(John Clear) wrote in message ...
(cut)
Larry Ellison, CEO of Oracle, and owner of many big boy toys, is
also a fan of aviation. The story goes that he was talking with
Wayne Handley and Sean Tucker after some airshow, and they hatched
the idea of the Turbo Raven. Cost isn't much of an issue for Larry
Ellison, since he is way up there on the various 'richest people'
lists.

As you concede yourself, when it comes to aerobatic airplanes there
exists a source of financing which generallty doesn´t exist for
private airplanes: Sponsoring. Therefore, the cost argument in itself
can only explain the relative scarcity of turboprop engines in private
aircraft, but not the near absence of turboprop engines in aerobatic
aircraft.


Another post mentioned the difference between aerobatics and
competition aerobatics. The T-6A and various other trainers are
aerobatic turboprops, but they don't have to worry about staying
in the competition aerobatic box, which is quite tiny. The cost of
a turboprop, and the size of the box are probably the main reasons
they aren't used on competition planes.

If the competition aerobatic box tends to be too small for turboprop
planes, then it is inconceivable why they do not install a greater
competition box for turboprop planes.

The maintenance requirements
on the turboprop would probably also be an issue.

The Turbo Raven was just a show plane, in the same category as the
jet powered Waco. Fun to watch, but totally ridiculous.

John

Well now, this jet powered Whacko is nothing but a piston biplane
with a turbojet strapped to its belly. And this turbojet engine has a
bent exhaust pipe - kind of like a turboprop. As long as I haven´t
seen more data on this plane or seen it fly, I won´t believe that this
setup has much more than decorative value.

And now you come and compare this thing with .... a classical
turboprop plane? Sorry, but that´s what I would call ridiculous. You
know as well as I do, that turbomachinery rules the airwaves - exept
for a relative scarcity among private airplanes and a next to absence
among aerobatic aircraft. And this is clearly a non trivial fact which
requires a cogent explanation.

Peter H.