Kyle Boatright
Well Known Member
Here's today's update on their website:
http://www.innodyn.com/aviation/news_archives/news_03_17_06.html
http://www.innodyn.com/aviation/news_archives/news_03_17_06.html
Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Clouds on the Innodyn Horizon
- Thread starter Kyle Boatright
- Start date
gmcjetpilot
Well Known Member
Turbine wanted?
If you want a turbine buy an Alison or Walter and get a plane big enough to handle +400hp (to 750hp). be ready to have a $1/4 mil into a turbine plane. Even if you could get an Innodyn you would have a toy not a real Turbine aircraft. G
If you want a turbine buy an Alison or Walter and get a plane big enough to handle +400hp (to 750hp). be ready to have a $1/4 mil into a turbine plane. Even if you could get an Innodyn you would have a toy not a real Turbine aircraft. G
Last edited:
Positive
Go Innodyn. I hope that you build a very nice and safe turbine. I hope that you sell a million of them and become a viable alternative for those of us that did not kick you in the teeth every time your name was mentioned. I would love to have a nice turbine on the front of my 7, even if I have to add extra fuel.
For those naysayers that are about to pipe in, I have had no luck with my mails to Innodyn but that does not mean that everyone has had the same experience. Don't care what others have to say, I like the idea that they have come up with. Someone has to test it and I would be glad to do it. There will be failures and successes until the day that the doors close, just ask Lycoming.
Nothing was ever perfect right out of the box. Trial and error make things better. That is called research.
I am glad that they are delaying shipping until the product is correct. It was nice of them to post the announcement regarding the delay and their not appearing as sun. Maybe this is a step in the right direction for this company.
Go Innodyn. I hope that you build a very nice and safe turbine. I hope that you sell a million of them and become a viable alternative for those of us that did not kick you in the teeth every time your name was mentioned. I would love to have a nice turbine on the front of my 7, even if I have to add extra fuel.
For those naysayers that are about to pipe in, I have had no luck with my mails to Innodyn but that does not mean that everyone has had the same experience. Don't care what others have to say, I like the idea that they have come up with. Someone has to test it and I would be glad to do it. There will be failures and successes until the day that the doors close, just ask Lycoming.
Nothing was ever perfect right out of the box. Trial and error make things better. That is called research.
I am glad that they are delaying shipping until the product is correct. It was nice of them to post the announcement regarding the delay and their not appearing as sun. Maybe this is a step in the right direction for this company.
aadamson
Well Known Member
Umm, but!
So let me see if I have this right.... And *you* want to put the above on *your* airplane, with *your butt* in the seat and *your* wife/sig other in the other seat and blast off into the wild blue yonders..........
Uh, huh, I'll watch while you do it ok?
ww2planes said:
So let me see if I have this right.... And *you* want to put the above on *your* airplane, with *your butt* in the seat and *your* wife/sig other in the other seat and blast off into the wild blue yonders..........
Uh, huh, I'll watch while you do it ok?
gmcjetpilot
Well Known Member
Innodyn almost ready! (still)
I appreciate enthusiasm. I too am enthusiastic, but it has taken a beating as I get older.
I think all those who have said, give Innodyn a break, I say good for you, but for me they have forfeited their support. They have promised, promised and promised. Their claimed performance and fuel burn is suspect. Add all the delays delays and delays. I guess the hold up is not only technical, its a money issue. They are not getting enough money in to keep going. I also feel sorry for all those who sent them deposits, fellow airplane builders, and that is where my loyalties are
http://www.avweb.com/newswire/12_03b/leadnews/191404-1.html
I still say that a good turbine will cost you $60K-$125K min. The ones that I think would work for a real plane (hydraulic prop, real fuel controller) are the Garrett TPE331, Alison250 and the Walter M601. All these are in the 400hp and up range. The RV is not a good match for a 400-650hp engine. It has nothing to do with negativeness towards Innodyn, it is then current state of affairs. To me Innodyn is a novelty engine, not a real turbo prop.
