There Is A Lesson Here

[GeeBee]

I've always said we are paying top line prices for a third rate show. This guy has broke the code. What is needed is volume to amortize the certification costs.

https://airfactsjournal.com/2020/11/the-20-an-hour-cessna-172-experiment/?trk_msg=C221B64EFR7KH3AU4TLITUU47C&trk_contact=PI3IG216Q2GFB19F8ETMFI1S8S&trk_sid=Q8OMEEVENKHGD1IT6LPG6TAO50&utm_source=listrak&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=READ+MORE&utm_campaign=A20114C&utm_content=Fast+Five+-+November+28

 

[N201MKTurbo]

All attempts to modify automotive engines into aircraft engines have eventually failed. The most successful was the Centurion diesel, which isn’t held in high regard. 
 

I wish them well, but if it was that easy, it would have been done long ago.

[tmo]

I think the article alludes to to "diesel engines that cost over $100,000 for the conversion, and offered little in operating cost savings" which must be the Austro / Thielert automotive conversions; I don't thing the clean sheet diesels got anywhere close to being an actual product (EPS, if memory serves). EPI also made some attempts, IIRC.

[1964-M20E]

https://corsairpower.com/

 

Corsair website is above.  This is interesting I like it and would be tempted being I am getting ready to do an engine for my F model.

Looking at the website they are still navigating the FAA bureaucracy and paperwork to get there.   You could go experimental with them in an experimental category.   As for normal flying my opinion is you advertise on the side of the plane with vinyl decals station the new engine type and how good it is then every where you go is an maintenance, proficiency or exhibition flight.

 

Advertised cost is $50k and the will give you up to $14k for your old engine to be deducted from the $50k.

The corsair runs about 2GPH less than a Lycoming running at 9.5GPH

 

[GeeBee]

The issue is not an automotive conversion although that is what has been done here. The issue is what CAN be done with engine technology in our airplanes that is not being done. 

We have a thread on this board about an engine failure induced by a spun bearings because the case halves were mis-assembled. Equally so, we see spun bearings from cylinder replacements. Why are we building 1930's engines with split cases? Why don't we have have mono block cases with the cylinders bolted on such that removal of the cylinder does not threaten to compromise the main bearing assembly? We continue to struggle with air cooled engines when the benefits of liquid cooling are well known and engine technology has advanced to create light weight aluminum blocks. Go back to 1963 and GM created an aluminum V-8 that weight about the same as an O-320. 

This not to mention the increase in power to weight ratios. We see new 6 cylinder engines putting out 400 hp, unheard of 10 years ago. I have not even touched upon ignition, fuel etc. As is pointed out, the Corsair engine can limp home on 4 cylinders, try that with your IO-540. 

Point is this. There is some very good and established technology and we in aviation are not getting the benefit of it. We continue to struggle with a 19th century ignition system, and early 20th century fuel systems and a design, horizontally opposed air cooled that even VW left 40 years ago.  

 

[Tim Jodice]

I wonder how many airframes it will be STCed for. If they say $50,000 figure 65 when you done with the other airframe specific parts and the "while you are in there" items. 

[whiskytango]

2 hours ago, GeeBee said:

The issue is not an automotive conversion although that is what has been done here. The issue is what CAN be done with engine technology in our airplanes that is not being done. 

We have a thread on this board about an engine failure induced by a spun bearings because the case halves were mis-assembled. Equally so, we see spun bearings from cylinder replacements. Why are we building 1930's engines with split cases? Why don't we have have mono block cases with the cylinders bolted on such that removal of the cylinder does not threaten to compromise the main bearing assembly? We continue to struggle with air cooled engines when the benefits of liquid cooling are well known and engine technology has advanced to create light weight aluminum blocks. Go back to 1963 and GM created an aluminum V-8 that weight about the same as an O-320. 

