VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

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

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #161  
Old 03-24-2019, 08:38 AM
ColoCardinal's Avatar
ColoCardinal ColoCardinal is offline
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Morrison, CO
Posts: 372
Default Turbine RV18

How about designing the D.R. suggested RV18 around the turbine engine, al la Drago? Great high altitude climb performance, light weight, better fuel availability and greater reliability. Maybe a feathering and beta range prop could be made available!
Think of a smaller version of the Turbo Otter.
__________________
Carl - - Morrison, CO
N16CB RV7A
Airworthiness cert issued 12/24
best X-mas present I could have hoped for!
paid 'til 10-19
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 03-24-2019, 09:49 AM
rocketman1988 rocketman1988 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sunman, IN
Posts: 2,189
Default Design

Lots of things COULD be designed but Van's is a business; there has to be a substantial ROI for any new aircraft design...

Realistically, what is the market size for a turbine powered super STOL, ala Drago?

Pretty small, I would wager...
__________________
Bob
Aerospace Engineer '88

RV-10
Structure - 90% Done
Cabin Top - Aaarrghhh...
EFII System 32 - Done
297 HP Barrett Hung
ShowPlanes Cowl with Skybolts Fitted - Beautiful
Wiring...

Dues+ Paid 2019,...Thanks DR+
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 03-24-2019, 05:37 PM
David Z David Z is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Thunder Bay Ontario
Posts: 335
Default Beta and Reverse

Is the engine capable of utilising a reversing propeller?

I understand it adds an extra level of complexity that's not really required. I'm mostly curious if the bearings and gear box are designed to handle beta range and/or reverse.

Depends on idle prop RPM, beta might even be important.
__________________
RV-8
Empennage Passed Pre-close Inspection
Wings mostly done
Fuselage is "in the mail"
83126
Dash 8 day job is financing the RV-8
Donation till September 2021
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 03-24-2019, 06:47 PM
ColoCardinal's Avatar
ColoCardinal ColoCardinal is offline
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Morrison, CO
Posts: 372
Default STOL Turbine

Quote:
Lots of things COULD be designed but Van's is a business; there has to be a substantial ROI for any new aircraft design...

Realistically, what is the market size for a turbine powered super STOL, ala Drago?

Pretty small, I would wager...
You're most likely correct if it was very much like Draco. The market may be fairly healthy for something along the lines of a Skywagon. A slightly larger, high wing, STOL capable RV10, if you will.
__________________
Carl - - Morrison, CO
N16CB RV7A
Airworthiness cert issued 12/24
best X-mas present I could have hoped for!
paid 'til 10-19
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 03-24-2019, 11:10 PM
Timberwolf Timberwolf is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Navarre, FL
Posts: 385
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColoCardinal View Post
You're most likely correct if it was very much like Draco. The market may be fairly healthy for something along the lines of a Skywagon. A slightly larger, high wing, STOL capable RV10, if you will.
These aircraft already exist and the market isn't there for them. People want a certified aircraft once you get into this category. Very few people need something this big and expensive for personal use. That's why the ones that are out there aren't selling like hotcakes.

Reading through the past few pages of comments guys are throwing out good ideas like how do we heat the cabin and can we get bleed air or beta? All good questions, and some can be considered during the engine design, but if we keep piling more and more **** on how is he supposed to get an initial design out? This is exactly how we see cars being designed today. By the time the engine is done it has 80 pounds of emissions **** that weighs down the engine and necessitates a need for even more power from that engine to keep up with the new emissions stuff.

Luckily, it sounds like he Turbine Aeronautics is taking it in for future wish list items, but is pushing on with the design. Let them get a running engine on the market then we as the consumer can play the what if game all we want.
__________________
Shane
RV-6 IO-360 Angle valve, G3X touch
Murphy Moose M14P flying
Aero Engineer, A&P
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 03-25-2019, 06:27 AM
Turbine Aeronautics Turbine Aeronautics is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Z View Post
Is the engine capable of utilising a reversing propeller?

I understand it adds an extra level of complexity that's not really required. I'm mostly curious if the bearings and gear box are designed to handle beta range and/or reverse.

Depends on idle prop RPM, beta might even be important.
The engines are designed to be used in both tractor and pusher configuration. The gearbox bearings will handle loads in both directions.

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 03-25-2019, 06:32 AM
Turbine Aeronautics Turbine Aeronautics is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timberwolf View Post
These aircraft already exist and the market isn't there for them. People want a certified aircraft once you get into this category. Very few people need something this big and expensive for personal use. That's why the ones that are out there aren't selling like hotcakes.

Reading through the past few pages of comments guys are throwing out good ideas like how do we heat the cabin and can we get bleed air or beta? All good questions, and some can be considered during the engine design, but if we keep piling more and more **** on how is he supposed to get an initial design out? This is exactly how we see cars being designed today. By the time the engine is done it has 80 pounds of emissions **** that weighs down the engine and necessitates a need for even more power from that engine to keep up with the new emissions stuff.

Luckily, it sounds like he Turbine Aeronautics is taking it in for future wish list items, but is pushing on with the design. Let them get a running engine on the market then we as the consumer can play the what if game all we want.
Too true Shane.

The engine we plan to get to market will likely suit 90+% of customers. That is our sole focus at this point, although we are both building and considering wish list items for potential future incorporation. As you say, there must be an ROI available to us on these wish list items. If not, unfortunately, they will not happen.

Dave
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 03-25-2019, 05:51 PM
foxhound57 foxhound57 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Gold Coast Australia
Posts: 37
Default McNeil Aviation - Escrow's for a Turbine Aeronautics PowerPlant

Hello Turbine Aeronautics

Well, I am up for it and have made my Escrow.com administration/application today.

Now for planning purposes do you have a Test Airframe we may be able to assist at McNeil Aviation in that area at this time.

Please PM me for a chat and contact details if you do!
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 05-09-2019, 10:06 PM
Red Rooster Red Rooster is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: savannah
Posts: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowflake View Post
My concern with this would be the effect on CG. 250-300 lb off the nose of an RV means you have to move that lighter powerplant a looooong way out to balance everything again.

As a powerplant, it shows great promise for someone looking to design an airplane around it. 120-200hp are great ranges to carry two people aloft, for casual cruising around (120hp) or stellar performance (200hp) but to optimize it you'll have to start over and configure the airframe with the lighter powerplant in mind. An RV with the wing moved back, or the seating moved forward, could do it, but you're still looking at significant engineering.
In between the firewall and turboprop, you have options. BRS, Header tank, or batteries for the turbine. Or a combination of any two. So the engine doesn't have to be pushed to far out in the front. IMHO.
__________________
______________________
Jereme RV6 N515SK

0-320-D2B / Dual P-Mag / JPI 830 / Old School 6-Pack
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 05-09-2019, 10:21 PM
Turbine Aeronautics Turbine Aeronautics is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Rooster View Post
In between the firewall and turboprop, you have options. BRS, Header tank, or batteries for the turbine. Or a combination of any two. So the engine doesn't have to be pushed to far out in the front. IMHO.
These are exactly the options that our first RV14 customer is considering. We will be working closely with him to facilitate his installation. His solution may well assist other RV owners.

Dave
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 12:16 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.