Would be good if these folks would have an update after 2014.
Looks like they update their facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/Turbine-Solution-Group-609158212429254/
Would be good if these folks would have an update after 2014.
There is an RV-10 w/ Turbine that is now flying. They bought a buddies RV-10 and showed it off at SNF a few years ago w/only his fuselage; but have subsequently finished it up and I know are flying it now since they gave him a ride in it last month when he was in Florida.
See Turbine Solutions Group: http://www.turbinesolutiongroup.com/tsg_RV10_kit.htm
Doug Lomheim
RV-9A Mazda 13B/FWF
I am pleased to announce that we have received our first deposit from a dedicated RV builder.
I would like to thank him for his support for our engine and express my own admiration for the initiatives he is proposing to integrate the engine into his aircraft. His set-up will certainly gather attention in a very positive way and he should end up with a very high performance and safe aircraft.
Dave
Hi Dave,
I've read this entire thread and your website, and if it is there I can't find it.
Are you anticipating that these engines will maintain full rated hp, and if so to what altitude? Or will they lapse like normally aspirated engines? It makes a huge difference - 120hp flat rated out-performs a standard IO-360 (180hp) above 12,500 density altitude, sometimes steady wins the race.
On an ISA day, the 200hp take-off power should be maintained to 5000? and will then reduce to 180hp at 10,000? and 137hp at 20,000?. That 137hp at 20,000? for our engine is around a 65% power setting for an IO360 at sea level. This should give you an idea of the anticipated performance of your RV at altitude.
Fuel flow at 20,000? @ 137hp is projected to be around 9.5 gph. A 150hp cruise at 10,000? on an ISA day will yield a fuel flow anticipated to be around 11.4 gph.
These are preliminary theoretical numbers that have yet to be validated. In around 9 months, I hope to be able to provide validation (or correction if necessary!).
The first RV that our engine will go into will be an RV14, as mentioned earlier in this thread. That is likely to be in around 15-18 months from now. The owner of that aircraft will be working with us to provide accurate numbers to the RV fraternity to enable RV builders to make an informed decision about their choice of powerplant. We are excited to work with this builder to get his Turbine RV airborne as soon as possible.
Dave
I've got a deposit in for one of these engines.
Debating about building a RV-14 around it... Or, maybe a Velocity Twin.
Big weakness of turbines is that efficiency usually goes way down below 85% power or so, so pulling back the throttle doesn't really save that much and two 120s would be running at just about optimum producing 200hp continuous at 10k'.
I'd love to put a turbine in the 14A I'm building. For me its just about the safety.
The W&B issues is what kills it for me. I don't want to have a special cowling an extra 2' long while my nose gear sits on the firewall. Whatever the engine mount is will have to have a place for the nose gear?
Although you could just mount the engine as close the normal length as possible so you can use the stock cowling and have a 1/2" steel firewall to make up the weight.
.5 BSFC will be very impressive at this scale if you can do that and that accomplishment would go a long ways towards wider acceptance of the engine in this market.
Agreed... However, I find it interesting that Velocity doesn't truly publish a Vne speed for their aircraft. Instead their flight test includes a bit of flutter testing to help establish a Vne for each aircraft.
While they have "limited" to 200 kts historically, the airframe might actually be able to take advantage of the additional thrust available through a turbine engine. No one will really know until it's done.
Of course, Vmc will probably creep up to be a real thing for the airframe instead.
That is for sure Ross.
We were not prepared to proceed with the development program if we couldn't get the SFC to less than 0.55 lbs/hp/hr so that was our initial target. Indications are that we can do a little better than our target, but time will tell. In 10 months when its on the test stand and we have verifiable numbers, that will be crunch time for us.
If we can demonstrate that level of performance, we hope that we can convert the LyConti customers to turbine power.
No doubt. Saving 100 lbs on the engine provides a weight allowance of 15 more gallons of fuel - which should make up the range difference of the SFC penalty. I'm sure people will be especially anxious to hear test results using auto or farm diesel, perhaps with appropriate additives, to avoid the expense of Jet A.
Not necessarily. It depends on the orientation of the layups/plies, and in the end, the relationship between the bending stiffness and torsional stiffness of the surface. The structural damping inherent in a built-up aluminum structure versus a composite structure may or may not be significantly different.
Composite structures can have better flutter margins if the layups/plies are tailored to maximize torsional stiffness while minimizing bending stiffness, within the constraints of other structural requirements (e.g, bending strength). The bending and torsional stiffnesses can also be somewhat tailored in metal structures to improve flutter margins, but not nearly to the extent of composite structures, as easily, or without adding a bunch of weight.
