Tomo Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 This looks promising! http://www.australianflying.com.au/news/cessna-introduces-jet-a-182-skylane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SAJabiruflyer Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 One could safely assume that Tomo will fly one as soon as it hits the country!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eightyknots Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 This looks promising! http://www.australianflying.com.au/news/cessna-introduces-jet-a-182-skylane It does look promising. But what are SMA Engines? (I have never heard of them) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damkia Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 It does look promising. But what are SMA Engines? (I have never heard of them) http://www.smaengines.com/?lang=en Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eightyknots Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 http://www.smaengines.com/?lang=en Interesting that the Yanks couldn't design such an engine and the Cessna crowd had to go to the Frogs to get a piston (diesel) engine to run on Jet A-1 fuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 I'm not surprised .As I read it, the french and spanish have been leaders in this technology for a while. The motor would have to be heavy and I think it runs a flywheel near the prop Might be a torsional vibration damper. When calculating weights and consumption figures remember Diesel and jet fuel are more dense than avgas. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damkia Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 I'm not surprised .As I read it, the french and spanish have been leaders in this technology for a while. The motor would have to be heavy and I think it runs a flywheel near the prop Might be a torsional vibration damper. When calculating weights and consumption figures remember Diesel and jet fuel are more dense than avgas. Nev Diesels generally burn less fuel mass per hp than petrol, anywhere from 10-20% less. Although diesel/Jet A1 weighs more, you need to carry less for the same range and hp. Having the "excess" mass in the equation fixed as a heavier motor rather than "variable" fuel supply would work to the advantage of most aircraft weight and balance requirements. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 I'm not surprised .As I read it, the french and spanish have been leaders in this technology for a while. The motor would have to be heavy and I think it runs a flywheel near the prop Might be a torsional vibration damper. When calculating weights and consumption figures remember Diesel and jet fuel are more dense than avgas. Nev I spent a lot of time boring holes in racing fuel to make it lighter, but it was never successful. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 I suppose if the pilot was more dense it would affect the performance too. I don't know about making holes in diesel, but you can make Holy water out of ordinary water by boiling hell out of it Nev 5 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 Diesel is more dense, so heavier, than petrol but you need less of it so there's an equalizer. We used to use power kerosene in tractors, simple technology, but in those years the engine had to warm up on petrol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damkia Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 I suppose if the pilot was more dense it would affect the performance too. I don't know about making holes in diesel, but you can make Holy water out of ordinary water by boiling hell out of it Nev But do you know what you can ADD to a bucket of water to make it lighter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Howard Hughes Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 41 Litres per hour is pretty good! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 But do you know what you can ADD to a bucket of water to make it lighter? I'll bite, what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 Take the Diesel/ jet A1 Litres X the SG annd compare it with the Avgas X the SG and it's not so good. Mass of fuel is what the load worries about. Paying for it is another important matter not directly relating to the actual operating of the plane. Fire considerations can be better but not eliminated..Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 Freeze it I suppose, but the bucket will split. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naremman Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 Diesel is more dense, so heavier, than petrol but you need less of it so there's an equalizer.We used to use power kerosene in tractors, simple technology, but in those years the engine had to warm up on petrol. Not only an agriculturist Turbz, but an ancient one as well!! We still have an Oliver 88 running on the farm, but I try and blank my memories of driving the damn thing. A petrol only proposition these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 I haven't seen power kerosene for sale for a long time. We used to use it in the firelighters when we were burning off. Remember how it burnt your skin if you let it spill on you? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damkia Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 But do you know what you can ADD to a bucket of water to make it lighter? I'll bite, what? Freeze it I suppose, but the bucket will split. Nev A hole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 But it has to be in the bottom. Sheesh this is BS. Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 I was going to say boil it after you said freeze it, but we might just as well have said tip the water out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamloops Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 The engine is plagued with problems, and Cessna has killed this project. They are returning the turbocharged gas 540 engine to the line up soon though. So for those who want a 182, but a Turbo 182 instead of the naturally aspirated model....this is good news. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmccarthy Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 To make water weigh less, add air. That is how an air-lift pump works. If you inject compressed air down a rising main in a well or mine shaft, the reduced density makes the water rise to the top and flow out of the riser. It isn't the compressed air "blowing" the water, it is just the bubbles reducing the density and making it float up in the surrounding normal water. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted November 18, 2015 Share Posted November 18, 2015 Fizzy Champagne makes you light headed. Same principle? Nev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now