What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

This Engine Will End Alternative Engine Dreaming

David-aviator

Well Known Member
Some of you may not know about what Lycoming is up to these days. The iE engine was flown to OSH in a Legacy and is for real.

http://www.lycoming.com/news-and-events/pdfs/iE2_Engine.pdf

When it hits the market, there is no reason to pursue an auto engine conversion. It will meet most objectives of going that route plus NO PSRU, plus a basic engine that has been proven.

Its development, I believe, is being driven by a realization that 100LL is on life support. Lycoming does not want to be in the hinterland when the government pulls the final plug on lead in this country. And that day is coming.

These engines are not being developed from unknown technology. All they are doing is borrowing what has been working very well for some time in the auto world and making an already great engine even greater.
 
Very interesting. FADEC, looks like FI with individual cylinder fuel control, ECU-controlled mixture control, knock sensors, variable ignition timing, turbo boost control, elctronic ignition.... very promising! Good for Lyc (and us!) that they're pushing forward.

And although I don't want to knock (hahaha) progress, I'm about to go enjoy all of these technologies in my 2000 Audi. :rolleyes:

TODR
 
When you find out what the price tag is, the novelty will quickly wear off.

I have a very simple philosophy on anything that goes in our aircraft: if its an improvement that simplifies or improves over existing technology, at a price equal to or less than what's currently available, I'm all for it. Otherwise its vapor. Just my $.02.
 
Last edited:
When you find out what the price tag is, the novelty will quickly wear off.

I have a very simple philosophy on anything that goes in our aircraft: if its an improvement that simplifies or improves over existing technology, at a price equal to or less than what's currently available, I'm all for it. Otherwise its vapor. Just my $.02.

I'm with Bob on this one- all those "improvements" are going to drive up the price.

I'll bet people will be just as likely to want an alternative engine just for the chance to buy it for less than 10,000 and add on/ buy parts as you go.
 
Yeah... when and where will you ever get the parts to finish... many have been down that road. SB this and AD that :eek:
 
Last edited:
Computers....

All things computer driven should be viewed with a skeptical eye. Computer controlled doesn't mean simpler.... especially when it comes to the ONE thing that allows airplanes to defy gravity!!
 
I looked the engine over at OSH this year. Apart from price, there is reason to believe it will never be easily suitable for an RV. Imagine the cowling and engine mount changes to accommodate the supercharger. It sticks out to the side and takes up real estate at the back. And then there is the control module, which will have to live on one side or another of the firewall (the example I saw did not have a long cable run). That thing was bulky and not easy to place. I know I'm being a naysayer but I think that this is not the FADEC we'll see in an RV; I expect that if this works out eventually there will be a scaled-down version without the supercharger and with a more refined (read 'smaller') control unit that will be easier to place in a small aircraft. Looked real pretty, though, just like any other new, unused engine...
 
Looks like something Ross Farnham would have done if he was designing an airplane engine from scratch.
 
All things computer driven should be viewed with a skeptical eye. Computer controlled doesn't mean simpler.... especially when it comes to the ONE thing that allows airplanes to defy gravity!!
The "computer" part shouldn't be a problem. They'll just use "Vista".:D
 
Out of curiousity (and perhaps ignorance), how would all of the automatic control functionality on this engine change aerobatic flying conderations?

No change? Easier management? Or is more control better?
 
I think it depends on what you are used to.

Out of curiousity (and perhaps ignorance), how would all of the automatic control functionality on this engine change aerobatic flying conderations?

No change? Easier management? Or is more control better?

If you fly a CS then I would guess there is little change. It appears that this engine package is intended for CS anyway?

On another note, I am not excited to see the day that FADEC takes over. I enjoy "operating" my aircraft systems. I know I am not perfect and can not do that job as well as a computer, but that is what I enjoy. Take away my knobs and you have taken away a big part of the fun of flying for me.
 
If you fly a CS then I would guess there is little change. It appears that this engine package is intended for CS anyway?

On another note, I am not excited to see the day that FADEC takes over. I enjoy "operating" my aircraft systems. I know I am not perfect and can not do that job as well as a computer, but that is what I enjoy. Take away my knobs and you have taken away a big part of the fun of flying for me.

I thought taking away fiddlin' with ADF and VOR knobs would ruin the fun of operating the aircraft......... ;)

(Reliable) Automation....bring it on! :)
 
To each his own Sam....

I thought taking away fiddlin' with ADF and VOR knobs would ruin the fun of operating the aircraft......... ;)

(Reliable) Automation....bring it on! :)

...but I hated fiddling with those kind of knobs. The upgrade in technology of avionics actually gave me a lot more knobs to fiddle with now with my modern EFIS, GPS, and EMS !!
If FADEC can give me something more to play with, then yes, bring it on.
 
All things computer driven should be viewed with a skeptical eye.

Simple fact is that our entire society is managed by computer. Whether good or bad, I think it is pretty safe to say the age of the computer is here, and it isn't going away anytime soon... ;-)

-Dj
 
In my mind, the electronics are not necessarily an "improvement." They are, rather, another possible point of failure.

