DIESEL ROTARY PISTON ENGINE

[Blackhawk]

In late 2009 we will begin production of three different size, High Torque Multi-fuel Radial Piston engines which will be Air-cooled and Fuel Injected.

 

There are very few engine choices in the 65HP to 120HP range at the moment and Diesel engines in particular, are virtually non existent for Recreational Aviation use.

 

We have Patents for the engines already in place for some countries with more to be submitted in early 2009 to give us full world wide protection.

 

Below are the specifications for the three engine designs (all Diesel, but can be configured to run on UL petrol at slightly less HP). They will have inbuilt gear ratios and drive configurations. All engines have a maximum 3000rpm and are designed to have the following drive options;

 

(1) Direct drive (for fixed wing and Gyro's) for all three capacity engines

 

(2) Direct drive with counter rotating shafts (for helicopters, fixed wing and Gyro's) for all three capacity engines.

 

(3) Direct drive with 500rpm on front output of engine and 3000rpm on the rear (for Helicopters only) for the 1600cc and 2000cc engines.

 

The specifications are as follows;

 

CAPICITY ............HORSEPOWER.............. DIAMETER ............WEIGHT

 

1200cc .....................70HP ............................510mm ................<50kg

 

1600cc .....................95HP ............................610mm ................<65kg

 

2000cc .....................120HP ..........................710mm .................<80kg

 

Production cost estimates put these engines at around 15 to 20% less than currently available petrol engines (Rotax in particular) of similar horsepower and considering a diesel has 26% more power than a petrol engine of the same displacement, this makes our Radial Piston Diesel a very viable alternative.

 

 

We are looking for 'serious' comments from members regarding these engines. We will be relying on your feedback so that we can determine the viability for us to proceed with the production and general consensus that they will be readily accepted throughout the aviation community.

 

I have attached a photo of the Petrol version proof of concept prototype engine.

 

Looking forward to your comments.

 

Regards

 

Graeme

 

 

 

[Guest palexxxx]

Do you have a website so that we can read more?

 

 

[Blackhawk]

That's all the infromation we are releasing at the moment so we can guage the vialability for production. Especially in this current economical climate.

 

Our web site was corrupted with MALWARE and is being rebuilt so I will let you know when it is back up and running.

 

Graeme

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

The 1200 sounds exactly what I need. Does the quoted weight include gearbox, exhaust, radiator, etc? When is the first one due out?

 

Old Koreelah

 

 

[Blackhawk]

Hi Lyle,

 

I thought you said you were going to to buy a Jabaru.

 

There's no gearbox or radiator and at the moment I can't give you any information on the exhaust weight.

 

Graeme

 

 

[Guest High Plains Drifter]

Rotary Piston engines

Heres me thinking i've found a close to original engine for my Sopwith replica, but further reading and i see the crank wont be bolted to the airframe

 

- Great idea a diesel radial - will it be jetA compatible ?

 

 

[Blackhawk]

Yes, it's a MULTI fuel engine.

 

I don't know about Tawney Port though.

 

Graeme

 

 

[Guest High Plains Drifter]

I don't know about Tawney Port though.

 

I think a drop of "Old Redemption" in the tank from time to time would extend TBO's ;)

 

 

[gofastclint]

Sounds brilliant and I wish you the best of luck.

 

Straight from the get go, it would be good if you could offer your engine with a prefabricated frame to mount on to popular firewalls.

 

 

[Blackhawk]

We'll definately look into that.

 

Graeme

 

 

[facthunter]

Description.

 

It's a piston radial configuration, isn't it? Why do you call it a rotary?. Is it a 2-stroke or a 4-stroke and liquid or air cooled? Lots of questions.

 

The Packard Co. in america built some (radial diesels) in the early thirties. and there was an east european brand called a ZOD. Quite a few German engines were produced as diesels but they were in-line opposed piston. (Junkers Jumo).

 

A rotary is normally regarded as a "wankel" type engine, whereas a "true" rotary is where the crankcase rotates with the cylinders and the crankshaft stays still. The propeller is attached to the engine, and turns with it. Nev..

 

 

[Blackhawk]

The engine doesn't have a crank shaft, the pistons are driven by a cam. Hence the term Rotary.

 

They are air cooled, but that might change before production and we can easily add valves for a 4 stroke configuration because of the simple way the engine is designed.

 

They are all common rail EFI.

 

Graeme

 

 

[gofastclint]

The engine doesn't have a crank shaft, the pistons are driven by a cam. Hence the term Rotary.They are air cooled, but that might change before production and we can easily add valves for a 4 stroke configuration because of the simple way the engine is designed.

 

They are all common rail EFI.

 

Graeme

what i like about the pistons moving a cam is that a higher percentage of the piston down force is transferred into actual shaft power as opposed to the force in a conventional combustion engine where maximum force in only when the crankshaft is at 90 degrees of the down ward force.

 

being a diesel, i hope you are using forced induction?

 

 

[Guest pelorus32]

G'day Graeme,

 

Nice engines.

 

From my point of view the form factor is going to be the limitation.

