 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kelly McMullen
Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Posts: 1188
Location: Sun Lakes AZ
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2015 6:09 am Post subject: Re Turbine RV-10 |
 |
|
You might right about the fuel burn..definitely more than the Lyc.
It would be fun to fly with the quiet turbine and simplicity, as long as someone else was paying the bills.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
[quote] I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever.
I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Lyc - expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there.
Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass strip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the '10, mortgage the house... oh nevermind.
The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure in the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power.
On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
| Quote: | See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's Kitplanes.
250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the Lyc.
But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After they rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense.
I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for fuel efficiency.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)>
at
The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. 'Anybody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain it. NO ONE has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest of us can buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for success but don't plan on it.
|
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
04/24/15 |
| Quote: |
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor
KCHD |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jim Combs
Joined: 24 Jan 2010
Posts: 140
Location: Lexington, Ky
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2015 6:41 am Post subject: Re Turbine RV-10 |
|
|
The engine web page is here:
http://www.pbsvb.com/customer-industries/aerospace/aircraft-engines/tp-100-turboprop-engine
It's rated at 200 HP. These guys extended the fuel tanks at least one bay per side. Useful load is reduced.
JimC
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
[quote]You might right about the fuel burn..definitely more than the Lyc.
It would be fun to fly with the quiet turbine and simplicity, as long as someone else was paying the bills.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever.
I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Lyc - expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there.
Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass strip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the '10, mortgage the house... oh nevermind.
The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure in the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power.
On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
| Quote: | See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's Kitplanes.
250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the Lyc.
But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After they rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense.
I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for fuel efficiency.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)>
at
The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. 'Anybody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain it. NO ONE has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest of us can buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for success but don't plan on it.
|
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
04/24/15 |
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
RV-10 -> N312F - Flying as of 12/2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kelly McMullen
Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Posts: 1188
Location: Sun Lakes AZ
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2015 1:40 pm Post subject: Re Turbine RV-10 |
|
|
Apparently you are calculating differently than whoever supplied Amy with data.
From her article, 180 ft/lb torque = 241 shp + 9 hp exhaust thrust for 250 total. IIRC they were getting ~175kts on ~19gph. To get that speed on Lyc you likely would need to burn at least 13gph LOP for 75% power.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky(at)gmail.com (jiminlexky(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
[quote]The engine web page is here:
http://www.pbsvb.com/customer-industries/aerospace/aircraft-engines/tp-100-turboprop-engine
It's rated at 200 HP. These guys extended the fuel tanks at least one bay per side. Useful load is reduced.
JimC
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | You might right about the fuel burn..definitely more than the Lyc.
It would be fun to fly with the quiet turbine and simplicity, as long as someone else was paying the bills.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever.
I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Lyc - expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there.
Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass strip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the '10, mortgage the house... oh nevermind.
The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure in the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power.
On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
| Quote: | See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's Kitplanes.
250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the Lyc.
But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After they rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense.
I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for fuel efficiency.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)>
at
The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. 'Anybody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain it. NO ONE has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest of us can buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for success but don't plan on it.
|
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
04/24/15 |
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
|
| Quote: |
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
Kelly McMullen
A&P/IA, EAA Tech Counselor
KCHD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kdb.rv10(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 25, 2015 1:53 pm Post subject: Re Turbine RV-10 |
|
|
I'd like to see what the fuel flow is at 150kts. I doubt it changes much with speed changes....
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 25, 2015, at 4:35 PM, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
[quote]Apparently you are calculating differently than whoever supplied Amy with data.
From her article, 180 ft/lb torque = 241 shp + 9 hp exhaust thrust for 250 total. IIRC they were getting ~175kts on ~19gph. To get that speed on Lyc you likely would need to burn at least 13gph LOP for 75% power.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky(at)gmail.com (jiminlexky(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | The engine web page is here:
http://www.pbsvb.com/customer-industries/aerospace/aircraft-engines/tp-100-turboprop-engine
It's rated at 200 HP. These guys extended the fuel tanks at least one bay per side. Useful load is reduced.
