Katamarino
Pattern Altitude
Outside of little rural fields in Europe, or smaller fields in the US, getting mogas onto an airport is a massive hassle or even impossible, especially in any significant quantity. Using Jet A is just so much easier.
Deltahawk update from S&F looks good!
- Thread starter MountainDude
- Start date
Done via STC. Originally the STC was for the warrior. Schools required the use of the G1000. Once Continental bought out Thielert (the warrior STC holder) Piper sent an Archer to get retrofitted. 13 changes to the archer dx STC from the original warrior STC. Sounds like the nose wheel geometry had to be altered to fit the diesel compared to regular archers.
"Since the Continental CD-155 diesel engine was approved for installation in the Archer under an FAA supplemental type certificate (STC), Piper has been building diesel Archers as standard TX models that were then modified with the diesel-engine STC"
Arcane.
In the case of the Pipers, I believe an upfit shop installs the engine after the aircraft is completed. So yes, they are mostly completed first with an o-360 then upfit with the diesel later. I don't remember if Piper contracts the engine change out to a third party or if it is just done in a separate shop by Piper employees.
Similar things have been done for years. It isn't uncommon to find aircraft that were constructed with no radios installed and the next logbook entry is from a separate shop on the same airport that installed all the radios that the aircraft was originally delivered with.
Doesn't make it less dumb.
It's a matter of opinion. The same thing has happened in the auto industry for years too.
Ed Haywood
En-Route
Why?
RyanShort1
Final Approach
Volume of sales versus cost of install, regulatory hoops, etc.
Katamarino
Pattern Altitude
Try rocking up to security at a Middle Eastern airport, for example, with 60 gallons of gas in jerry cans and see how it goes. Not to mention the hassle of finding adequate quality gas and someone who's willing to haul it for you. The whole thing is a logistical nightmare.
None of these places have anywhere near enough GA traffic for them to ever contemplate providing a fuel other than Jet A on the field, either.
Auto industry has way more volume. Airplanes are essentially hand built.
FancyG
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2020
- Messages
- 383
- Display Name
Display name:
FancyG
What's the GA volume in the Middle East? Is it a thing or not really?
There are a few people worldwide who can justify paying for diesel aircraft engines. Some of them might like to see the GA scene twist around to align with their interests, claiming that it would expand GA into places where there is little or no aviation gasoline infrastructure now. In reality the lack of fuel infrastructure in those places is a symptom, not a cause. In the foreseeable future there never will be many light aircraft transporting people around most of the world, nor much civilian market for complex, expensive diesels that might otherwise make it easier for them to operate. The trend over the last few decades is for less light aircraft in most of the world, for reasons unrelated to fuel, and in the small number of places in the world where we will maintain the freedom to travel by light aircraft, gasoline will remain available to do so. In the US Avgas is widely available, that’s not going to change in spite of politics, and if somebody wants to carry fuel on the airport (virtually any US airport) that’s not a significant issue either.
The best avenue for development of reliable diesels for light aircraft has been military UAV applications and US government paid development - because the budgets are large and the demand for military UAV activity will more likely continue to grow, not shrink. Spin offs or parallel commercial certification may then be practical because the technical issues get resolved by a customer with deeper pockets.
The best avenue for development of reliable diesels for light aircraft has been military UAV applications and US government paid development - because the budgets are large and the demand for military UAV activity will more likely continue to grow, not shrink. Spin offs or parallel commercial certification may then be practical because the technical issues get resolved by a customer with deeper pockets.
Last edited:
Katamarino
Pattern Altitude
Basically nothing. GA is pretty concentrated into what we think of as "The West" (incl Australia and NZ), and parts of southern Africa.
Katamarino
Pattern Altitude
I haven't seen any evidence of anything like that at all. What I see is people wanting choice, and options, over and above the old fashioned and limited choices which we have now.
That's Freedom. USA, USA, USA!
The problem is that in the real world you have to convince the actual market to buy what you offer, at the price you supply it. The only actual market where diesels have a chance for commercial sales is Europe, with market volume limited by current politics and economics that are killing light aviation at levels above ultralights, and a handful more in places like Africa. The market such as it is for diesels is for military UAV engines that fly a lot of hours and are replaced fairly frequently, at great expense.