 

Most current LSA aircraft are designed and cowled for either a Jab or a Rotax engine.

 

If these engines are not bolt and cowl compatible with existing aircraft designed for the Rotax particularly then that will severely limit their uptake.

 

I'd be interested to know what your intentions are in that regard - we've been looking for a good reliable diesel for a while.

 

Regards

 

Mike

 

 

[geoffreywh]

very interesting, usually diesels are "compression ignition" but I see you have spark plugs fitted. do you have any consumption figures? as a radial "looking" engine will it stand fitting "out in the wind" and still be visually appealing? The 120hp looks great....

 

 

[Blackhawk]

Geoff,

 

The photo is the prototype petrol version, not a diesel.

 

We've decided to develope the diesel version instead of the Petrol.

 

Flying "out in the wind"................ YES!

 

Graeme

 

 

[gofastclint]

The powers of influence will love this engine if you can word it right.

 

Calculate a very rough figure of all light aircraft in the world running on Avgas, then try to figure out the carbon foot print, the throw in "if all planes flew on my engine" and also "use bio green fuel" and show the savings. talk in millions of tons of harmful emissions per year and you will get notices.

 

Sell the "green" and you will get backing.

 

Politicians feed on self promotion, they want to offer you funding for "green points" to make themselves seem good.

 

All they want to have on their resume is "wow I saved this much harmful gas going into the air"

 

 

[gofastclint]

Oh, I see you have posted on home built airplanes and got bombarded by the caveman holding a wing, yeah, he likes to do that. just don't make direct eye contact and you should be fine.

 

 

[Blackhawk]

What a well worded and true discription.

 

I had these types before that are happy to criticise beyond belief and never achieve anything in their lifetime for themselves.

 

I wonder what comments he would have made if he was around with the Wright Bros.

 

Graeme

 

 

[Yenn]

Blackhawk.

 

Please excuse us if we appear to be knockers, but I for one have seen things like this for years and nothing has come from them. Most seem to depend upon government money and when that dries up, so do they. One very succesfull firm in Australia dropped it's engine research and got into acoustics, another in Germany went broke leaving those who bought their engines without backup.

 

For us to take any engine seriously, we need a good description of it's type and fuel requirements.

 

To post a picture of a petrol engine while promoting a diesel, suggests to me that you are not taking us seriously.

 

Now that I know just about what you are talking about, my comment is that this has been tried before and gone nowhere. Probably due to lubrication problems, but Iwish you all the best in your endevour and hope that you can succeed in producing a better engine.

 

 

[Guest High Plains Drifter]

Yenn covers it fairly well. Probably wont be much more then well wishing support until there is an engine flying.

 

As an observer over the years, the difficulty's faced by Jabiru and Rotec were a lesson for me.

 

 

[Blackhawk]

Hi Ian,

 

I know exactly what you are talking about and I too have seen many good deigned engines over the past 10 years dissappear into oblivion. Not only unusual designs but many engines based on conventional engine thinking.

 

Every time I've searched for an engine to use and find one that will fulfill our needs, it fails to materialise and the search then starts again. This is the sole reason for us to get involved in developing these engines.

 

We have collaberated with a number of engineers to bring this concept forward and hope we will not fall into the same obis as the others. All original designs may have their failings initally but subsequent improvements by other imaginative thinkers can turn an average idea into an excellent one.

 

It wouldn't matter if you designed the most perfect of whatever, there would always be those that will ridicule and nock the whatever, for the sake of seeing their name in print or to voice their opinion, when in fact they haven't got a clue what their talking about. These people are usually the ones who eat three or more serves at a smorgasbord then complain the meal was rubbish.

 

And I know you are not one of these type of people, so your comments are

 

always taken onboard.

 

At least we are prepaired to put our necks on the chopping block no matter what the end results may bring.

 

Greame

 

 

[Guest High Plains Drifter]

...and I'd probably loose the word "rotary" from the engine description. Many pilots will associate it with blip throttles, or 60,000 rpm screamers, probably not what you want :thumb_up:

 

 

[gofastclint]

I would definitely loose the rotary term, not to be a bugga but its not a matter of what "is" the correct term, your business needs customer and the least amount of confusion the better. people look at it and see a radial regardless of the inside workings.

 

I can't wait to see your engine up and running on diesel, an exact release date would be good, I'll even get all my fly buddies down for a fly in BBQ for you to show your work.

 

everyone wants you to succeed, its just that there have been so many flops in the past.

 

In Russia Vedenyev use their radial engines to power generators, recreational aviation is too small a market, if you hooked your engine up to a stationary generator you would expand your business ten fold. Vedenyev engines run up to 20,000 hours as stationary generators, and thats good advertising.

 

If your engine is more efficent than the others it will naturally be bought as a generator.

 

Cater for the masses and have your nich as well, like how honda has their F1 and their family cars.

 

 

[facthunter]

Rotary?

 

It's not a rotary. The power is derived from reciprocating pistons. Whether they transmit their reciprocating motion to a rotating motion via a crank or some cam set-up is irrelevant. It's not an appropriate description..(my view). Nev..