![]() |
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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 15, 7:11*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
WingFlaps wrote : On Feb 15, 4:12*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote: Thomas Borchert wrote innews:VA.000077db.005 : 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? Read it again. 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? I have. Plenty of them. Seen at least one A-65 go to almost 4,000 hours In a cub trainer, in fact. I've seen lenty of others go past 2,000 with no nuttin changed. all working airplanes, though. OK, but what % of engines is that (is plenty say 1 in 20)? (I'll admit skepticism on the idea of a 4000 hour engine life with no rework -I can't imagine the compression figures) I question whether the reliability argument of petrol is not as sound as it might be so that people want a new engine to be unrealistically reliable without regard to other advantages. I'm not saying the thielert is the best but rather the diesel engine has so much going for it that it should replace petrol but resistance to change old technology will stop good progress. Cheers |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Thielert (Diesel Engines) | Charles Talleyrand | Piloting | 108 | February 19th 08 04:59 PM |
diesel 160-200HP engines | geo | Home Built | 27 | April 2nd 04 04:27 PM |
Diesel engines for Planes Yahoo Group Jodel Diesel is Isuzu Citroen Peugeot | Roland M | Home Built | 3 | September 13th 03 12:44 AM |
Diesel engines for Planes Yahoo Group Jodel Diesel is Isuzu Citroen Peugeot | Roland M | General Aviation | 2 | September 13th 03 12:44 AM |
Diesel engines for Planes Yahoo Group Jodel Diesel is Isuzu Citroen Peugeot | Roland M | Rotorcraft | 2 | September 13th 03 12:44 AM |