This not to mention the increase in power to weight ratios. We see new 6 cylinder engines putting out 400 hp, unheard of 10 years ago. I have not even touched upon ignition, fuel etc. As is pointed out, the Corsair engine can limp home on 4 cylinders, try that with your IO-540. 

Point is this. There is some very good and established technology and we in aviation are not getting the benefit of it. We continue to struggle with a 19th century ignition system, and early 20th century fuel systems and a design, horizontally opposed air cooled that even VW left 40 years ago.  

 

I couldn't agree more @GeeBee.  Why is it that no major engine manufacturer is willing to do a true Clean Sheet engine design, based on a water-cooled fuel- injected aluminum block engine that runs on Mogas?  I think I know the answer - the company attorneys have a good understanding of their liability exposure based on the current antiquated design, and that is factored into the cost of the product.  The liability associated with a Clean Sheet design is an unknown, and no manufacturer wants to stick their neck out.  Very sad.

[carusoam]

Some disappointing detail comes with every automotive engine...

Primarily a V8, capable of 300hp from Chevy.... can be boosted to a much higher number...

Challenges...

1) It gets the HP from 6k rpm...

2) 6k rpm requires a gear box to get useable rpm for propellers...

3) Gear boxes are heavy... and out on the nose.

4) Heavy and out on the nose is a real WnB challenge...

5) Light weight gear boxes have had poor performance numbers so far... the glass version of the Comanche aka Raven was the epitome of this challenge...

6) Corvette engines are really cool... and have raced Nurburgring for 24hrs in stock form.... brand new from the factory... 

7) Running full out, one day each week... is not what most V8s are designed to do...

8) most Corvettes are loping around at 2k rpm @60mph, not quite 150kts...

9) So who wants to be the test pilot demonstrating the value of a V8 in an environment that is technically different than its design spec...

10) Yay for the guys in the experimental world... they have taken every version of air cooled engine to see what it can do...

The experimental world is interesting.... there are some people that build planes just to demonstrate STOL performance... kind of like building a car to race... but not one to drive long X-countries...

Sooo.... let’s read the deep details to see if any of this can be interesting to typical MSer flights...

Fancy ignition systems and fuel injection and electronic controls are getting closer...  visit with the engine manufactures at KOSH...  they have interesting aviation specific hardware for the experimental world...

All of this has to have a planB to work when parts fail...

The 1930s technology has left the building... our spark plugs aren’t the same as back then, the electronic mags with variable timing surely have changed, the coatings, the machining and casting technologies have all risen to new levels... the hoses used for fuel have reached a new high of being multilayer with fabulous function and resistance to fuel and oil...

Even if your engine was first built in the 70s... it got some new technology over the years... from really cool valve designs to new follower materials... aluminum gear pumps have been swapped out... automatic CNC machinery used to build this stuff... computerized data keeping for engine build records... wow! (Important when you hear an AD is coming...)

Even pressing sheet metal has made great precision strides...

If you swapped out the engine for an IO390 you got the latest roller technology followers...

In the end... the limiting factor is probably the fuel we have and the air... density, and %O₂ that hasn’t changed in millennia... 

 

PP thoughts only... not a mechanic... or historian...

By the time the stock engine from Chevy is useable in a Mooney... it will cost about as much as an IO550 does per hour over its lifetime... oddly enough, turbines are in a similar price range when you include their really long TBOs...

For an interesting look at a diesel Audi automotive engine in an airplane... find the Raptor on you tube... second flight with improved cooling is due up in the next week or two...

It is a huge job for any one guy to make any progress...

Compare to SpaceX... where the pay off is huge!

Imagine building airplanes out of Stainless...  Hmmmm... John Delorean was on to something... but, needed better financial support...

The sound of low cost aviation generates a lot of interest... hope springs eternal.... 

Best regards,

-a-

[N201MKTurbo]

I’ve Been involved with GA since 1980. I’ve heard the mantra that if we would just use modern engine technology everything would be so much better. So here we are 40 years later and we are in the same place. 
 

