![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message ... In rec.aviation.owning Mike Rapoport wrote: wrote in message ... snip There's lots of ground turbines under 400hp so we know there's a market there; i.e. they must be practical and competive with pistons or they wouldn't sell. A lot of them are used to power natural gas compressors way out in the middle of nowhere and reliability is much more important than fuel efficiency and you have a large suitable fuel supply availible. True. So put it this way, if it were the turbine makers instead of the diesel makers that jumped on this bandwagon, what would be their smallest engine? Given the high initial cost of turbines and the hgiher fuel comsumption, I doubt that turbines would be competitive with gasoline engines given current price differentials between the two fuels. The beauty of a diesel aircraft engine is that it should cost the same as a gas engine, has fewer parts, uses less fuel and lasts longer. The turbine engine is more reliable but costs more and uses more fuel. The lower the hp the less competitive the turbine gets against the diesel. Your first sentence overlooks the fact that turbines are currently competitive at the Caravan level, but I pretty much agree with the rest. I don's see that I've overlooked something relative to the Caravan. The Caravan has a 940hp engine. There is currently no suitable piston engine to power such a large, single engine airplane. It couldn't be anything other than a turbine. OK, let's say I buy into about 400hp as the "up to now" crossover point. Even 400hp is not an economic crossover. It just represents the limit of what is practical in small aircraft turbine engines. The 400hp Allison turbine is really a helicopter engine anyway. The smallest practical application seems to be the around the Meridian/Caravan/TBM 700 size range and these engines are all around 1000hp. The engineers designing airplanes are not totally stupid, if it made sense to install 400hp turbines they would do so. Given the current fuel cost differential, where would you expect that point to move to assuming the engines were available? It depends on how powerful diesels get for aircraft. Under several thousand horsepower the diesel will always be cheaper and more fuel efficient than anything else. There probably isn't an economic crossover point for gasoline engines either unless the fuel price spread is artificially raised even higher than it is now. You have to remember that the HSI and overhaul costs on turbines is much greater than the cost of overhaul on a piston engine. Given that the small turbine is going to consume a lot more fuel and cost more to build and maintain it will never be cheaper. Turbines will be used in applications where cost is a secondary consideration to high power and high reliability. The gas turbine is a mature 60yr old technology, huge improvements in cost or efficiency are somewhat unlikely. For a really efficient turbine see http://www.turbokart.com/about_ge90.htm Jim Pennino Remove -spam-sux to reply. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|