DeltaHawk appears to be nearing certification. Who knows when or if Gemini will ever deliver anything bigger than a 100hp motor, but both of these offer comparable power-to-weight while using Jet-A or Diesel - neither likely to run out soon - and running always LOP without pilot intervention.

Adept Airmotive is also moving ahead with certification. These motors run on Unleaded and offer real improvements in power-to-weight.

If you are going to pay $80k or more for an engine, it ought to offer SIGNIFICANT improvement over a $20k IO-360.

IMHO...

:D
 
Alternate fuels?

For a second, I thought they might be talking something other than gas, but it appears that it will be something other than 100LL.
I have an alternative engine in my new 335d BMW. They gave me an ECO credit of $4500 which brought the price of the car down to the comparible 335i gas auto. Having owned both, I can tell you that the diesel is wonderful. Low end torque rivals, if not exceeds the 300hp 335i model, I average around 30mpg which is 8 better than the i and still produces 285hp, and it operates with none of the traditional diesel attributes; twist the key and it starts right up even in the coldest weather, makes very little noise, produces no black exhaust, and I can run regular diesel at the same price of regular gas, no more need for premium at a premium price.
The disadvantage is that you can order this engine in only one car, the sedan, with one transmission, the automatic. They just are not popular over here.
Over 50% of the auto's in europe are now diesel. Someday, I hope we can catch up and start enjoying the new diesel technology in our airplanes.
 
alternative fuels

I've posted on these forums before, have taken a bit of a beating, but I'll try again.

I've built and am flying an RV9 with a Wilksch WAM120 diesel. This engine has all manual control (no electronics), direct drive, liquid cooling. I love it. I have 106 hours on it as of yesterday, and it hasn't missed a beat. I'm burning between 4.5 and 4.8 GPH, cruising at 160 mph true.

I still think Diesel / JetA is the best bet for the future. The technology exists today to make a simple, non-electronic, lightweight (my plane weights 985 lb), direct drive, JetA powered engine that is quite a bit more efficient than a gasoline engine; I know because I'm flying one.

Kurt
 
Absolutely Kurt! You've got it 100%

BTW, I love your WAM installation. Congratulations on a beautiful bird.
 
I've built and am flying an RV9 with a Wilksch WAM120 diesel. This engine has all manual control (no electronics), direct drive, liquid cooling. I love it. I have 106 hours on it as of yesterday, and it hasn't missed a beat. I'm burning between 4.5 and 4.8 GPH, cruising at 160 mph true.

I don't see a problem here at all!
 
WAM 120

The WAM series of engines is also getting closer to cerification. I can confirm the figures Kurt is getting as we are the same with our RV9.

WAM are currently working on a longer stroke bigger bore version which will provide 140 HP. The engine is great to fly behind and very simple to operate. They are also working on 160/180 hp versions.

The 120/140 engines weigh less than an 0-320 installed and if you throttle back 140mph at 3.5 gallons an hour is possible giving a massive range.
 
In every other "world" of engines, changes like these have improved the performance, reliability and flexibility of the power plant. No reason to expect less here. It's just a matter of paying for it - more ways than financially.

In terms of how it would fly for aerobatics, cross-country, crop dusting or racing - just re-program the management system. Done. That's the kind of flexibility auto racing engine builders have been enjoying for years.

ff
 
I thought taking away fiddlin' with ADF and VOR knobs would ruin the fun of operating the aircraft......... ;)

(Reliable) Automation....bring it on! :)

I agree also. If it is something that reduces pilot workload, it is worth looking into.

Besides, automation helps keep these new-fangled jet engines running...:p
 
From a performance standpoint, the two biggest bangs for the buck in any reciprocating spark ignition engine is ignition and fuel delivery. We have a variety of electronic ignitions available now which have proven to be a vast improvement over magnetos, so that is one area "solved". The one area that has not seen a lot of development is a retrofit EFI system. For those of us familiar with the automotive aftermarket, we know that there is a VAST selection of EFI systems available to retrofit older "dumb" engines as well as a bewildering array of modifications available to existing computer controlled cars. Considering there are aftermarket EFI systems capable of supporting 1000+ HP big block Chevies, finding the right parts and programming to feed a 200 HP Lyc should not be difficult. The hardware is there.

IIRC, I saw a Lyc O-320 once that was fitted with a complete GM EFI setup. This was a few years ago and I have not heard much about it since, but this seems to be the best compromise between the alternative engine and traditional route. Aside from the higher cost of the aircraft engine (vs. automotive), you seem to get the best of both worlds.

Personally, I don't see much value in having a computer control my propeller (as with FADEC), but if my Lycoming would start and run with the same level of effortless reliability and incredible fuel efficiency as my 2008 Corvette, I'm all for it.
 
Sorry, which IO-360 was this one, and where do I sign?

here ya go Andy.$19,300 as it sits.