It seems that there have been at least 40 years of failures to implement the new technology. Not for lack of trying.

Is it possible that all who have tried are idiots? It is hard to imagine that is the case. I think the fact is that airplanes are not cars, or boats. And our engines are probably more suited to the job then most people give them credit for.  

[Mooneymite]

1 minute ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I’ve Been involved with GA since 1980. I’ve heard the mantra that if we would just use modern engine technology everything would be so much better. So here we are 40 years later and we are in the same place. 
 

It seems that there have been at least 40 years of failures to implement the new technology. Not for lack of trying.

Is it possible that all who have tried are idiots? It is hard to imagine that is the case. I think the fact is that airplanes are not cars, or boats. And our engines are probably more suited to the job then most people give them credit for.  

What you say is true.  I've been in aviation for 51 years and agree with your observations.  I suspect that the paradigm will not shift until we get away from the conventional internal combustion engine.  Physics is physics.

We need to look to an entirely different kind of powerplant.  Maybe a steam turbine using nuclear fusion?  What's old is new!

I hope a brighter, more inventive generation than mine will shift the paradigm.

[aviatoreb]

20 minutes ago, Mooneymite said:

What you say is true.  I've been in aviation for 51 years and agree with your observations.  I suspect that the paradigm will not shift until we get away from the conventional internal combustion engine.  Physics is physics.

We need to look to an entirely different kind of powerplant.  Maybe a steam turbine using nuclear fusion?  What's old is new!

I hope a brighter, more inventive generation than mine will shift the paradigm.

Electric is coming.

[aviatoreb]

I was fantastically bullish on the clean sheet design eps diesel 8 cylinder graphite block with amazing fuel specifics.

alas - it failed.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2020/august/12/eps-declares-bankruptcy

[Mooneymite]

6 minutes ago, aviatoreb said:

Electric is coming.

Electric is so yesterday!  

Besides, even from Walmart, extension cords get expensive.  

Edited November 29, 2020 by Mooneymite

[aviatoreb]

44 minutes ago, Mooneymite said:

Electric is so yesterday!  

Besides, even from Walmart, extension cords get expensive.  

Could be yesterday.

but electric is coming.  Tomorrow.

cape air our regional airline - as featured in the tv show “wings” and I’ve flown in that very Cessna 402 multiple times from massena to Boston is investing in electric for 2023.

https://provincetownindependent.org/news/2019/12/19/wolf-sees-future-of-cape-air-in-all-electric-planes/
 

 If players like airbus are spending serious money to be sure to have a seat at the table

https://www.airbus.com/innovation/zero-emission/electric-flight/e-fan-x.html

And you can rent a ride this weekend in Korea for a finicky ride around the city in an overgrown octacopter. https://www.avweb.com/recent-updates/evtols-urban-mobility/ehang-216-completes-first-korean-flight-tour/
 

Pro- con - or indifferent / it’s coming.

[GeeBee]

There is no doubt electric is coming. Do you have a million dollars for the new tech? I don't. You're still going to be buying avgas when I am taking a dirt nap. 

Going back to the doubters, think about this. I just put a new cylinder on my IO-550G. You all know by rote,  a very specific break-in to get the rings to properly seat. I had to use mineral oil. Now do you break in a car engine? Do you break in a marine engine? Nope. Indeed manufacturers of marine outboard have the design so refined, you don't do anything to the engine for one year or 100 hours. My new car came with Mobil 1, and the computer ran the car 12,000 miles before it said, "Change oil".  No break in, no break in oil, nothing.  So if you think that materials and methods are no longer "1930s" consider it the next time you are running mineral oil for 25 hours at 75% power. Third rate show for Ferrari prices. 

 

 

 

[carusoam]

So...

I googled ‘airplane of the future’ to see what they would look like...

Seems like twin turbines will be big... 

