RV8T

[cawmd82]

If only it flies, behaves and feeds as advertised-----what a plane!!!!!

Unfortunately we say more or less the same things about our teenagers and we generally know how that turns out!!!

Good luck Jim Benson---hopefully you will surface and be our jet fueled, 22000 rpm hero!!

[N395V]

I wonder when one of these rocket builders will put the 255 horse turbine on one of their planes?

That was my intent but it wasn't ready then and all the current rocket builders will be tooo old when it is.

The thing we all want to know is whats this thing going to guzzle in dollars per hour

The fuel flow on their site has never been backed up with flight data. I have been following these guys for years and no progress to date. What we all know is that their posted numbers do not box with the energy required to generate the stated HP.

They have been playing with a fuel controller that feeds fuel based on a square wave input and they vary the duration as well as the frequency. The apparent problem is when the fuel flow gets down to acceptable levels the turbine blades heat up and hit the can. This ain't good.

According to the Innodyn website, they have signed an LOA with Firewall Forward

They have done this at least once before.

It flew for 15 minutes three days ago, a weekend has gone by, with no talk of other flights?

They have had one in an RV4 and a cub for years and still no data. Doubt we will get much data from the "private individual" I find it odd that the flight and announcement came just after OSH.

Greg Richter BMA actually put money into the predecessor of innodyn and has dibbs on one of the 1st production engines. He doubts it is ready for prime time.


They still have not figured out a way to control power to the prop and it is doubtful they will be able to compete with the fuel flow of a recip which at todays prices is becoming more important.

Don't read me wrong I am not against innovation. The thought of a turbine RV8 or F1 makes me drool. I just do not think you can bend the laws of thermodynamics enough to make it competetive from a fuel and cost standpoint.

[N200PF]

I've been following them (with the occational live conversation for a real time update) for about 2 years as well and I for one am excited to see them putting another engine in an RV! However, I'm with Milt on the lack of public info on the RV-4 and the RV-6A that they had installed in the past.

I can't imagine that if there were serious problems with the power at the prop or over heating at lower flow rates that they would even try to deliver one to a customer. ...could be wrong though. I wish they would talk to us and tell us what's up!

We have all earned the right to ask them for more detail after following them for so long. HEY INNODYN - We're all excited about your work, your turbine and understand that innovation is tough, time consuming work. We're talking about it here because we're interested. Give us an update so we can continue believing in your engine!

- Peter

[iwannarv]

Any new info on the 8T? I'm still curious...

[RV505]

I spoke with an Jet Engine Enginer from a big place in Connecticut. He said he looked at the program and there isn't enough stages in the engine to keep the fuel burn reasonable. He said it would never work economically.

[jdmunzell]

The best thing about turbines is their reliability and lack of vibration. Take the Pilatus for example. It looks like a single engine King Air! It's interesting that this engine will burn all those type of fuels. I remember that a PT-6 could burn 100LL, but the engine was limited to a certain number of hours of that 100LL, during one overhaul cycle.

I wonder about the speeds though. ...200kts? Isn't that getting a bit close to Vne for the -8?

[Cam Hartman]

Thanks Andy for bringing this to our attention; its an exciting development in powerplants thats for sure and a very innovative one at that.

It will be very interesting to see the fuel consumption figures as they become available. In the meantime it would be reasonable to assume that it will be most efficient "at altitude" and will certainly further open up the skies for the RV.

Does anyone have technical info on an article in circulation concerning control flutter experienced in the RV aeroplanes fitted with turbine engines? I don't have any more info than that to go on so any info would be greatly appreciated.

You'd have to install one for the engine sound alone......................

Thanks in advance,

Cam.

[Andrew Griffin]

I was wondering if after all of the initial discussion if anyone ended up tracking down the owner of the Turbine 8 and had a chat to him/her?

It would certainly be interesting to hear from a "customer". Maybe then we might get some actual fuel flow info and details on how the thing actually flys.

If anyone does get a chance to talk to the owner could you please let us know. I'm more curious than anything...

[gmcjetpilot]

Originally Posted by N395V

Don't read me wrong I am not against innovation. The thought of a turbine RV8 or F1 makes me drool. I just do not think you can bend the laws of thermodynamics enough to make it competitive from a fuel and cost standpoint.

Thank you, well put. The fuel control and prop set up from what I know sounds very experimental. As far as the first customer RV-8T, I would only believe independant flight test side by side with a piston powered RV-8, with controlled flight profiles.

It is so hard to compare bananas and lettuce. You have to talk a direct comparison to get real usable numbers. Van has devised and used a few simple side by side test to compare engines (Rotary, Subaru) to a Lyc.

[Cam Hartman]

So is there any definitive technical data available or just rumour and opinion?

Regards.