A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A36 Bonanza turbo prop



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #29  
Old January 2nd 04, 05:37 AM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I didn't design the conversion or even talk to the guy who did but consider
that there are a number or constraints:

1) Vmo (which will be the same as Vno in the piston Bonanza)
2) Mmo, does anyone even know what the maximium permissable mach number is
for a Bonanza? Probably even Beech does not.
3) Weight and balance, you can't put a huge engine out in front.
4) Fuel burn at expected altitudes (high teens) a bigger compressor takes a
lot of power to turn at low altitudes. At sea level my TPE 331s each burn
36gph idling (the props are at flat pitch..

I think (guess) that they were looking for somewhat better performance than
a turbocharged piston Bonanza across the existiong flight envelope, but not
to extend that envelope too far in either speed or altitude. If they put an
engine into the airplane that would make 300hp at FL310, they would probably
have to completely re-flight-test the airplane.

I am a little confused by your post as well. An engine can only make its
thermodynamic horsepower at sea level and ISA, so you are below that at any
flight altitude.

Mike
MU-2


wrote in message
...
On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 16:25:57 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
wrote:

If it had more compressor capacity then we would want a larger turbine

for
more power. The real question is how high do you want to go in an
unpreasurized airplane?


Now you're confusing me. I don't expect any turboprop airplane to run
out of poop in the low teens. Max rated thermo hp isn't the issue,
it's running out of it before getting to an altitude where acceptable
gains in true airspeed are made.

The real question is how much power is available and the specific fuel
consumption in let's say between 9,000-15,000 msl.

Again, unless they've made some big changes in the powerplant, you
don't need to worry about getting too "high" unpressurised.

TC


You're a turbine guy, you should be familiar with the effects/affects
of altitude with respect to turbine temp and available power produced
at altitude.

Unless things have changed one heckuva lot since I researched one for
a customer, the turbine A36 needs one heckuva lot more compressor.

TC







 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Right prop, wrong prop? Wood prop, metal prop? Gus Rasch Aerobatics 1 February 14th 08 10:18 PM
Ivo Prop on O-320 Dave S Home Built 14 October 15th 04 03:04 AM
Turbo prop AT-6/SNJ? frank may Military Aviation 11 September 5th 04 02:51 PM
IVO props... comments.. Dave S Home Built 16 December 6th 03 11:43 PM
Early Bonanza or Apache? Brinks Owning 11 July 16th 03 06:01 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.