JimC
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | You might right about the fuel burn..definitely more than the Lyc.
It would be fun to fly with the quiet turbine and simplicity, as long as someone else was paying the bills.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever.
I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Lyc - expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there.
Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass strip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the '10, mortgage the house... oh nevermind.
The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure in the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power.
On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
| Quote: | See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's Kitplanes.
250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the Lyc.
But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After they rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense.
I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for fuel efficiency.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)>
at
The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. 'Anybody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain it. NO ONE has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest of us can buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for success but don't plan on it.
|
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
04/24/15 |
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
|
===================================
://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
===================================
cs.com
===================================
matronics.com/contribution
===================================
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Combs
Joined: 24 Jan 2010
Posts: 140
Location: Lexington, Ky
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 26, 2015 9:08 am Post subject: Re Turbine RV-10 |
|
|
i was incorrect. it is 240 Hp based on TP-100 web site. I don't have my Sport aviation yet.
Jim C
Do not Archive
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Kevin Belue <kdb.rv10(at)gmail.com (kdb.rv10(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
[quote]I'd like to see what the fuel flow is at 150kts. I doubt it changes much with speed changes....
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 25, 2015, at 4:35 PM, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | Apparently you are calculating differently than whoever supplied Amy with data.
From her article, 180 ft/lb torque = 241 shp + 9 hp exhaust thrust for 250 total. IIRC they were getting ~175kts on ~19gph. To get that speed on Lyc you likely would need to burn at least 13gph LOP for 75% power.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky(at)gmail.com (jiminlexky(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | The engine web page is here:
http://www.pbsvb.com/customer-industries/aerospace/aircraft-engines/tp-100-turboprop-engine
It's rated at 200 HP. These guys extended the fuel tanks at least one bay per side. Useful load is reduced.
JimC
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | You might right about the fuel burn..definitely more than the Lyc.
It would be fun to fly with the quiet turbine and simplicity, as long as someone else was paying the bills.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever.
I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Lyc - expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there.
Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass strip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the '10, mortgage the house... oh nevermind.
The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure in the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power.
On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
| Quote: | See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's Kitplanes.
250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the Lyc.
But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After they rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense.
I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for fuel efficiency.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)>
at
The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. 'Anybody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain it. NO ONE has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest of us can buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for success but don't plan on it.
|
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
04/24/15 |
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
|
==========
://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
==========
cs.com
==========
matronics.com/contribution
==========
|
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
_________________
RV-10 -> N312F - Flying as of 12/2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rv10rob(at)gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2015 2:44 pm Post subject: Re Turbine RV-10 |
|
|
Sounds really cool:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51lideX9bUw
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky(at)gmail.com (jiminlexky(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | i was incorrect. it is 240 Hp based on TP-100 web site. I don't have my Sport aviation yet.
Jim C
Do not Archive
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Kevin Belue <kdb.rv10(at)gmail.com (kdb.rv10(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | I'd like to see what the fuel flow is at 150kts. I doubt it changes much with speed changes....
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 25, 2015, at 4:35 PM, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | Apparently you are calculating differently than whoever supplied Amy with data.
From her article, 180 ft/lb torque = 241 shp + 9 hp exhaust thrust for 250 total. IIRC they were getting ~175kts on ~19gph. To get that speed on Lyc you likely would need to burn at least 13gph LOP for 75% power.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky(at)gmail.com (jiminlexky(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | The engine web page is here:
http://www.pbsvb.com/customer-industries/aerospace/aircraft-engines/tp-100-turboprop-engine
It's rated at 200 HP. These guys extended the fuel tanks at least one bay per side. Useful load is reduced.
JimC
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | You might right about the fuel burn..definitely more than the Lyc.
It would be fun to fly with the quiet turbine and simplicity, as long as someone else was paying the bills.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever.
I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Lyc - expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there.
Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass strip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the '10, mortgage the house... oh nevermind.
The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure in the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power.
On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
| Quote: | See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's Kitplanes.
250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the Lyc.
But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After they rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense.
