future engines maybe

[Brett]

I wonder if this engine will ever be a option in some aircraft in the future ;)

 

http://www.microjeteng.com/prop.html

 

 

[Deskpilot]

You betcha, but probably not in RAA aircraft. We are too tightly confined to allow experimentation. Why, we can't even have contra rotating props which, ignoring weight and engineering problems, make for a safer plane than a single prop with its inherent torque. When I voted for part 103, I made comments to the same effect and requested that the door be left ajar so that we could add, in small ways, to the advancement of aircraft design and manufacture. It probably fell on deaf ears but I had my say.

 

Cheers, Doug

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

turbo props.once you have flown an aircraft with these you will not want to go back to piston engines. they are so smooth, reliable and are capable of long life in the right hands.just a little expensive to set up. and they will run on any type of fuel. the garrett 80shp APU is an engine worth looking at. I wonder how far we would be down the track if we wern't over regulated 103 needs tossing in the bin.

 

my interest is in the small jets and electric power.

 

how long before the next election?

 

 

[eastmeg2]

That's a lovely dream, I suppose that even 95.10 wouldn't allow it. Imagine putting one of these babies on a Sapphire or Vampire.

 

BUT, where are the spec's & numbers on these?

 

Weight?

 

Fuel burn rate?

 

Hrs TBO?

 

Will it run on old banana skins, "they will run on any type of fuel" - Just kiding

 

 

[Guest micgrace]

Hi

 

Great dream. Except for one minor detail. fuel burn. 2.5 L/min for a measly 150lb thrust? Might just be able to do a circuit in 95.10 guise.

 

Micgrace

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

I have done a bit of time with turbines flying and working on them. (the only thing i don't like about them is the synthetic oil they use. very thin hot and bad for your health. ) I read a story somewhere of a challenger ultralight with the garrett set up as a pusher. it is basically a TPE type. It was used in a powercart. also used for pumping oil in pipelines. pretty impractical for fuel burn they need bums on seats and altitude to be economical. They will run on most fuels. just adjust the FCU for fuel densitys. turbine agplanes have approval to run on diesel but limited to hight and oat temp due to wax seperating in cold. i just love the smell of jet a in the morning. serious tho it would be great to be able to put whatever powerplant in a 95 10 without the hurdels. i don't think it will change in whats coming up. but as it stands if i had the money to waste i could have three different types of motive power. piston, microjet, and electric. And out of the three the original piston engines produce the least power and would be the most unreliable. but in the end the most practical. the microjets would just be a novelty. but the electric version is looking like a real goer within 12 mths. once set up it will take less than 30 minutes to swap both sides over. or one of each maybe just for fun.

 

photo 'riding a PT6'

 

 

 

[Guest Chris Rhoades]

Just seen the engine.

 

Something not quite right here - the exhaust stream should be frying the electrics in the test van and unless the grey 'bearing' unit before the prop is a compound epicyclic gearbox the prop will be doing 50,000+ rev/min with the tiny turbine.

 

Pity though, it's a nice thought.