RV-7build345.jpg
 
I like how...

...all the "rounding errors" (prices, no mags etc) are always presented here in the Lyclone's favour.

Still, nice engine Brian - was it 100% new and who built it for you?
 
...all the "rounding errors" (prices, no mags etc) are always presented here in the Lyclone's favour.

Still, nice engine Brian - was it 100% new and who built it for you?

It's a rebuild and yes built for me. Includes logs, test run(no dyno) and 1yr warranty. Here's a list straight from my invoice:

Lycoming IO-360 180hp base price: $16,900
Add Constant speed option: $500
Add 9:1 pistons: $400
Upgrade to cold-air front inlet sump: $1000
Upgrade to Plane Power Alternator in place of standard: $150
Remove Bendix injection system: <$1000>
Remove magnetos/harness/plugs: <$800>
======================================
Total: $17,150

I purchased a used(test run only) AFP injection system $2150.(i think, may have been $2000)
So that's why I listed $19300.

I also didn't include the New prop govenor (+$1150) or the Emag/Pmag combo(+$1500) that I also have purchased(but not shown)

Anyone else want one, PM me I'll give you details
 
There are two options and here is one from Tracy Crook:
http://www.rotaryaviation.com/eficont.html

That's what I'm talking about! Though that is not the installation that I saw before, it's the same concept. Very interesting that he left the carb installed and functional as a redundant fuel system. I thought about that same concept some time ago, so I'm glad it works. In theory, you fly around with the mixture in cutoff as long as the EFI is working; and the carb functions as a simple throttle valve only. In the unlikely event the computer goes Tango Uniform, you push the mixture knob in and you are flying with a standard carb again.

What would be nice as a refinement is to add a knock sensor for ignition timing control and an oxygen sensor to really refine the mixture. Unfortunately air cooled engines are too noisy to allow a knock sensor to function, and the oxygen sensor would not like a steady diet of 100LL, so true closed loop operation is going to be hard. On the plus side, a software map can be developed to accommodate any atmospheric condition that will be encountered, so you don't suffer any real loss by running open loop.

The number of "software tuners" in the automotive world is huge - they have replaced the tuneup and speed shops of the "good old days". I think if we get that expertise to turn their attention to our aircraft engines, we'd really have something. I'm all for alternative engines, but there does not seem to be any yet developed that can produce 100% power all day long like a Lycosaurus. Seems to me that melding the brute strength of an aircraft engine with the sophisticated brain of the automotive world is the way to go.
 
I wonder if it will run LOP; I like the ability to "tune" my engine on the go. I want to retain the ability to control the prop.
 
I wonder if it will run LOP; I like the ability to "tune" my engine on the go. I want to retain the ability to control the prop.

If it truly does run on unleaded, there's a good chance it will have closed loop fuel injection with wideband lambda control which can automatically goto LOP under cruise conditions :)

All modern EFI cars do this, so theres no reaosn Lyc can't do it too.
 
...All modern EFI cars do this, so theres no reaosn Lyc can't do it too.
Other than lead tends to foul the O2 sensor, which is why you don't want to run 100LL in your car. We have done some testing and found that the narrow band sensors will last a few hundred hours, less than that for the wide band sensors. It makes me wonder how they got around this issue.
 
Other than lead tends to foul the O2 sensor, which is why you don't want to run 100LL in your car. We have done some testing and found that the narrow band sensors will last a few hundred hours, less than that for the wide band sensors. It makes me wonder how they got around this issue.

They probably require replacement of the sensors at each 100 hr inspection...

:D
 
Other than lead tends to foul the O2 sensor, which is why you don't want to run 100LL in your car. We have done some testing and found that the narrow band sensors will last a few hundred hours, less than that for the wide band sensors. It makes me wonder how they got around this issue.

Hence why I started with "If it truly does run on unleaded" as the original poster suggested.. Also makes me wonder if catalytic converters will be required for ULP running too..

I believe the Bosch widebands last around 100 hours with leaded which fits in with breister's comment :)
 
I wonder if it will run LOP
I don't see why it wouldn't. The AFR can be set to run rich or lean based on MAP, RPM, and throttle position, and you don't need an O2 sensor to do it once the ECU is mapped. I've been running my car without an O2 sensor for 5 years or so, getting 36 mpg out of a ~330hp 1.8L (109 CI):)
 
computer control

Does that fancy Lycoming have a computer-controlled gas pedal like my Toyota? :D

Dave A.
6A
 
It exists for the Lancair Evolution and a Tecnam. Never released for Experimentals though. I believe they would be close to $100K if you could buy one.
 
...Computer controlled doesn't mean simpler....

Amen, brother! I've been calling computers 'comp(lica)ters' since 1985.

I have to clean/update/fix my wife's PC when she's not at home. Because, when I utter the inevitable stream of F-bombs, she gets upset.

When it comes to "smart" technology, I refuse to be an early adopter.

(A retired avionics tech / involuntary computer repairman-programmer)
 
Back
Top