spelling correction
"Jim Macklin" wrote
in message news:MMYWg.2126$XX2.1083@dukeread04...
| All internal combustion engines work the same. A turbine
| just does it as a series of continuous events in different
| sections of the engine and a piston engine does one at a
| time so power is produced only 1/4 of the time in a 4
cycle
| and 1/2 the time in a two cycle.
| I'm going to print some T-shirts...
|
| "SUCK
| SQUEEZE
| BANG and
| BLOW
|
| Get your mind out of the gutter, it is an engine"
|
|
| The P&W PT6 is perhaps the most popular turboprop. It
uses
| air coupling between the power and reduction gear section.
| Makes it better in many ways, but there is a loss of
| efficiency.
|
|
| "Emily" wrote in message
| ...
|| cjcampbell wrote:
|| Emily wrote:
|| cjcampbell wrote:
|| Mxsmanic wrote:
|| cjcampbell writes:
||
|| A turborprop
|| increases safety, but now you are talking real
| money, both in
|| acquisition cost and in fuel and maintenance.
|| Why are turboprops so much more expensive? I
thought
| gas turbines
|| were supposed to be simpler and more efficient.
|| They are simple, but much less efficient than piston
| engines.
|| Plus, parts are a lot more expensive and when things
go
| very bad, the
|| maintenance costs are a lot more than a piston. That
| alone scares a lot
|| of operators off.
||
|| Ok, actually, I don't know much about turboprops, but
| that's the case
|| for turbofans.
||
|| From a maintenance standpoint, just think of a
turboprop
| as being a
|| turbofan with a lot less blades.
||
|| LOL...yeah, the whole gas generator and power tubine
thing
| seems a
|| little to complex. I'm sure at some point I understand
| it, but you
|| forget what you don't use.
|
|