There will not be a significant difference in fuel flows between our 200hp engine at 150hp/10,000' compared to the equivalent 200hp piston engines at 150hp/10,000'. In fact, they should be very similar.
However, our 200hp engine is being optimised for a 180hp cruise at 10,000' which is a power the piston engines generally will not achieve (unless augmented).
From their web page with two 200hp Lycomings they predict a cruise speed of 215 KTAS @ 75% power (one presumes at or near 7,500' since that is about how high you can go and still generate 75% power in a normally aspirated Lycosaurus). Replacing the two Lycosaurus engines with your turbines and assuming 150hp / engine @ 17,500' should realize about 288 KTAS (same horsepower, add roughly 3% per 1,000').
"... And then of course, if you just add a small bleed air port, you could add pressurization..."
I know it was kind of TIC but there is substantially more to the design of a reliable, safe pressurized airplane than "just adding a small bleed air port"...
That "bleed air" can easily com from a turbo or supercharger.
Not that it matters where it comes from. It would still be a substantial project...
I don't think you'll see a non-flat rated 200hp turbine produce 150 hp at 17,500 feet. Turbo normalize the Lycs and you'd get some good speeds and fuel flows running LOP.
Looks like they're aiming for Lyc 360 type pricing. We'll see how that ends up when they come to market.
Updated estimations following the most recent design work have the price point in the region of $50k so we are now above the new IO360 in purchase cost. That is more than we would have liked but given the benefits of such an engine, we believe it still represents good value.
The minimal routine maintenance and the projected longer TBO, combined with the lower projected cost of overhaul should result in a lower hourly cost to run the engine than the LyConti?s. And then there are the (in general) cheaper fuels...
Dave
I don't think you'll see a non-flat rated 200hp turbine produce 150 hp at 17,500 feet. Turbo normalize the Lycs and you'd get some good speeds and fuel flows running LOP.
"... And then of course, if you just add a small bleed air port, you could add pressurization..."
I know it was kind of TIC but there is substantially more to the design of a reliable, safe pressurized airplane than "just adding a small bleed air port"...
For your interest, our current predictions (subject to validation once the engine is running of course) at 20,000? give a maximum continuous cruise power of 138hp with a fuel flow of around 9.8 usg per hour at a 180ktas cruise state, ISA conditions.
We don?t intend to offer a bleed port initially. We figure that not a high % of our customers will be pressurising their aircraft. Indeed, we optimised the engine for 10,000? because we feel that not many will likely go much higher. We suspect that 18,000? will be many folks limit where cannula oxy can be used and pressurisation is not a necessity. 140hp or thereabouts is still a fairly useful power at 18,000?.
Dave
I started with this:
"However, our 200hp engine is being optimised for a 180hp cruise at 10,000'"
I guesstimated 150hp up to about 15,000', with normal lapse rate thereafter. As I said, my napkin math may be far off!
A turbine is not exactly like turbonormalized piston, but as you pointed out they are generally flat rated (due to heat in the hot section) up to some altitude and then lapse the same as a normally aspirated. TA is saying they still generate 180hp @ 10,000', so 150hp per engine @ 15,000' is not a bad guess, and incidentally is the same horsepower as two normally aspirated IO 360 200 hp motors @ 75% power. With two engines, that is 300hp@15k'; normal lapse should drop you down to ~65% power @ FL250. You are looking at less horsepower but also less induced drag as you get closer to L/D (max) so IAS should drop slightly but TAS should continue to increase a bit. The general formula usually applies until you approach high Mach numbers, when induced drag begins to rise despite low IAS.
Again the caveats - my recollections are 35 years old, and this ain't no Phantom!
We don?t intend to offer a bleed port initially.
Almost forgot, the bleed port is not just about pressurization.
It's about free air conditioning and easy heating.
All you need is an inter-cooler, a water separator, and an expansion valve. Lightweight, can fit under almost any cowling.
BIG opportunity for a selling point, especially if you cobbled together a kit for people...
If you make it standard, but ship it capped, it would preclude needing a separate design.
Of course, you could probably charge a premium for the feature too. It's not drilling the hole that is expensive, it's knowing where to drill...
...and, as always, the devil is in the details.
What do you think happens when you start siphoning off bleed air?
Let me give you a hint:
TANSTAAFL
"There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"
...and, as always, the devil is in the details.
What do you think happens when you start siphoning off bleed air?
Let me give you a hint:
TANSTAAFL
"There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"
Valid points however it's really best not to project TBOs before even a single example has gone that many hours running in the real world...