Last edited:
Pinecone
En-Route
FYI, the 172 started with the Continental O-300 at 145 HP. Later switched to Lycoming O-320, 150 HP, then later to the 160 HP version.
The much later Hawk SP was a 172 with IO-360, 180 HP.
There was also the XP with an Continental IO-360 derated to 195 HP. The T-41B used the same setup but with full rated 210 HP.
Mxfarm
Line Up and Wait
Just get out your checkbook, many things can be done if a customer is willing to pay for them.
tspear
En-Route
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2010
- Messages
- 3,508
- Display Name
Display name:
Timothy
@Tusayan
I think you are effectively burying your head in the sand. 100LL has a finite life span left. The endangerment finding, and the FAA target of ending 100LL by 2030 mean the sunset time for current avgas has been set.
The replacement avgas solutions, such as G100UL have a minimum of a $1 per gallon increase in price. Jet-A is currently between $1 and $3 bucks more expensive than avgas, and this is without discount programs for Jet-A. Add an additional $1 for some unleaded version and we are talking real money. The stats from the FAA is 20% of the fleet consumes 80% of the fuel. For that 20% of airplane owners, the cost difference between unleaded avgas and Jet-A could really matter.
In addition, current Lycoming and CMI engines are "bespoke" hand built and extremely labor intensive. As a result, the cost of replacement engines and overhauls for many aircraft in the 180-200HP rang is now approaching $100K. With a target price around $110K for a FWF package, DH has roughly a 10K difference in price. At 10GPH, a fairly common fuel rate for engines that size in cruise, you are looking between 500 hours (at $2 a gallon at the bottom end) cost recovery in the price of the engines.
There is still many steps for DH to be successful (including being able to build/sell at that price); but DH has taken some very impressive steps finally down the path and I think have made it much farther than anyone else.
Tim
I think you are effectively burying your head in the sand. 100LL has a finite life span left. The endangerment finding, and the FAA target of ending 100LL by 2030 mean the sunset time for current avgas has been set.
The replacement avgas solutions, such as G100UL have a minimum of a $1 per gallon increase in price. Jet-A is currently between $1 and $3 bucks more expensive than avgas, and this is without discount programs for Jet-A. Add an additional $1 for some unleaded version and we are talking real money. The stats from the FAA is 20% of the fleet consumes 80% of the fuel. For that 20% of airplane owners, the cost difference between unleaded avgas and Jet-A could really matter.
In addition, current Lycoming and CMI engines are "bespoke" hand built and extremely labor intensive. As a result, the cost of replacement engines and overhauls for many aircraft in the 180-200HP rang is now approaching $100K. With a target price around $110K for a FWF package, DH has roughly a 10K difference in price. At 10GPH, a fairly common fuel rate for engines that size in cruise, you are looking between 500 hours (at $2 a gallon at the bottom end) cost recovery in the price of the engines.
There is still many steps for DH to be successful (including being able to build/sell at that price); but DH has taken some very impressive steps finally down the path and I think have made it much farther than anyone else.
Tim
The Rotax 916 is limited to 137 HP continuous, 160 HP for 5 minutes.
@tspear, I’m not “burying my head in the sand”, I’m being realistic about the market and the budgets it takes to develop new aircraft engines. In the likely commercial volume I think the price would need to be $250K per engine to amortize the cost for a new 200 or 300 HP general aviation engine, especially a diesel. Thielert had significant sources of development funding other than the commercial customer and still ended up broke and owned by AVIC. If you want a diesel today, you buy it from the company who picked up the bankruptcy assets and it’s still an expensive lifecycle cost proposition. Nobody is going to magically change that situation.
@tspear, I’m not “burying my head in the sand”, I’m being realistic about the market and the budgets it takes to develop new aircraft engines. In the likely commercial volume I think the price would need to be $250K per engine to amortize the cost for a new 200 or 300 HP general aviation engine, especially a diesel. Thielert had significant sources of development funding other than the commercial customer and still ended up broke and owned by AVIC. If you want a diesel today, you buy it from the company who picked up the bankruptcy assets and it’s still an expensive lifecycle cost proposition. Nobody is going to magically change that situation.
