F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

[Skybum1]

Gents,
This is another question from the newbee. Can an F19 use the same nosebowl as the BC-12D? I know the cowling section is a bit longer for the O200, but I don't know about the nosebowl. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks.

Brian Jardine
801-499-6210

[Winston L.]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

Yes, the nose bowl is the same part. Winston

[jgerard]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

Only difference is the F19 does not have the opening under the prop.

[VictorBravo]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

If you have an airplane powered by the A-65, you MUST have that opening under the propeller to feed the cooling baffle underneath the crankcase. This is the only oil cooling that the 65 powered planes have. If you get an F-19 cowl for a 65 powered plane, you have to cut the opening and make sure the baffle seals to the inside of the cowl.

In a day or so, I'll post a photo of the new and improved lower engine baffle I just made. Took me a WEEK of tin bashing and probably that much again in head-scratching. But so far it turned out pretty good, and I think it will achieve my goal of OVER-cooling the oil temp, so I can control the temp with a cover plate.

[FlyingGourmet]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

I am just finishing the install of 4 new milleniums on my 0-200. I have a nose-bowl with an opening beneath the propeller (BC12d). Prior to this conversation I was not aware that I might have the wrong nose-bowl. Do I need to cover the hole to insure proper air flow over my 0-200?

Please help as I want to safegaurd my new investment.

[Winston L.]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

Only difference is the F19 does not have the opening under the prop.

Yep, I forgot about that. Winston

[VictorBravo]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

I am just finishing the install of 4 new milleniums on my 0-200. I have a nose-bowl with an opening beneath the propeller (BC12d). Prior to this conversation I was not aware that I might have the wrong nose-bowl. Do I need to cover the hole to insure proper air flow over my 0-200?

Please help as I want to safegaurd my new investment.

IF you have an oil cooler installed on your O-200, and IF this oil cooler has proper airflow to and from the cooler, and IF your O-200 does not have the lower crankcase baffle... then you can cover the square hole under the prop.

If you leave the hole open and there is no lower crankcase baffle, then the airflow into this hole will OPPOSE the proper cooling air flow through the cylinders and you could damage your engine.

If you close off the hole and don't have a "Regular" oil cooler... you WILL damage your engine.

Gotta figure out what method of oil cooling your particular F-19 has and then make the cowlings work with it. Some O-200's do not have an oil cooler (Cessna 150) and some do.

[Larry Lyons]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

Looks like a nose bowl trade may be in the offing.
Spotter

[tim]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

ya im looking for a cowl for my bc-12d-85 for the long mount any one know were i can find one ??? all the cowls that my friend has are 65 and i really dont want to mod them

[VictorBravo]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

ya im looking for a cowl for my bc-12d-85 for the long mount any one know were i can find one ??? all the cowls that my friend has are 65 and i really dont want to mod them

BC-12D-85 and BC-12D-65 should be the same part IMHO.

[Dano"T"]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

Except....he needs one for a Long mount.

[VictorBravo]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

Except....he needs one for a Long mount.

OOPS! I was only talking about the nosebowl, not the lengthened center cowl. If memory serves, the nose bowl should be the same. Mike Redpath (ragwing nut) should be able to offer a definitive answer for sure. The Harer STC shows that you only have to splice in 4 inches onto the existing 65 cowling, which can be done with a "flush" patch so it doesn't show.

It is just me, or do others here believe the days of a long mount and long cowl for an electrical system are numbered? The newer design certified starters and alternators should be able to fit on the short mount, and if not then the technology is there now to make up small, low power starters and alternators than even the small ones on the market today.

IMHO, the vast majority of Taylorcraft owners wanting "an electrical system" need the alternator only to run a radio and transponder and maybe a GPS, and recharge the battery. Nobody needs 60 amps to run a full avionics suite and four backup gyros. I'd GUESS that a 15 or 20 amp alternator output would be more than enough for what we need.

Besides, the newer crop of radios and transponders consume VERY little power compared to the older units. Just seems like a large model airplane brushless motor converted to run as an alternator (only needs a rather simple black box and a few medium size wires) would supply enough power to run a radio and transponder. This stuff would take up very little room behind the engine.

Hell, the tachometer drive on an A-65 would turn the thing. You'd need a small planetary gearbox (again, a shelf item for the R/C modelers) to spin up the alternator, and a rubber safety coupling to break if the alternator bearing siezes and not damage the engine. That and a little black box, and one circuit breaker, and you'd be done. Oh, and one of the electronic tachs because you used the tach drive.

[Ragwing nut]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

They are correct on the nose bowls, except I don;t think the lycoming or franklin has the lower opening either. Univair was selling long mounts, but the REAL problem is long hinges and spines for the cowl to correctly lengthen the upper cowl. The O-200 with full electrics will fit on a short mount, but there is a problem. You can't remove the mags due to the increase depth of the rear case.

Mike

[FlyingGourmet]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

Does anyone have a 0-200 (with or without accesories) on a short-mount that's been field approved? If so -what do you think.

[wlas]

Re: F19 cowl vs. BC-12D cowl

I got a field approval on a 0-200 with a short mount on a 1940 model a few years back and it worked real good. I then put a starter and B&C alt. on later, the guy really liked it. The engine had slick mags so you could pull them without moving the engine forward.