engine and a bit of chewing the fat cannot determine reliability and life cycle of an engine.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I think this was the one which doused the general discussion, but regardless, you have an opportunity to put up some genuine numbers.

 

 

[gandalph]

I think this was the one which doused the general discussion, but regardless, you have an opportunity to put up some genuine numbers.

Turbop, I'm not pushing any line or numbers. I think you have me confused with someone else. I simply suggested, with those admittedly inflammatory and derogative smileys, that we were drifting away from the topic of this thread. I think you were pretty emphatic somewhere back there about what the topic was. You post #296 makes me think that I might have have upset you in some way. If I have .... what can I say?

 

 

[Powerin]

I'm a great fan of thread drift (and a perpetrator). Sometimes threads take on a life of their own and turn into a meeting of intelligent minds with a great deal of wisdom imparted (albeit with a bit of vitriol, misinformation and ego thrown in). They may occasionally degenerate into mudslinging but I'm willing to put up with that for the times when they're a great learning experience.

 

 

[dazza 38]

I'm a great fan of thread drift (and a perpetrator). Sometimes threads take on a life of their own and turn into a meeting of intelligent minds with a great deal of wisdom imparted (albeit with a bit of vitriol, misinformation and ego thrown in). They may occasionally degenerate into mudslinging but I'm willing to put up with that for the times when they're a great learning experience.

And entertainment.