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 » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cessna's new LSA: "Skycatcher"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 24th 07, 11:54 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,232
Default Cessna's new LSA: "Skycatcher"

Jim Stewart wrote:
wrote:
: Don't knock the O-200 quite so fast. The 162 is getting the "D"
model : engine, the Type Spec of which hasn't even been issued, yet.
I would be : surprised if Continental doesn't incorporate some
improvements to the : cylinder design. As a rugged, easy-to-maintain
light aircraft : powerplant, I personally think they made a good choice.

I'm not "knocking" it so much as I lament a brand new aircraft not
using new technology. TBO doesn't take into account cylinder
overhauls, which are routinely required on old-school air-cooled
aircraft engines. I'm been plagued with sticking valves on my O-360
since I got my Cherokee and taking a step *backwards* from that (WRT
cooling, compression ratio, etc) seems silly.

If the "D" models has the improvements you suggest, then it's a
good compromise. If not, it's a rather disappointing choice. Perhaps
with 110 HP it'd go faster than allowed in a LSA?


Another issue is the reduction gear that
comes with a 912. If you value the lower
vibration levels and more optimum prop
and engine rpms, it's a benefit you don't
get with the Continental.


Is the prop RPM in cruise really any lower than a Conti? Most reduction
units are simply to get the prop RPM low enough to decent efficiency and
seldom get much lower than a direct drive airplane engine.

Matt
  #2  
Old July 25th 07, 06:54 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning
Snowbird
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 96
Default Cessna's new LSA: "Skycatcher"


"Matt Whiting" wrote
Is the prop RPM in cruise really any lower than a Conti? Most reduction
units are simply to get the prop RPM low enough to decent efficiency and
seldom get much lower than a direct drive airplane engine.


The reduction gear ratio on the 912S is 1:2.43. This means a prop RPM of
2386 rpm at max power and around 2000-2100 rpm in cruise. Very sweet and
efficient.


  #3  
Old July 25th 07, 11:57 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.owning
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,232
Default Cessna's new LSA: "Skycatcher"

Snowbird wrote:
"Matt Whiting" wrote
Is the prop RPM in cruise really any lower than a Conti? Most reduction
units are simply to get the prop RPM low enough to decent efficiency and
seldom get much lower than a direct drive airplane engine.


The reduction gear ratio on the 912S is 1:2.43. This means a prop RPM of
2386 rpm at max power and around 2000-2100 rpm in cruise. Very sweet and
efficient.



I don't have the efficiency curves handy. That sounds pretty slow for a
small diameter prop.

Matt
 




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
Old polish aircraft TS-8 "Bies" ("Bogy") - for sale >pk Aviation Marketplace 0 October 16th 06 07:48 AM
More on Cessna's new "Cirrus Killer" [email protected] Piloting 49 November 13th 05 02:29 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:30 AM.


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