George
PS, The Wright Bros, did not send out lots of press releases take deposits before flying.
I appreciate enthusiasm. I too am enthusiastic, but it has taken a beating as I get older.
I think all those who have said, give Innodyn a break, I say good for you, but for me they have forfeited their support. They have promised, promised and promised. Their claimed performance and fuel burn is suspect. Add all the delays delays and delays. I guess the hold up is not only technical, its a money issue. They are not getting enough money in to keep going. I also feel sorry for all those who sent them deposits, fellow airplane builders, and that is where my loyalties are
http://www.avweb.com/newswire/12_03b/leadnews/191404-1.html
I still say that a good turbine will cost you $60K-$125K min. The ones that I think would work for a real plane (hydraulic prop, real fuel controller) are the Garrett TPE331, Alison250 and the Walter M601. All these are in the 400hp and up range. The RV is not a good match for a 400-650hp engine. It has nothing to do with negativeness towards Innodyn, it is then current state of affairs. To me Innodyn is a novelty engine, not a real turbo prop.
George
PS, The Wright Bros, did not send out lots of press releases take deposits before flying.
Last edited:
You bet
I would be glad to put my but in that seat, however, I am not a moron and would not risk another person. I am not an expert on turbines or pistons and will never pretend to be. I encourage dreamers and my wife says that I am a dreamer. She mostly said it when I told her that I wanted to build and fly my own plane. Guess what, my dream is coming true.
If Innodyn comes up with a turbine that I can put on my plane then good for the dreamers. I remember, not too long ago, many people bashing Egg for his conversions. Still goes on today but to a much lesser degree. Each day he is showing you that his dream was a good one and that his untrusted product can be a trusted one. I hope that Innodyn does the same.
Turbines are not new and I doubt that Innodyn has created a brand new product with all new technology of the likes that the world has never seen. It looks to me that they are trying to satisfy a niche that they believe exists by scaling down from a large mega horsepower turbine so that folks like me can have one.
I would be glad to put my but in that seat, however, I am not a moron and would not risk another person. I am not an expert on turbines or pistons and will never pretend to be. I encourage dreamers and my wife says that I am a dreamer. She mostly said it when I told her that I wanted to build and fly my own plane. Guess what, my dream is coming true.
If Innodyn comes up with a turbine that I can put on my plane then good for the dreamers. I remember, not too long ago, many people bashing Egg for his conversions. Still goes on today but to a much lesser degree. Each day he is showing you that his dream was a good one and that his untrusted product can be a trusted one. I hope that Innodyn does the same.
Turbines are not new and I doubt that Innodyn has created a brand new product with all new technology of the likes that the world has never seen. It looks to me that they are trying to satisfy a niche that they believe exists by scaling down from a large mega horsepower turbine so that folks like me can have one.
aadamson
Well Known Member
ww2planes said:
Ah, I see, you haven't done your homework on this one.... It's *not new*, it was used as an APU in helicopters, it doesn't burn 7g/100hp, more like 13-16. The only thing thats new is the adaptation of automobile fuel injectors to the housing and a computer to control the fuel. But come on don't you think that if you could claim 7g/100hp, you'd absolutely want to prove it and take massive amounts of orders. They have done just the opposite, claim, but not prove and take no orders.... Oh, and that was after they took everyones money the first time and never paid them back... This is a company that has been around for some time, made all these claims and never delivered.
As I said, I'll watch ya
Here's another one of my stupid questions...
Why would anyone even want to put a turbine in an RV? They burn more fuel and are way more expensive. As far as power is concerned, a 200hp Lyc will get me as close to Vne as I care to be. Unless you're cruising at 35,000 feet, what's the attraction?
If the turbine had been invented first, and the piston afterwards, the piston engine would be hailed as a technological marvel in terms of effeciency.
I'm not trying to start a flame war here. This is an honest question directed at those who would install a turbine in an aircraft that appears to be unsuitable to operate where the turbine really shines. I'm curious what I'm missing.
