New RR500 Turboprop engine in the Mooney

[RobertoTohme]

Quote: M20BE

The Rolls Royce R500 isn't designed for helicopters, it's designed with GA market in mind. It's revolutionairy, still don't get it why nobody is talking about it everyday :-(

[M20BE]

Yes, but indeed, the Robinsons fly also with lycoming airplane aviation engines :-) hehehe

[RobertoTohme]

Quote: M20BE

Yes, but indeed, the Robinsons fly also with lycoming airplane aviation engines :-) hehehe

[Greg_D]

I had an interesting discussion with some Mooney factory folks this weekend regarding the turbine they are looking at installing in their airframe.  They claim that it will be only marginally faster than an Ovation and considerably slower than an Acclaim.  In fact, they said plans are only to certifty it to about 18K feet.  The altitude certification may be so that it doesn't compete directly with the Acclaim.  They said the limitation on speed was because they couldn't get a bigger prop on the plane to use the available horsepower.  Prop size is limited because of landing gear geometry.  It seemed the main reason they were intereted in the turbine engine was fuel availability, or lack thereof in the export market.

 

[TurboExec]

They couldn't just stick more blades on it?

I think they are making a big mistake if they don't certify it over 18k'......How much will it cost in comparison to the Acclaim?

[KSMooniac]

Greg, I still think he said that the critical altitude of the engine would be 18k, not the absolute certified ceiling, meaning it won't be able to maintain 100% power above that altitude.  We'll see...

Regardless, I'm considerably less excited about the project since the only "improvement" will be the ability to burn something other than 100LL, but at a significantly higher rate for no more additional speed or utility.

[RobertoTohme]

Then again, those RR engines are for helicopters and hence not designed for high altitude flight...  If you run a comparo between the RR powered Tradewind Bonanza vs the P&W PT6 powered Rocket Engineering Bonanza, you'll notice that the best speeds and altitudes differ quite a bit, where the RR's best altitude is 15,000 ft and 220 true, vs 250 @ FL250 for the PT6 powered one.  I also think that if the speed is less than the Acclaim, they'll find no market for it because being a turbine it's going to cost close to or even north of 1 million.

[M20BE]

Roberto, RR stated that they will have it at almost the same price of the TSIO-550 engine, with a less weight. They will need a longer nose for the W&B IMO....

You also have to understand that in my part of the world (the old world) avgas is 18$ a gallon, and jetA1 is like 9$ a gallon..

 

[TurboExec]

But when you are buying a $600,000 - $1M airplane is another $9/gal a big deal?  And I'd bet that the Continental is buring quite a bit less than the RR....Continuous combustion burns a LOT, I bet the difference between the 2 would more make up more than half the difference in cost.

[Greg_D]

Quote: KSMooniac

Greg, I still think he said that the critical altitude of the engine would be 18k, not the absolute certified ceiling, meaning it won't be able to maintain 100% power above that altitude. We'll see...

Regardless, I'm considerably less excited about the project since the only "improvement" will be the ability to burn something other than 100LL, but at a significantly higher rate for no more additional speed or utility.

[TurboExec]

4 or 6 seats?  That is Matrix territory....price wise

[Greg_D]

Four seats from what I've been told.  Essentially an Ovation/Long Body Mooney with a different powerplant.

[KSMooniac]

Adam, I think the concern is less about the cost of 100LL and more about the availability of it in many parts of the world...it just isn't as easy to find at any cost compared to JET A or diesel.  Once that is understood, then making a low-end turboprop makes some sense if one is to go after international sales like Mooney appears to be doing.  This makes (or maybe *made*) sense when the dollar was weak but who knows since the entire world economy appears to be sliding backwards right now.

As I understood the short presentation this past weekend, the RR500 would be bolted to an existing M20 airframe and would have to have the long range tanks to be useful.  Optimal efficiency in the teens at 27 or 28 GPH.  I missed that it would only be certified to 18k...that makes absolutely no sense to me...I thought it was only the critical altitude of the engine.  I don't see why anyone would buy this thing in the US since it is slower, less efficient, and much more expensive than the M20TN.  Sounds like Porsche Mooney, Round II if you ask me.  Perhaps there will be enough international sales to not completely lose the farm?  (fingers crossed that the parlay the experience into a true 4-place + bags pressurized airframe with a derivative engine)

[TurboExec]

I sure hope you aren't right about it being the second coming of the Porsche Mooney!  I fear everything being said here (not necessarily true) sounds similar to the past though....

[M20BE]

Eugh, anyone cares about the 7 times more reliability of a turbo prop ? 

[aviatoreb]

AVWEB produced a video of an interview with a rep from Rolls Royce at the AOPA show.  It's on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2nD7Nqh7B4

 

Bump this thread.

 

Now that Mooney is back in business.....  How about finishing that RR500 powered Mooney project?

[Mcstealth]

I was wondering the same thing, along the lines of the thread: What should Mooney do next.

You would think that this item has come up in the think tank discussions.

I question if anyone would buy a 4 seater that costs so much

Df

[aviatoreb]

I was wondering the same thing, along the lines of the thread: What should Mooney do next.

You would think that this item has come up in the think tank discussions.

I question if anyone would buy a 4 seater that costs so much

Df

 

I think "people" would.  People are buying and building the Lancair Evolution for well North of a million.  I would have never guessed that you could find builders in that price category. If I had a million I would want something prebuilt.  If I had the money for a new acclaim, then I would be quite tempted by an RR500 M20T that was maybe 100k more, 15 knots faster and had the reliability of a turbo prop on the nose.  At those speeds the airframe would have to be beefed up a bit but it could be done by the airframe manufacturer.  Maybe 200 or 300k more if it were pressurized.  

 

I'm not in that buying bracket so I just cheer for new projects as a fan.

[Awqward]

Pretty hard to beat a Jetprop..... I doubt you could

[carusoam]

My time line has a delay in it....

If they start building it today, I will be looking at it second hand in 15 years...

Good things are worth the wait...

Best regards,

-a-

[Piloto]

George you forgot the most important comparison.

If a new Acclaim is $750K, how much is going to be a turboprop Mooney? Maybe $1.5M?

[aviatoreb]

George you forgot the most important comparison.

If a new Acclaim is $750K, how much is going to be a turboprop Mooney? Maybe $1.5M?

 

Why does an RR500 need to be 800k?

 

Anyway separate question - why would an RR500 be any more expensive than an IO500?  Is it inherently more complicated to machine?

[Piloto]

Eugh, anyone cares about the 7 times more reliability of a turbo prop ? 

 

If the hot section rotor blades are made of the same material as in cruise missiles or piston turbos that is the kind of TBO you are looking at. Of course cruise missiles don't need long TBOs. Those impressive TBOs on turbines you heard is because the blades are made of Titanium and they would cost more than an IO-550.

 

Just look on AIrNav.com and try to find airports with runways shorter than 2,500ft that sell Jet fuel. Jets simply don't land on those but Mooneys does.

 

José

[Guest]

Typical red line temperature for a turbocharged piston engine at 1650 F is equal to 899 C. Well above the red line for a typical turbo prop engine.

Clarence

[Seth]

Good Bumb.  An update on the RR500 project would be very neat. 

 

If they built a new small aircraft out of composite with the Mooney mentality, why not build a composite structure around the RR500?

 

Adapting to the M20 may make sense, but a hybrid design may work better - A pressurized composite fuselage and the M20 wings.  Thoughts?  Use the branding and seating structre/design work from the M10 as part of the M30.

 

-Seth