What do You Want in An Engine

[szicree]

If I came up with a suitable replacement for the current engine I can't imagine selling it for $10,000. Folks would gladly gobble them up at $18000 as fast as I could produce them. The Japanese analogy is a little off. Does a honda cost half of a Ford? If the quality and performance are comparable, the price will be too. IMHO, of course.

[bswat]

For me to switch from a Lycom to an alternative engine it would take:
-Safety (I'm not willing to gamble on reliability. This really isn't that hard to prove. Just give the engine to Rosie and wait a few weeks!)
-Equivalent weight and HP (I'm not willing to give up payload and want RV performance)
-Complete firewall forward package (alternative engines without firewall forward kits already exist)
-Financial stability (I don't like the thought of losing a deposit to a company that goes under. Using an escrow service would be good. But long-term financial stability is more important. I'm sure I'll have some problems sometime in the future with even the best-engineered engine.)
-Price. (For me, I think it would take about a 20% discount off the Lycon. price to interest me. There is an inherent risk to using an alternative engine. You can't predict future success of the engine or the company, so there must be a financial reward to the additional risk.)

Additional decision factors:
-Ability to use any propeller. I'd like to be able to use a Harzell CS blended airfoil if I wanted to.
-Additional HP. I wouldn't mind a few extra HP if it didn't compromise payload or W & B.

[mikegraycmg]

I love to see innovation. I wanted the subaru to work for me, but it appears to me to be too heavy for my vision of an RV-8. I would love to see a reliable diesel between 180 to 210 hp, with low weight. So far, I have seen few better options than an 0-360, or, perhaps, the new ECI IO-340X. I will be interested when you can provide an option to these two choices with equal or superior weight, cost, FWF, fuel usage, and electronic ignition, preferably carbureted, with a highly compatible constant speed, lightweight propeller. You'll need to look into a cowl design, as well.

Right now, I'm just working on the tail for my RV-8, so I'll have plenty of time to make that choice. I'm leaning to the 340 for its low weight and 185 hp, but I'd like to see some reliability data on that engine.

I wish you luck, because you are doing precisely what needs to be done. There ought to be a better way, and only the kind of work you are planning to do can let us know.

[jcoloccia]

Originally Posted by szicree

If I came up with a suitable replacement for the current engine I can't imagine selling it for $10,000. Folks would gladly gobble them up at $18000 as fast as I could produce them. The Japanese analogy is a little off. Does a honda cost half of a Ford? If the quality and performance are comparable, the price will be too. IMHO, of course.

Agreed. Actually, I meant $10,000 before the "aviation premium". $18,000 for an IO-360 angle valve is just a touch more than the 1/2 price I suggested. Show me a new IO-360 A1B6 clone for $18,000, and I'll show you at least one very satisfied customer

[davidkarlsberg]

I was thinking of ditching the whole gas thing all together. Maybe a nuclear powered engine? Could fly years without refueling and as a bonus you could sell the spent fuel to North Korea. Either that or a big rubberband.

[RVbySDI]

Originally Posted by jcoloccia

Agreed. Actually, I meant $10,000 before the "aviation premium". $18,000 for an IO-360 angle valve is just a touch more than the 1/2 price I suggested. Show me a new IO-360 A1B6 clone for $18,000, and I'll show you at least one very satisfied customer

My thoughts are that of all the issues you are hearing come out in this thread that are revolving around performance characteristics of particular engine setups they are only secondary to the overwhelming issue that everyone wants. The underlying real issues I hear from everyone's posts and that I focus on is the issue of the all mighty $$$$. The "Aviation premium" has got to go.

Safety is an issue that all of us want from our airplane designs. This goes for engines also. That does not mean that I want my desire for a safe engine to cost me everything else if I want to fly. This is something that I call the "For the children syndrom". Whenever someone wants to charge a premium for something they bring out the notion that we have to "do it for the children". In the aviation world we have to pay that premium price "For the Safety". Well, I say No we don't!

I have had numourous automobiles that I have run 1,000's of hours on the engines without them breaking and quitting on me. I don't think that my paying more money for an engine is going to give me any more assurance that the engine will not quit on me someday. I would like to see a statistic that shows the percentage of Lyclones compared to the total number produced that have broken down during operation and whether the percentage is higher or lower than the percentage of automobile engines compared to the total number produced that have broken down during operation. I don't think any amount of Safety $$$ premium we would ever pay to the FAA regulators or Lyclone manufacturers or Santa himself would make an ounce of difference in the safety of one engine over the next.