Why would anyone even want to put a turbine in an RV? They burn more fuel and are way more expensive. As far as power is concerned, a 200hp Lyc will get me as close to Vne as I care to be. Unless you're cruising at 35,000 feet, what's the attraction?
If the turbine had been invented first, and the piston afterwards, the piston engine would be hailed as a technological marvel in terms of effeciency.
I'm not trying to start a flame war here. This is an honest question directed at those who would install a turbine in an aircraft that appears to be unsuitable to operate where the turbine really shines. I'm curious what I'm missing.
Reply
#1, Because I can. #2 Because I want to. #3 So I can smoke past you on my way to the nearest gas station. #4 So I can out climb you. #5 So I can look way more cool.
Seriously.
They may not burn 7 gal per 100 hp but maybe I do not care. The two Lyc's that I fly regularly don't burn that little either. In fact I think that they are closer to 13 GPH when cranked up.
My non-flying airport neighbors would sure appreciate the quiet. If proven safe, my wife would also appreciate the quiet while watching a movie. I like the alleged simplicity and the TBO times for turbines. The lack of parts, let alone moving parts, is also appealing.
I do not know anything about the money but I do know that if people were ripped of, they have recourse, especially as a group. I don't see them piping in on this site to sing their woes. Guess they have a volunteer choir.
I sure am glad that Eclipse did not have everyone pull their money when they announced that ther product was delayed and that it was going to be more than a mil to buy.
Still dreamin.
#1, Because I can. #2 Because I want to. #3 So I can smoke past you on my way to the nearest gas station. #4 So I can out climb you. #5 So I can look way more cool.
Seriously.
They may not burn 7 gal per 100 hp but maybe I do not care. The two Lyc's that I fly regularly don't burn that little either. In fact I think that they are closer to 13 GPH when cranked up.
My non-flying airport neighbors would sure appreciate the quiet. If proven safe, my wife would also appreciate the quiet while watching a movie. I like the alleged simplicity and the TBO times for turbines. The lack of parts, let alone moving parts, is also appealing.
I do not know anything about the money but I do know that if people were ripped of, they have recourse, especially as a group. I don't see them piping in on this site to sing their woes. Guess they have a volunteer choir.
I sure am glad that Eclipse did not have everyone pull their money when they announced that ther product was delayed and that it was going to be more than a mil to buy.
Still dreamin.
ww2planes said:
Ummmm...yeah....have you ever been anywhere close to one of these single (solid) spool, single stage, centrifugal compressor, constant speed turbine engines when they are running with a prop on the front?!?! Whereas you can actually hear yourself think when a lyco is at idle, you'll need earplugs if you're anywhere near these. The prop is nearly at full RPM even at idle (just flattened a little bit). They are FAR from quiet - stand next to the wing of a 727 or the rear end of a DC-9 with the APU running and it's about 50% of the noise these things make with a prop on them.
I'll leave the rest of the arguments for others to sort out. Not arguing the rest of your reasoning...just the noise part
The engine isn't the noisiest part of our planes, the prop is. Also, you're right about less moving parts but the TBO thing is a whole 'nother' discussion - just remember cycles kill turbines, not hours.That being said, I still have to admit it would be pretty cool to smell the Jet A instead of AvGas and hear the turbine "tick,tick,tick, whoomp, big puff of smoke, then the spool up" during start on my little RV6 - Plus, I've always like EPR, N1 & N2's (Oooops, not on the ATP/Inndodyn)..... What I'd really like to see is a miniature PT-6 with a split spool, but then again if that were possible/profitable P&W would already be doing it.
Just my 2 cents as usual and all in good fun!
Cheers,
Stein.
Unproven
Unproven innovation leads to revolutionary technology. I think it's the "Yankee Spirit." Supposedly ordinary men can do great things if given the freedom to pursue happiness.