I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for fuel efficiency.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)>
at
The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. 'Anybody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain it. NO ONE has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest of us can buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for success but don't plan on it.
|
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
04/24/15 |
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
|
==========
://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
==========
cs.com
==========
matronics.com/contribution
==========
|
|
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
|
--
Rob Kochman
RV-10 Flying since March 2011
Woodinville, WA
http://kochman.net/N819K
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jdriggs49(at)msn.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 27, 2015 6:47 pm Post subject: Re Turbine RV-10 |
|
|
Nothing is as hot as the sound of a turbine spooling up and the wafting aroma of kerosene! ☝🏻
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 15:40:08 -0700
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re Turbine RV-10
From: rv10rob(at)gmail.com
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com
Sounds really cool:[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51lideX9bUw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51lideX9bUw[/url]
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Jim Combs <[url=mailto:jiminlexky(at)gmail.com]jiminlexky(at)gmail.com[/url]> wrote:
| Quote: | i was incorrect. it is 240 Hp based on TP-100 web site. I don't have my Sport aviation yet.
Jim C
Do not Archive
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Kevin Belue <[url=mailto:kdb.rv10(at)gmail.com]kdb.rv10(at)gmail.com[/url]> wrote:
| Quote: | I'd like to see what the fuel flow is at 150kts. I doubt it changes much with speed changes....
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 25, 2015, at 4:35 PM, Kelly McMullen <[url=mailto:apilot2(at)gmail.com]apilot2(at)gmail.com[/url]> wrote:
| Quote: | Apparently you are calculating differently than whoever supplied Amy with data.
From her article, 180 ft/lb torque = 241 shp + 9 hp exhaust thrust for 250 total. IIRC they were getting ~175kts on ~19gph. To get that speed on Lyc you likely would need to burn at least 13gph LOP for 75% power.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Jim Combs <[url=mailto:jiminlexky(at)gmail.com]jiminlexky(at)gmail.com[/url]> wrote:
| Quote: | The engine web page is here:
[url=http://www.pbsvb.com/customer-industries/aerospace/aircraft-engines/tp-100-turboprop-engine]http://www.pbsvb.com/customer-industries/aerospace/aircraft-engines/tp-100-turboprop-engine[/url]
It's rated at 200 HP. These guys extended the fuel tanks at least one bay per side. Useful load is reduced.
JimC
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Kelly McMullen <[url=mailto:apilot2(at)gmail.com]apilot2(at)gmail.com[/url]> wrote:
| Quote: | You might right about the fuel burn..definitely more than the Lyc.
It would be fun to fly with the quiet turbine and simplicity, as long as someone else was paying the bills.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Bill Watson <[url=mailto:Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com]Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com[/url]> wrote:
| Quote: | I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever.
I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Lyc - expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there.
Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass strip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the '10, mortgage the house... oh nevermind.
The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure in the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power.
On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
| Quote: | See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's Kitplanes.
250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the Lyc.
But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After they rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense.
I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for fuel efficiency.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson <[url=mailto:Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com]Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com[/url]> wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Bill Watson <[url=mailto:Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com]Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com[/url]>
at
The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. 'Anybody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain it. NO ONE has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest of us can buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for success but don't plan on it.
|
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - [url=http://www.avg.com]www.avg.com[/url]
04/24/15 |
| Quote: |
get="_blank">[url=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List]http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List[/url]
tp://[url=http://forums.matronics.com]forums.matronics.com[/url]
_blank">[url=http://www.matronics.com/contribution]http://www.matronics.com/contribution[/url]
|
get="_blank">[url=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List]http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List[/url]
tp://[url=http://forums.matronics.com]forums.matronics.com[/url]
_blank">[url=http://www.matronics.com/contribution]http://www.matronics.com/contribution[/url]
|
|
| Quote: |
get="_blank">[url=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List]http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List[/url]
tp://[url=http://forums.matronics.com]forums.matronics.com[/url]
_blank">[url=http://www.matronics.com/contribution]http://www.matronics.com/contribution[/url]
|
==========
://[url=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List]www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List[/url]
==========
[url=http://cs.com]cs.com[/url]
==========
[url=http://matronics.com/contribution]matronics.com/contribution[/url]
==========
|
|
| Quote: |
get="_blank">[url=http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List]http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List[/url]
tp://[url=http://forums.matronics.com]forums.matronics.com[/url]
_blank">[url=http://www.matronics.com/contribution]http://www.matronics.com/contribution[/url]
|
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
|
--
Rob Kochman
RV-10 Flying since March 2011
Woodinville, WA
[url=http://kochman.net/N819K]http://kochman.net/N819K[/url]
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flying-nut(at)cfl.rr.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2015 3:21 am Post subject: Re Turbine RV-10 |
|
|
Hmmm ...... R2800 (spooling up), a P-51, and a P-38 with the blowers going ..... each has a unique sound. All turbines sound alike!
