Lycoming and the Future

[Devious Rhesus]

It boggles my mind to see how long it took to adopt fuel injection, so I'm not exactly holding my breath for electronic ignition. Which is a darn shame, considering how adverse I am to kludging together my own electronic system from one of the current vendors.

I know Lycoming has to be weary of the future of 100LL, but certainly an electronic ignition system would make fuel changes easier to cope with? What does the future hold for them: Direct injection? Higher compression ratios? Nothing ? shut up and buy your engine?

[Neal@F14]

Incorporating oil spray nozzles into the case halves that cover all the camshaft lobes and followers, plus having an external port to the passages that feed said nozzles so it could be connected to a pre-oiler system would be a welcome addition for owners who fly infrequently

[walkman]

Originally Posted by Devious Rhesus

It boggles my mind to see how long it took to adopt fuel injection, so I'm not exactly holding my breath for electronic ignition.

I don't get it, there's plenty of electronic ignition options. Or do you mean a certified one from Lycoming? Or one with modern automotive features like knock detection and so forth?

I think, may be wrong, but many if not most of the feature in advanced automotive set ups are for environmental reasons.

The fuel injection system in my old 911 (Bosch K Jetronic with Lambda) is not that much different than the Bendix RSA-5 on my airplane once you get rid of the lambda control and the vacuum servos used to control fuel and therefore emissions in an overrun condition (which doesn't really happen on airplanes).

EFII has a more modern electronic fuel injection system. Its still not sequential, but its probably better than the Bosch Motronic setup used until the early 90's.

[Mike H]

Originally Posted by Devious Rhesus

It boggles my mind to see how long it took to adopt fuel injection, so I'm not exactly holding my breath for electronic ignition. Which is a darn shame, considering how adverse I am to kludging together my own electronic system from one of the current vendors.

I know Lycoming has to be weary of the future of 100LL, but certainly an electronic ignition system would make fuel changes easier to cope with? What does the future hold for them: Direct injection? Higher compression ratios? Nothing ? shut up and buy your engine?

Lycoming has been using fuel injection for almost as long as they have been in production making aircraft engines. They were not the first to use fuel injection on aircraft engines. I have seen aircraft engines from the 20's and earlier in museams that had mechanical fuel injection.

What is the question? Some people are not and never will be happy running a "Lycosaurous". Maybe an automotive engine with "modern technology" is for you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoinette_8V

[N941WR]

Electronic ignition is a huge barrel of worms for the engine (and prop) manufacturers.

The extra kick from the EI can cause severe harmonics, which could compromise the prop. It all depends on a few simple variables like the compression ratio, ignition timing, prop material, prop type, prop length, and maybe a few other small items.

The failure mode can be fairly dramatic and deadly.

[Devious Rhesus]

Originally Posted by N941WR

Electronic ignition is a huge barrel of worms for the engine (and prop) manufacturers.

The extra kick from the EI can cause severe harmonics, which could compromise the prop. It all depends on a few simple variables like the compression ratio, ignition timing, prop material, prop type, prop length, and maybe a few other small items.

The failure mode can be fairly dramatic and deadly.

This right here is the crux of my question. I don't want to hobble together something that seems sufficient based on the opinions I find on the internet, especially considering my life is on the line. If Lycoming were to put out an EI fired motor with a list of approved prop combos, that would make me feel pretty warm-and-fuzzy.

It's just frustrating, seeing this low hanging fruit in terms of fuel savings / power gains, but just having this gut feeling that doing real due diligence is well outside my scope of expertise. I?d love to know where Lycoming stands on progressing in this realm?

[rzbill]

Originally Posted by Devious Rhesus

This right here is the crux of my question. I don't want to hobble together something that seems sufficient based on the opinions I find on the internet, especially considering my life is on the line. If Lycoming were to put out an EI fired motor with a list of approved prop combos, that would make me feel pretty warm-and-fuzzy.

So.....Hartzells approval of the BA prop with no rpm restrictions on a parallel valve IO-360 with electronic ignition is not sufficient for your needs?

[RV6_flyer]

Originally Posted by Devious Rhesus

It boggles my mind to see how long it took to adopt fuel injection, so I'm not exactly holding my breath for electronic ignition. Which is a darn shame, considering how adverse I am to kludging together my own electronic system from one of the current vendors.

I know Lycoming has to be weary of the future of 100LL, but certainly an electronic ignition system would make fuel changes easier to cope with? What does the future hold for them: Direct injection? Higher compression ratios? Nothing ? shut up and buy your engine?

Two years ago, Lycoming had their Light Sport 235 Experimental engine on display with electronic ignition on display at AirVenture.

[BonitaRV8]

Lycomming did about 4years ago. It's called the ie2. Dual electronic ignition, fuel injection (automotive style) and prop control. They were offering it on a angle valve 540 with dual turbos. It is/was offered on a Lancair. They didn't see a market for the experimental builders. Google it.