new twin concept from Cirrus

In article .com,
"Kingfish" wrote:

All good points. Probably the best argument against the twin is that
Cirrus' singles are so damn fast already

nah - people seem to wants twins for night over-the-mountains and for hauling
more stuff

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

Kingfish,

Ah, a jet and a twin based on the single-engine design - and with
Thielerts. Now where have I heard that idea before? g

Hint: www.diamondaircraft.com

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Kingfish,

I think the next big thing
could be diesels, and a Thielert or SMA might be a nice addition to a
fast airframe.


I may have reported this here already, but I live in Hamburg, Germany,
home of the Thielert group. And at the Hamburg airport, I have seen
what seemed to be a prototype of an SR-22 fitted with the big 350-HP
Thielert. So there's hope, I guess. From what I hear, Cirrus has pretty
much given up on SMA. But I may be wrong...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas B wrote:

I have seen what seemed to be a prototype of an SR-22 fitted with the big 350-HP Thielert.

I kinda figured that would be the next evolution of that airframe. Did
the cowling look like it was modified?

Now where have I heard that idea before? g

Hint: www.diamondaircraft.com

Reference my second and third posts re the DA-42

"john smith" wrote in message
...
I don't see any economic advantage to adding a twin to their product
line. Their singles already offer "twin-like" speeds without the expense
of the second engine and systems. I don't see any evidence that there is
demand for a new piston twin.

The purpose of a twin is load capacity.

The development and certification costs alone would require that the
selling price be in the VLJ range.

And the maintenance $$ on those is a lot higher.

"Kingfish" wrote in message
oups.com...
John S. wrote:

I don't see any economic advantage to adding a twin to their product
line. Their singles already offer "twin-like" speeds without the
expense
of the second engine and systems. I don't see any evidence that there
is
demand for a new piston twin.

All good points and tough to argue. It was more of a "what if"
excercise. I'm sure if there was a good business case for a twin
Klapmier would be all over it.

I suspect he's up to his eyeballs already.

"Kingfish" wrote in message
oups.com...
All good points. Probably the best argument against the twin is that
Cirrus' singles are so damn fast already. I read recently about a
turbonormalizer STC for the SR22 that boosts the cruise up to 200kts.
Not a cheap mod for an extra 15kt on the top end, but the climb is
probably pretty impressive past 8k feet.

That's the main purpose of turbonormalizing, climb performance; and much
better "high and hot" performance.

There's a significant difference between tubronormalizing and
turbosupercharging and evidently that's what Cirrus is going after.

"Mike Schumann" wrote in message
.net...
I would be putting my money on a diesel engine. That would be huge in
Europe. With the price of gas going up in the US, it would be a big hit
here also.

It was my (mis?)understanding that a diesel is, HP/lb, heavier than a
standard aircraft engine, especially when getting into the higher (over 250)
HP models. Correct?
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO


Does it tell you something about our times
when a representative of the Taliban is
welcome on the Yale University campus
but representatives of our own military
forces are not? - Tom Sowell, May 1, 2006

Kingfish,

Did
the cowling look like it was modified?


Just a little. Some louver-type ventilation and such. But the engine is
heavier than the TCM.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Matt,

It was my (mis?)understanding that a diesel is, HP/lb, heavier than a
standard aircraft engine, especially when getting into the higher (over 250)
HP models. Correct?


Not necessarily, but the big Thielert at 350 HP is heavier than an IO-520/550.
60 pounds or so.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)