VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #131  
Old 03-13-2019, 10:35 AM
Canadian_JOY Canadian_JOY is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,291
Default

Thanks again, Dave, for your patient and well-reasoned reply. Having spent a lot of time in the turbine world I fully understand why others are wanting a turbine engine for their personal aircraft. I wish you and Turbine Aeronitics the very best of success with this engine!
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 03-13-2019, 05:02 PM
Turbine Aeronautics Turbine Aeronautics is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian_JOY View Post
Thanks again, Dave, for your patient and well-reasoned reply. Having spent a lot of time in the turbine world I fully understand why others are wanting a turbine engine for their personal aircraft. I wish you and Turbine Aeronitics the very best of success with this engine!
Thanks CJ. We appreciate your support.

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 03-13-2019, 05:15 PM
breister breister is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine Aeronautics View Post
It is unlikely that we will go higher than 300hp as we are then getting into RR/Allison power ranges.

I suggest you start looking at aircraft that could use up to 300hp as that engine will likely follow reasonably soon after the 200hp. First things first though, we need to deliver a reliable 200hp engine.

Dave
I would argue that if you can do it at these prices you should do it and undercut their market. You can buy a lot of Jet A for $100,000 difference in purchase cost. If you prove your design and go certified, there are thousands of potential STCs saving 400 lbs per engine which would be very enticing for owners of older aircraft, especially in countries in peril of losing access to 100LL.

Last edited by breister : 03-13-2019 at 05:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 03-13-2019, 06:09 PM
rv6ejguy's Avatar
rv6ejguy rv6ejguy is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 5,766
Default

Many small companies have been ruined trying to certify new aero engines. The time to contemplate that, if ever, is years after hundreds have been sold to the Experimental market and accumulated hundreds of thousands of flight hours.

Baby steps first, get the R&D funding dollars earned back by sales to the Experimental market with far less liability exposure. Worry about competing with RR way down the road.
__________________

Ross Farnham, Calgary, Alberta
Turbo Subaru EJ22, SDS EFI, Marcotte M-300, IVO, Shorai- RV6A C-GVZX flying from CYBW since 2003- 441.0 hrs. on the Hobbs,
RV10 95% built- Sold 2016
http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html
http://sdsefi.com/cpi2.htm


Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 03-14-2019, 01:03 AM
Turbine Aeronautics Turbine Aeronautics is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rv6ejguy View Post
Many small companies have been ruined trying to certify new aero engines. The time to contemplate that, if ever, is years after hundreds have been sold to the Experimental market and accumulated hundreds of thousands of flight hours.

Baby steps first, get the R&D funding dollars earned back by sales to the Experimental market with far less liability exposure. Worry about competing with RR way down the road.
Ross, are you sure someone hasn’t passed you a copy of our business plan?

The certificated market is an enticing one, but there will be a time and a place for it. As Ross says, baby steps. If we can demonstrate the safety and reliability of our engines in the experimental market, the transition into the certificated market will be easier from the perspective that the certificated market will have more confidence in both the product and the company support.

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 03-14-2019, 04:40 AM
Michael White's Avatar
Michael White Michael White is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cartersville, Georgia KVPC
Posts: 945
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbine Aeronautics View Post
Ross, are you sure someone hasn?t passed you a copy of our business plan?

The certificated market is an enticing one, but there will be a time and a place for it. As Ross says, baby steps. If we can demonstrate the safety and reliability of our engines in the experimental market, the transition into the certificated market will be easier from the perspective that the certificated market will have more confidence in both the product and the company support.

Dave
And more confidence in the financial stability / longevity of the company.

Wishing you the best of luck, Dave!
__________________
Moose
VAF #136
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 03-14-2019, 07:11 AM
rdrcrmatt rdrcrmatt is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 300
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rv6ejguy View Post
Many small companies have been ruined trying to certify new aero engines. The time to contemplate that, if ever, is years after hundreds have been sold to the Experimental market and accumulated hundreds of thousands of flight hours.

Baby steps first, get the R&D funding dollars earned back by sales to the Experimental market with far less liability exposure. Worry about competing with RR way down the road.