Last edited:
StraightnLevel
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2023
- Messages
- 520
- Display Name
Display name:
StraightnLevel
The future for what? Home builders?
The top selling airplanes in the US right now are Cirrus SR20/22/22T, DA40, and C172. The Vision Jet at #7 sells almost as many (90) as Piper Archers (93). Heck, you have to lump all of the Tecnam LSAs together to out-sell the twin DA62 by itself. Otherwise, there are no LSAs in the top ten; Cirrus has nearly half of the GA market by themselves (look at piston sales and then add Vision).
Which of those top sellers is a candidate for a Rotax?
10 best-selling piston airplanes in 2022 — General Aviation News
What were the top selling piston airplanes in 2022? Cirrus leads the pack, taking the first, second, and fifth spots on the top 10 list.
generalaviationnews.com
tspear
En-Route
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2010
- Messages
- 3,508
- Display Name
Display name:
Timothy
DH has a multi-decade long history. The company has effectively gone BK multiple times as such the likely tens of millions (likely hundreds) of previous investments have effectively been wiped out. Since the acquisition in 2015 or so by the Ruud family the company has made significant progress. DH actually managed to produce the data, designs and conforming engines, to complete the certification of the engine. Diamond/Austro spent $67 USD (I think that was the number) Million per the press reports to do this with all the engineering data provided by MB. This is an incredible accomplishment. Per the press, the Ruud family has the capital to bring the engine fully to production, and the Ruud family has the history of being successful in multiple endeavors.
Curious, where you are getting the 250K number?
Tim
I work in the business.
It is amazing how a series of bankruptcies and loss of investment can create a situation in which a huge amount of money has been spent in order for people who didn’t fund the development to make a small amount of money. Oddly enough the people making the lost investments don’t like that business plan.
Last edited:
Jim_R
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
- Messages
- 1,842
- Display Name
Display name:
Jim
SoonerAviator
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2014
- Messages
- 9,356
- Location
- Broken Arrow, OK
- Display Name
Display name:
SoonerAviator
Yes, but I believe it maintains that 137HP up into the teens. An IO-360 at 160HP is down about 50HP by 10,000' just due to air density. So the benefits of running 160HP continuously don't matter too much in practical use. At 5,000' altitude, the IO-360 should be down around 24HP (so 136HP), which puts it right in line with the Rotax 915/916 continuous rating. Climbing higher than 5K quickly starts favoring the Rotax.
SoonerAviator
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2014
- Messages
- 9,356
- Location
- Broken Arrow, OK
- Display Name
Display name:
SoonerAviator
The 172R I flew for 40hrs of my Private ticket begs to differ. However, the 172S and other variants of IO-360 certainly have higher max-RPM limits which gets a higher HP rating. In any case, that isn't the point. The IO-360 is just an example of an engine in the 160HP range like the Rotax 916is. Could be any Conti/Lyco model with 150-160HP for fair comparison.
My belief is that the extent of GenAv in the middle east is a small handful of what would otherwise be considered commercial passenger airframes, up to and including the A380, finished as a flying palace for one or more ruling families. If it were in the US, as much as it looks like Part 120.99, requires a type certificate to fly, with the check ride to ATP standards, it would be still be Part 91, so technically GenAv. Nothing to speak of that is piston/prop powered, nor 4- or 6-seats.
SoonerAviator
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2014
- Messages
- 9,356
- Location
- Broken Arrow, OK
- Display Name
Display name:
SoonerAviator
Would certainly be a concern, although I guess some of that is dictated by where the weight is located on the DeltaHawk, especially when considering the supplementary components like the radiator/cooling system.
Last edited:
For fair comparison of performance between with turbo-Rotax gasoline engine that can operate at 100% power for only 5 minutes, you don't pick the Lycoming with the worst power density of any as a result of being de-rated for extreme durability when operated at 100% rated power indefinitely.
In relation to altitude performance, when comparing performance of a simple, easy to maintain naturally aspirated gasoline engine and a complex turbo engine you don't pick the only variant of the non-turbo engine that is redlined at only 2400 rpm instead of 2700 RPM, when raising RPM is how the naturally aspirated engine maintains its power at altitude.