Sorry, couldn't resist.
do not archive
The turbine 10 is hangared at Deland FL, just around the corner from the Gin Mill restaurant. Stop by for a burger and then go see the 10.
Linn
On 4/27/2015 10:42 PM, Danny Riggs wrote:
[quote] Nothing is as hot as the sound of a turbine spooling up and the wafting aroma of kerosene! ☝🏻
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 15:40:08 -0700
Subject: Re: Re Turbine RV-10
From: rv10rob(at)gmail.com (rv10rob(at)gmail.com)
To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com (rv10-list(at)matronics.com)
Sounds really cool: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51lideX9bUw
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky(at)gmail.com (jiminlexky(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | i was incorrect. it is 240 Hp based on TP-100 web site. I don't have my Sport aviation yet.
Jim C
Do not Archive
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Kevin Belue <kdb.rv10(at)gmail.com (kdb.rv10(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | I'd like to see what the fuel flow is at 150kts. I doubt it changes much with speed changes....
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 25, 2015, at 4:35 PM, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | Apparently you are calculating differently than whoever supplied Amy with data.
From her article, 180 ft/lb torque = 241 shp + 9 hp exhaust thrust for 250 total. IIRC they were getting ~175kts on ~19gph. To get that speed on Lyc you likely would need to burn at least 13gph LOP for 75% power.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Jim Combs <jiminlexky(at)gmail.com (jiminlexky(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | The engine web page is here:
http://www.pbsvb.com/customer-industries/aerospace/aircraft-engines/tp-100-turboprop-engine
It's rated at 200 HP. These guys extended the fuel tanks at least one bay per side. Useful load is reduced.
JimC
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | You might right about the fuel burn..definitely more than the Lyc.
It would be fun to fly with the quiet turbine and simplicity, as long as someone else was paying the bills.
On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever.
I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Lyc - expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there.
Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass strip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the '10, mortgage the house... oh nevermind.
The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure in the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power.
On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
| Quote: | See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's Kitplanes.
250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the Lyc.
But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After they rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense.
I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for fuel efficiency.
On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)> wrote:
| Quote: | --> RV10-List message posted by: Bill Watson <Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com (Mauledriver(at)nc.rr.com)>
at
The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. 'Anybody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain it. NO ONE has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest of us can buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for success but don't plan on it.
|
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
04/24/15 |
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
|
==========
://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
==========
cs.com
==========
matronics.com/contribution
==========
|
|
get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
|
|
--
Rob Kochman
RV-10 Flying since March 2011
Woodinville, WA
http://kochman.net/N819K
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
04/27/15 )��ߢ{l�7�r�h�M4�M iǜ���z����.�'�N�W] ��D�����K ��j��',.+-歺 ��5�h����,z�^���.+-�إ�؞�˜�� ��T���n�+��b�p+r�y'���C� 塧{ ����,x(Z�P>-��Z��vk��k��j+y�ky�m���� &j��',r��5�h�uи��m���� ���'�� �o�j��j�+E]t.+-��M� $�NECI�������'���j[(j�����z����y�h��j�~m��ߢ���f����r�(�m��ߢ���f����r�(�����B�{k������y�����jy2���*.��z�.�˩���1�m������ �)چ����i��0�f����r�(��(���n�b�xm���� &j��',r��r���&�*'�����'��k{��w/�i[b]
| | - The Matronics RV10-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