 

I was looking for the Otto, Celera... it has a funky non-turbine big engine... running on diesel... from Red Aviation, the A03...

https://www.businessinsider.com/new-private-plane-otto-aviation-celera-500l-2020-9#theyre-a-common-feature-on-newer-aircraft-as-the-aerodynamic-efficiency-they-provide-helps-lower-fuel-burn-and-increase-range-13

 

The red A03 is like a pair for straight sixes bolted side by side... the layout allows for the failure of one side to not affect the other... unless something in common rapidly disassembles....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RED_A03

800Lbs and 700hp 

Similar to Clarence’s twin on the front of his Comanche... only bigger... 

Best regards,

-a-

[GeeBee]

The Celara is a joke. Peter Garrison in this month's Flying magazine has a nice piece on how big of a joke. I've seen the "Celara movie" before. Jim Bede would be proud. Let's stick with the doable.

 

 

 

[Missile=Awesome]

@carusoam  Question:  Does a day go by that you don’t pine for a turbine?  

[Missile=Awesome]

#Love the one you’re with.

Envy..a deadly sin...(insert expensive)

[carusoam]

Always searching for increased fuel efficiency... the addition of power is icing on the cake...

Probably stems from driving a 60hp 4spd 1.6 liter Ford Escort in the early days...

The next car was (typical for NJ) a Firebird... not an ordinary firebird... a Firebird Formula 350...

Similar to a Missile... 300hp in a frame designed for smaller engines... 

 

The drive to add a turbine to a Mooney... is the usual safety of operations...

Very few turbines stop operating under normal flight conditions...

Just don’t run out of fuel...  

 

• Safety
• Speed
• Efficiency

Sort of in that order... 

 

Best regards,

-a-

 

[N201MKTurbo]

So what if we got a better engine. 

Better gas mileage means more range. I can’t last a tank as it is.

More power means more speed, but not much.

Saving money? The lead article was talking about replacing a $35k engine with a $50k engine to save 2 GPH. That 15k will buy a lot of avgas.

Besides, the fuel specifics of our engines is pretty good. When it comes to a 20% increase with a lower octane fuel, I’ll believe it when I see it.

[laytonl]

I flew in a diamond DA-62 yesterday and it has the Austro AE330 diesels.  Easy starts and smooth operation and has FADEC.  I was impressed with the ease of operation and smoothness.  Props auto-feather too. Lee

[Hank]

54 minutes ago, carusoam said:

Always searching for increased fuel efficiency... the addition of power is icing on the cake...

Probably stems from driving a 60hp 4spd 1.6 liter Ford Escort in the early days...

The next car was (typical for NJ) a Firebird... not an ordinary firebird... a Firebird Formula 350...

Similar to a Missile... 300hp in a frame designed for smaller engines... 

Sorry you ended up with the little engine! A friend used to have a Formula 400 when we lived in Georgia, free from the threat of snow and ice . . . . Still smaller than the Bandit Edition, 6.6 liter. I was driving a Chevy truck with I-6, 250 1-barrel . . . . .

While a turbine would certainly add some performance to our Mooneys, it will drive acquisition prices even higher. But our small-bladdered cohort will enjoy making the same distance in less time, even though they will burn more fuel getting there and land with a lot less.

[tmo]

8 hours ago, Missile=Awesome said:

Envy..a deadly sin...(insert expensive)

One could argue that lust is as deadly and possibly even more expensive ;-)

[GeeBee]

I'm searching for reliability, efficiency and ease of operation. Our internal combustion engines in aviation compared to other modes are lacking. I can drive my car from from the Jersey shore to Pike's peak and never touch a mixture knob, and it starts in a split second in both places. Not only that, the mixture is always "on the money". If detonation were to start, in a fraction of a second it is stopped. If it looses coolant it "limps" home. Hundreds of miles if needed. It is 6 cylinders and puts out 382 hp. Power to weight ratio? Got it in spades.