I wish DeltaHawk was still taking this approach. Their new investors have set the direction to go certified first. I know they've been "just about to become available" for YEARS... but after meeting them a few months ago, I'm very hopeful. I just wish something from them fit the RV-10.
__________________
Matt
CFI / RV-10
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 03-14-2019, 07:58 AM
rv6ejguy's Avatar
rv6ejguy rv6ejguy is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 5,766
Default

I don't know why all these new companies can't or won't learn from past experiences in this regard. The landscape is littered with failed attempts and failed companies trying to go certified at the start. They completely underestimate the time and financial resources required to complete certification and maintain the paper trail after certification.

We've been asked to STC or certify some of our products over the years. After checking into the requirements, I'm never going there. It would bleed us dry in time and money and we're already as busy as we'd ever want to be in the Experimental market.

Watch how many other companies fail in customer service and product support, if not outright fail financially, as they try to increase production 20 or 30 fold, attempting to be a bigger player. Mass production while maintaining proper quality control and service, involves major effort and efficient management and oversight.

Dave has exactly the right plan here IMO which gives his company the best chance of success, product acceptance and business longevity. This product will sell itself if the projected performance, durability and price is realized. In fact, it could unseat the aero diesel contenders who've been so long getting to market and are never cheap either.
__________________

Ross Farnham, Calgary, Alberta
Turbo Subaru EJ22, SDS EFI, Marcotte M-300, IVO, Shorai- RV6A C-GVZX flying from CYBW since 2003- 441.0 hrs. on the Hobbs,
RV10 95% built- Sold 2016
http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html
http://sdsefi.com/cpi2.htm


Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 03-14-2019, 09:24 AM
breister breister is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rv6ejguy View Post
I don't know why all these new companies can't or won't learn from past experiences in this regard. The landscape is littered with failed attempts and failed companies trying to go certified at the start. They completely underestimate the time and financial resources required to complete certification and maintain the paper trail after certification.

We've been asked to STC or certify some of our products over the years. After checking into the requirements, I'm never going there. It would bleed us dry in time and money and we're already as busy as we'd ever want to be in the Experimental market.

Watch how many other companies fail in customer service and product support, if not outright fail financially, as they try to increase production 20 or 30 fold, attempting to be a bigger player. Mass production while maintaining proper quality control and service, involves major effort and efficient management and oversight.

Dave has exactly the right plan here IMO which gives his company the best chance of success, product acceptance and business longevity. This product will sell itself if the projected performance, durability and price is realized. In fact, it could unseat the aero diesel contenders who've been so long getting to market and are never cheap either.
In the short term I agree absolutely. Keep it simple, appeal to the broad experimental market. I support their current plan.

My post was simply that in the longer term that market may not be sufficiently large to sustain them, and only pointing out that simply because there is a competitor in the horsepower range doesn't mean that they can't beat the snot out of them on price - WHEN they are ready to tackle that market.

Here is another thought. These silly things are so light and small that they could usher in a new generation of experimental planes designed as twin-engine offerings (a 400hp RV-10 twin anyone?). Such designs would have to be brand new as the CG change moving the engine from the nose to the wings is a big deal. An old design, the Raven from South Africa, was patterned on the Comanche and might have made an amazing platform for these engines if re-vamped to simulate the Twin Comanche. And so on.
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 03-14-2019, 09:50 AM
Mudfly Mudfly is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Alpharetta, Ga
Posts: 212
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by breister View Post
In the short term I agree absolutely. Keep it simple, appeal to the broad experimental market. I support their current plan.

My post was simply that in the longer term that market may not be sufficiently large to sustain them, and only pointing out that simply because there is a competitor in the horsepower range doesn't mean that they can't beat the snot out of them on price - WHEN they are ready to tackle that market.

Here is another thought. These silly things are so light and small that they could usher in a new generation of experimental planes designed as twin-engine offerings (a 400hp RV-10 twin anyone?). Such designs would have to be brand new as the CG change moving the engine from the nose to the wings is a big deal. An old design, the Raven from South Africa, was patterned on the Comanche and might have made an amazing platform for these engines if re-vamped to simulate the Twin Comanche. And so on.
Not if you put two Turbine Aeronautics engines under the cowl up front. Of course we will need RELIABLE gearbox that take two inputs to one output. If helicopters can do why can't fixed wing. Additionally, to save fuel, engine times, etc, you would burn both engines for takeoff and landing, and shut one down for cruise.
Put that on your to-do list Dave
__________________
Shawn Edwards
RV-14A (140174)
www.myrv14build.blogspot.com
2020 VAF Donation
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:42 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.