I have a friend who is developing a horizontally opposed engine with ceramic technology that will operate at detonation. It will burn virtually anything (bio-fuel, diesel, acetylene etc.) and be super efficient. Is he interested in Aviation? No. He wants to build a generator (this is not his day job. Do I doubt he can do it? I better not, he helped develop the technology that cut silicon into wafers in the machine you are typing on. I razz him and tell him it won't work (running an engine at detonation), but I probably shouldn't.
More power to em'.
I think the cure to the money woes would be to form a corporation and sell stock in the company. This will separate the believers from the non-beleivers and reward the prudent.
Unproven innovation leads to revolutionary technology. I think it's the "Yankee Spirit." Supposedly ordinary men can do great things if given the freedom to pursue happiness.
I have a friend who is developing a horizontally opposed engine with ceramic technology that will operate at detonation. It will burn virtually anything (bio-fuel, diesel, acetylene etc.) and be super efficient. Is he interested in Aviation? No. He wants to build a generator (this is not his day job
. Do I doubt he can do it? I better not, he helped develop the technology that cut silicon into wafers in the machine you are typing on. I razz him and tell him it won't work (running an engine at detonation), but I probably shouldn't.More power to em'.
I think the cure to the money woes would be to form a corporation and sell stock in the company. This will separate the believers from the non-beleivers and reward the prudent.
Rotary10-RV
Well Known Member
aerial said:Unproven innovation leads to revolutionary technology. I think it's the "Yankee Spirit." Supposedly ordinary men can do great things if given the freedom to pursue happiness.
I have a friend who is developing a horizontally opposed engine with ceramic technology that will operate at detonation. It will burn virtually anything (bio-fuel, diesel, acetylene etc.) and be super efficient. Is he interested in Aviation? No. He wants to build a generator (this is not his day job
More power to em'.
I think the cure to the money woes would be to form a corporation and sell stock in the company. This will separate the believers from the non-beleivers and reward the prudent.
The real problem here is that Innodyne has already done this, as ATP. Affordable Turbine Power. It is unclear if the name change was done to update the "sound" of the name, or to dodge creditors. There are several early investors that claim to have lost everything they invested. If this isn't true it would be good to have Innodyne explain what happened, (as ATP), to allay everyones worries. I doubt they will hit anywhere near the claimed GPH, but if a reliable turbine was available in the 180-250HP range they would still sell as many as they could make.
The biggest problem with selling "vaporware" to use a silicon wafer term is there is no way to tell the difference between the honest developer and the snake-oil salesmen. Much better to have a product available when you start advertising! A "hard" launch is the only way to be sure of anything. The refusal to release dyno information causes much concern. I wish them well myself, but seriously doubt their ability to deliver based on the refusal to show the dyno figures. A bunch of engines in various stages of assembly wouldn't hurt either.
Bill Jepson
pierre smith
Well Known Member
Innodyn.....
Remember Jim Bede?
Pierre
Remember Jim Bede?
Pierre
Red Voodoo
Well Known Member
Ugly
The above arguments, pro and con, all have their merits I guess. My objection is purely esthetic. The turbine installation takes the classic RV lines and produces something that looks like a chihuahua's dinner (sorry Doug ) from the firewall forward. Gag.
Ben R.
RV-9A #90217
Fuselage
The above arguments, pro and con, all have their merits I guess. My objection is purely esthetic. The turbine installation takes the classic RV lines and produces something that looks like a chihuahua's dinner (sorry Doug
) from the firewall forward. Gag.Ben R.
RV-9A #90217
Fuselage
brianwallis
VAF moderator
wow!
Uh... you are putting what on the front of a plastic airplane?
I'm impressed..... I think..... I think you have big kahunas....I'm not familiar with the breaking point of those airplanes but I think the tails are comming off of the Turboprop Lancs. Dont take this as ragging on you... I'm just concerned....
Still in research mode....
brian
aadamson said:
Uh... you are putting what on the front of a plastic airplane?