Those interested in high altitude performance of compression ignition engines should BTW look at combustion stability and restart with the same interest they look at boosted power. And the climb performance penalty paid on a given airframe by carrying around the extra engine and cooling system weight.
Last edited:
SoonerAviator
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2014
- Messages
- 9,356
- Location
- Broken Arrow, OK
- Display Name
Display name:
SoonerAviator
I'd guess there are almost as many of those 160HP 172R IO-360s operating than there are the 180/200HP variants, but that is neither here nor there as you still said the IO-360 was rated at 180 or 200HP which was flat out incorrect for a large portion of the IO-360 engines in service. You're the one who brought Rotax 160HP limitations into the thread about the Deltahawk anyway, lol.
No, there aren't. The low RPM 160 HP version of what is normally a 180 HP engine in parallel valve configuration, or a 200 HP in angle valve configuration, is a specialty engine used for a very specific application. It pays a substantial price in climb and high altitude performance by being limited to only 2400 rpm, but lasts a very, very long time even when flown by students - who don't fly at high altitude.
Last edited:
SoonerAviator
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2014
- Messages
- 9,356
- Location
- Broken Arrow, OK
- Display Name
Display name:
SoonerAviator
I'd need to see numbers, simply because there were a ton of 172Rs produced (roughly 579 in the dirst year of production vs 21 of the SP-model in that same time period. It's still irrelevant as there are a ton of 160HP io-360 made since the post-restart 172 had that engine for most of the 172 produced. Just accept it.
Sierra_Hotel
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2019
- Messages
- 982
- Display Name
Display name:
Sierra_Hotel
Something about wrestling pigs comes to mind.
Warmi
Line Up and Wait
Rotax 915/916 modded to 180 HP with 160 hp continuous.
There are a few LSA manufacturers in Europe who started offering this one as an option.
shop.edgeperformance.no
There are a few LSA manufacturers in Europe who started offering this one as an option.
EP917Ti - 180HP (Turbo/EFI/FADEC)
€48.275 ex. VAT The markets best power to weight ratio engine !
FancyG
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2020
- Messages
- 383
- Display Name
Display name:
FancyG
The future for 'affordable' personal aircraft increasingly looks Experimental.The future for what? Home builders?
The top selling airplanes in the US right now are Cirrus SR20/22/22T, DA40, and C172. The Vision Jet at #7 sells almost as many (90) as Piper Archers (93). Heck, you have to lump all of the Tecnam LSAs together to out-sell the twin DA62 by itself. Otherwise, there are no LSAs in the top ten; Cirrus has nearly half of the GA market by themselves (look at piston sales and then add Vision).
Which of those top sellers is a candidate for a Rotax?
10 best-selling piston airplanes in 2022 — General Aviation News
What were the top selling piston airplanes in 2022? Cirrus leads the pack, taking the first, second, and fifth spots on the top 10 list.
None of those listed seem particularly affordable or suited for the current Rotax offerings.
My gut feeling is that the Cirri are partnership/business planes and the Pipers are school planes so they're GA in type but not in spirit.
Warmi
Line Up and Wait
No wonder they sell maybe a few hundred total … what used to be a product that was somewhat affordable to upper middle class and professionals is now pretty much entirely reserved for multimillionaires …
Jim_R
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2010
- Messages
- 1,842
- Display Name
Display name:
Jim
Too many of the planes that were affordable to the upper middle class and professionals from 1950-1985 are still available, and still priced where they are affordable to upper middle class and professionals. If that available fleet of aircraft wasn't meeting demand, they'd be selling for much higher prices.
The multimillionaires aren't interested in 50 year old aircraft with ratty paint and interiors or in 30 year-old aircraft with dull paint and fair interiors. They're interested in the shiniest toy in the box with all the bells and whistles.
Those are two completely different market segments, and demand is being met in both.
Warmi
Line Up and Wait
But thats like claiming that automotive markets in places like Cuba are basically healthy with just about everyone driving increasingly older and junkier 50 years old cars with just a few folks being able to afford new models - after all demand is being met in both markets …
tspear
En-Route
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2010
- Messages
- 3,508
- Display Name
Display name:
Timothy
Not really that open. It is a highly regulated product, with extensive liability issues, with significant infrastructure capital paid for by tax dollars (airports)....
Tim