On Feb 15, 4:12*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Thomas Borchert wrote :



Peter,

AFAIK this was forced on them by all the failure

Sorry, but that's completely wrong. "Power by the hour" was a Thielert
concept from the get-go.

But I bet the "scrap" engines get reworked by Thielert

You lose.

Why is it that each and every innovation in GA is met by people
spouting OWTs and made-up speculation, when a minute or two of simple
research would provide the facts? What picture does that paint of the
pilot population and their "hangar talk"? How about a simple "I don't
know and that's why I keep quiet on this" instead of spouting made-up
negatives? Sorry, but this is really annoying.

There's nothing made up about "No sparks, no power" I wouldn't buy one
because of this. My club was looking at one ofr a Cherokee and decided
against it because of the lack of limp home capability.


You based a decision on an engine on the fact it did not need
electricity? Since when does adding a complex ignition system add
reliability? All a diesel needs is air and fuel, the fuel pump and
injectors are no more complicated that for petrol engines so that
would be a big boost in potential reliability (given the poor
performance of mags and plugs) in my book..

That apart, I'd like to dig a bit deeper into this reliability issue.
What percentage of Lycs or Cons mahe it to TBO without major part
replacements (such as cylinders, cylinder heads, magnetos etc.). Put
another way, is there anyone here who has _ever_ seen one go to TBO
without major working?

Cheers