So, in my opinion, the overwhelming thing you can do to jumpstart production of a new engine is

1.) Make a reliable engine (We all have different ideas of what this means. Some want carbs, mags and air cooled, others want Fuel Injection, EI and water cooled. What we all want is for it to not cough several times, spit once and die on climb out.)

2.) Make it flexible enough to meet the needs of several operating environments

3.) Make it easy to install

4.) Most importantly, make it avaiable at a purchase price that doesn't require mortgaging a house to purchase it(if a factory new Chevrolet 350 engine can cost $2000 there is no reason a factory new <Your Name Here> 350 should cost much more).

RVBYSDI
Steve

[Mike S]

Chevy can make/sell a 350 for a couple grand or less for a number of reasons----the design has been arround for 50 years, with only minor tweeking, so engineering costs have been recovered, the volume of production is in the millions of units annualy-----really big impact on cost here, --and very little libality costs per unit.

The available, and potential market for a new avaition engine is NOTHING compared to the Chevy's market.

Even though prices would come down for an a/c engine manufacturer who produces large volumes of engines, and consiquently gets bigger discounts from suppliers on parts and sub assemblies, and amatorizes costs over more units, etc., there is not enough market to drive the production numbers REQUIRED for a real signifiant $$$ savings.

If I were to invent/develop/produce a new "Super Whiz Bang 360", and through large production numbers-------say 25,000 units a year, that I could sell to the homebuilder market for $10,000, I would flood the market in the first two or three months, then be left holding onto millions of dollars in unsold inventory, with no forseeable market in sight.

The rate of sales drives the production volume from the output side, and that also effects the cost of production.

With all that said, I would like the same as everyone here, a safe, reliable modern, efficent engine that fits the airframe as it currently is with little to no modification, low cost, and oh yes, 260 hp for my -10.

Mike

[N916K]

Originally Posted by dbuds2

What would it take in cost, weight, performance, ease of installation, completeness of package, technology, economy, reliability, customer support, etc, to make you and most everyone else switch?

I'm putting together a team of designers and analytical engineers to solve this problem if the market demand is there.

PLease let me know what you want.

Jabiru seems to have taken the most realistic approach toward providing a new aircraft engine. Do you think you could be so much more succesful then them that you could have a new $15,000 200hp engine that weights no more than a current O-360? Not saying you couldn't but it does seem they had realistic goals and put out a pretty good product in a short period of time.

Overall the requirments for an airplane engine haven't changed in 100 years. There is no reason we need a huge change just because we want to use new technology. I work as an engineer in the auto industry and have to deal with engine calibration. The changes in car engines happen because the requirements for the engines change over time not just because the auto makers think it's a great idea to keep changing things. Nothing happens in the auto industry unless it's to meet a requirement or save money. Point is, auto technology doesn't always relate to valid aviation technology.

As far as a dream engine, I have to agree with some of the other people here, design your own O360. Make a few changes and use some car technology where appropriate. Pistons, con rods, valves, fuel injection, that sort of thing. Possibly make it modular so you can make a 6 cylinder. Remember to start with an AIPLANE engine design not a car engine when working on a new design.

And remember that first thing they teach you in engineering school. It's not science, it's classical solutions to new problems. The wheel has already been invented, just look for small improvements and not a totally new design.

Good Luck, I'd like to see something else out there as much as the next guy.

[dbuds2]

I love the input from all experienced aviators and lovers of experimental planes. Your suggestions are all very good and as many have suggested, quite obvious. My intent for this posting is to find out which of the many engine characteristics are the most important. I will continue to collect your suggestions as long as you keep posting them. I plan to use your input to brainstorm the design with our team. This isn't a hard technical problem, it IS a tough problem to accomplish the fundamental objectives and also target the nice to haves.

I will start compiling the inputs and share on this site.

[johngoodman]

I am in the very early stages of an RV-10. I will probably buy what Van suggests, BUT, I would love a diesel. My dream engine would be a diesel that sips JetA, has a FADEC, and can stay close to the IO540 weight. I'll pay a premium above the cost of a new IO540, but not a lot.
John