I'm impressed..... I think..... I think you have big kahunas....I'm not familiar with the breaking point of those airplanes but I think the tails are comming off of the Turboprop Lancs. Dont take this as ragging on you... I'm just concerned....
Still in research mode....
brian
aadamson
Well Known Member
Lancair Legacy
Brian, shows how little you know about the Lancairs. First, the Legacy "RG" was *designed* for the IO-550, yep, from the ground up. And it's the only approved engine combination for it. Second, they race them all day long at Reno with over 600HP in the TSIO-550 configuration, current speed is over 350mph.
Just because I'm building an "FG" and not the "RG", I'm building it on the carbon (read as RG) kit, again the kit that was designed for the IO-550. (As a note the FG in eglass is only designed for the IO-360 motor)
As for the couple of IV accidents in the last few months. Not sure where you got your information, but I know of *NO* accident that was caused by a departure of a "tail" while in flight. Both of the recent accidents were caused by continued flight into IMC or ICING. If you read the accident reports, both were flights that were in real nasty weather and most likely flights that *should not have been undertaken*.
I'm certainly not gonna put my butt in an airplane that I don't have complete confidence in, and I'm not about to do something that hasn't been reviewed and previously approved by the FAA.
But alas, I suppose this is part of the "plastic" vs. "metal" bashing that goes on. I'm not going to get into the merits of one design vs. the other, that has been hashed out numerous times. Thanks for your concern, however, based upon the over 200 currently flying carbon legacy's with IO-550's and the fact that the airplane was specifically designed for that engine, I don't believe your concern is necessary. If I were doing something like taking an RV8 and putting an IO-540 on it, perhaps that would be grounds for concern, but because of the design, this is more like taking an RV7 and putting an IO-360 on it. Both were designed for each other.
brianwallis said:
Brian, shows how little you know about the Lancairs. First, the Legacy "RG" was *designed* for the IO-550, yep, from the ground up. And it's the only approved engine combination for it. Second, they race them all day long at Reno with over 600HP in the TSIO-550 configuration, current speed is over 350mph.
Just because I'm building an "FG" and not the "RG", I'm building it on the carbon (read as RG) kit, again the kit that was designed for the IO-550. (As a note the FG in eglass is only designed for the IO-360 motor)
As for the couple of IV accidents in the last few months. Not sure where you got your information, but I know of *NO* accident that was caused by a departure of a "tail" while in flight. Both of the recent accidents were caused by continued flight into IMC or ICING. If you read the accident reports, both were flights that were in real nasty weather and most likely flights that *should not have been undertaken*.
I'm certainly not gonna put my butt in an airplane that I don't have complete confidence in, and I'm not about to do something that hasn't been reviewed and previously approved by the FAA.
But alas, I suppose this is part of the "plastic" vs. "metal" bashing that goes on. I'm not going to get into the merits of one design vs. the other, that has been hashed out numerous times. Thanks for your concern, however, based upon the over 200 currently flying carbon legacy's with IO-550's and the fact that the airplane was specifically designed for that engine, I don't believe your concern is necessary. If I were doing something like taking an RV8 and putting an IO-540 on it, perhaps that would be grounds for concern, but because of the design, this is more like taking an RV7 and putting an IO-360 on it. Both were designed for each other.
Last edited:
Maybe a tad more research needed ....
Brian,
The Lancair Legacy was built around the IO-550 as I understand it.
I used to say that the fastest/best 4 place kit was from Lancair and the fastest/best 2 place was from Glasair. Glasair had a few stumbles and Lancair did not get it just right with the Tigress.
But the Legacy ... WOW!!! Tough on that Glasair III. Is what the Tigress concept must have led to and ....
Leader or the Pack at Reno. Daryll G. just "blows" everyone away with his supercharged (I think) IO-550 powered Legacy. If you gegt a chance, take a look at one of the installations ... nice!
Of course I think that RV's are the best "value".
James
RV6 Flying
RV6A under construction (still)
Wish **I** had a Legacy with an IO-550
Brian,
The Lancair Legacy was built around the IO-550 as I understand it.
I used to say that the fastest/best 4 place kit was from Lancair and the fastest/best 2 place was from Glasair. Glasair had a few stumbles and Lancair did not get it just right with the Tigress.
But the Legacy ... WOW!!! Tough on that Glasair III. Is what the Tigress concept must have led to and ....
Leader or the Pack at Reno. Daryll G. just "blows" everyone away with his supercharged (I think) IO-550 powered Legacy. If you gegt a chance, take a look at one of the installations ... nice!
Of course I think that RV's are the best "value".
James
RV6 Flying
RV6A under construction (still)
Wish **I** had a Legacy with an IO-550
brianwallis said:
aadamson
Well Known Member
Fast Legacys
Daryll, runs a TSIO-550 with dual turbochargers, and intercoolers, it's obviously not a stock engine as it makes around 600HP, I've heard they are going to bump it up to 700+ for next year. He turned 385mph in practice, and won the gold race at 365. I might be wrong, but I heard that MP was about 70" at 5000' at Reno is what they were running with water injection.
here is his engine
And here is his airplane
Both he and Lynn Farnsworth
have the ability to add "water injection" in a tank that fits in the right seat. They can then pull that out, and the airplane is back to a daily flyer. Lynn also runs this same TSIO combination.
Interestingly enough, the stock Legacy's ran about 290mph in a stock IO-550, altho they turn up the prop to turn about 2900-3000 instead of 2700...
http://www.sportclass.com/race_results.html
Excellent combination of speed and HP... if I do say so
jclark said:ILeader or the Pack at Reno. Daryll G. just "blows" everyone away with his supercharged (I think) IO-550 powered Legacy. If you gegt a chance, take a look at one of the installations ... nice!
Of course I think that RV's are the best "value".
James
RV6 Flying
RV6A under construction (still)
Wish **I** had a Legacy with an IO-550
Daryll, runs a TSIO-550 with dual turbochargers, and intercoolers, it's obviously not a stock engine as it makes around 600HP, I've heard they are going to bump it up to 700+ for next year. He turned 385mph in practice, and won the gold race at 365. I might be wrong, but I heard that MP was about 70" at 5000' at Reno is what they were running with water injection.
here is his engine
And here is his airplane
Both he and Lynn Farnsworth
have the ability to add "water injection" in a tank that fits in the right seat. They can then pull that out, and the airplane is back to a daily flyer. Lynn also runs this same TSIO combination.
Interestingly enough, the stock Legacy's ran about 290mph in a stock IO-550, altho they turn up the prop to turn about 2900-3000 instead of 2700...
http://www.sportclass.com/race_results.html
Excellent combination of speed and HP... if I do say so
Last edited:
osxuser
Well Known Member
Lets not start airplane bashing here. I think all of these designs are much safer than the Wittman Tailwind I'm working on right now. Glasair is a inheriently more stout design, but the Lancair is slicker. The RV is cheaper than both of them, and the super-8 is a pretty decent setup, even without the factory support.
gmcjetpilot
Well Known Member
What?
Any way lets not get our cojones in a bunch. Glassair , Lancair who cares
they are made of glue and string ; aadamson, nice pictures, that engine
cost more than my whole plane, impressive I guess. G
How did we get from Innodyn to this?osxuser said:
Any way lets not get our cojones in a bunch. Glassair , Lancair who cares
they are made of glue and string
; aadamson, nice pictures, that engine cost more than my whole plane, impressive I guess.
G
Last edited:
osxuser
Well Known Member
For my money, the big-bore lancairs and glasairs are just YANKing the airplane through the slipstream a lot faster than it really wants to go. I think the sweet spot for most of our airplanes lands around the Angle Valve IO-360 Lycoming, maybe up to the IO-390. But after that the speed gains per HP isn't all that impressive. 600+HP TSIO-550's don't get my blood going like a 2400HR SMOH IO-360, but I guess I'm just a bit on the wierd side .
.
