twin-engine kits available

In article ,
Steve Hix wrote:

In article
,
JohnO wrote:

On Jan 18, 10:44*am, jan olieslagers
wrote:
JohnO schreef:

On Jan 17, 12:58 pm, wrote:
I'm doing some research on what kits are available that are a twin-
engine design.

I'm looking at possibly building and was curious since Google finds
the obvious but didn't want to wade through 20 pages of stuff to find
the non-obvious.

Thanks.

-brad walker

Hi Brad, the big question on my mind is WHY?

Now just imagine he had answered that for himself before posting

Those kits looked horribly expensive. I wonder what the Tecnam P2006
will sell for?

The current guess is US$250K. (I'm doing BFR prep with a Tecnam dealer.
It's been 32 years since I last flew...things are different from then.)

Meanwhile, from another post on this thread...I'm going to ask tomorrow
about the price again; it being not unlikely that I got it wrong.

Steve Hix schreef:

Meanwhile, from another post on this thread...I'm going to ask tomorrow
about the price again; it being not unlikely that I got it wrong.

You might wish to consult http://www.tecnam.com/brouchure/BrP2006T.pdf
which says 260.000 euro's - at the current rate of exchange 260.000 US$
will not do. Horribly expensive, yes, it is that.

In article ,
jan olieslagers wrote:

Steve Hix schreef:

Meanwhile, from another post on this thread...I'm going to ask tomorrow
about the price again; it being not unlikely that I got it wrong.

You might wish to consult http://www.tecnam.com/brouchure/BrP2006T.pdf

Woof!

which says 260.000 euro's - at the current rate of exchange 260.000 US$
will not do. Horribly expensive, yes, it is that.

More like US$380,000 currently. Which seems more than a touch high,
given that their singles are currently running around $100K, using about
the same engine that the 2006T will. Double the price, such a deal!

Triple or nearly quadruple, not so much.

I wonder what dealer cost would be, come to think about it...

Ooh, I like the look of that A-28.

It looks pretty small - not so sure it would be a true four-seater.
Maybe 2+2.



jan olieslagers wrote:
schreef:
I'm doing some research on what kits are available that are a twin-
engine design.

I'm looking at possibly building and was curious since Google finds
the obvious but didn't want to wade through 20 pages of stuff to find
the non-obvious.

You could have a look at
http://www.aeroprakt.kiev.ua/eng_html/main.html
they have two twin designs the A-28 and A-36.
But it's unclear to me if these are offered as kits,
and as I presume you're in the USA
they might well be too far anyway.
kA

On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:58:54 -0800 (PST), wrote:

I'm doing some research on what kits are available that are a twin-
engine design.

I'm looking at possibly building and was curious since Google finds
the obvious but didn't want to wade through 20 pages of stuff to find
the non-obvious.

Thanks.

-brad walker

Also the Rutan Defiant (push/pull centerline thrust twin), but it was
a plans built - not a kit built.

-Nathan

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 10:22:36 -0600, Allen Browning
wrote:

From the KitPlanes Magazine 2008 Kit Buyer's Guide

Creative Flight Aerocat TR - uses Jabiru 3300 www.creativeflight.com

Lockwood Aircraft Air Cam - uses Rotax 912S www.lockwoodaircraft.com

VSTOL Aircraft Corporation SST2000 - uses Hirth 3203 vstolaircraft.com

Aw come on, you missed the most obvious utility twin. The Cri Cri.
:-)) Economical on gas too:-))

Roger




wrote:
I'm doing some research on what kits are available that are a twin-
engine design.

I'm looking at possibly building and was curious since Google finds
the obvious but didn't want to wade through 20 pages of stuff to find
the non-obvious.

Thanks.

-brad walker

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote

Aw come on, you missed the most obvious utility twin. The Cri Cri.
:-)) Economical on gas too:-))
Someone mentioned that one, But that is an interesting one! g

I think I remember seeing one with two engines on each pod. So, how many
here have ever flown an aircraft with 4 honkin' engines? g

That would make some sense. Two to maintain flight, and 4 for takeoff and
climb.

I think it would probably need to have tip tanks and wet wings, though!
:-))
--
Jim in NC

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote

Aw come on, you missed the most obvious utility twin. The Cri Cri.
:-)) Economical on gas too:-))
Someone mentioned that one, But that is an interesting one! g

I think I remember seeing one with two engines on each pod. So, how many
here have ever flown an aircraft with 4 honkin' engines? g

That would make some sense. Two to maintain flight, and 4 for takeoff and
climb.

I think it would probably need to have tip tanks and wet wings, though!
:-))
--
Jim in NC

I have personally wasted more time with a scratch pad than I really care to
admit--exploring the concept of a multi engine homebuilt. In the end,
except for a few special cases like the Cri-Cri or the Air-Cam, I doubt that
there is enough of a market to develope a kit.

Basically, if you demand the ability to maintain altitude with one engine
inoperative and you eliminate the constant speed props that make multi
engined aircraft competitive; then you make no gain in speed or payload
compared to an equivalent single using a climb prop. You do gain usefull
load, but it goes into added fuel; and you gain gross weight, but it goes
into the additional engine, fuel, and structure.

Alternatively, if you add in the costs and complexity of the parts that
normally make multi engine viable, such as constant speed props; then the
cost and the build time increase dramatically. In the end, a used and type
certified twin makes more sense--unless it simply does not exist for the
proposed mission.

Peter

"Peter Dohm" wrote in message
. ..

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Roger (K8RI)" wrote

Aw come on, you missed the most obvious utility twin. The Cri Cri.
:-)) Economical on gas too:-))
Someone mentioned that one, But that is an interesting one! g

I think I remember seeing one with two engines on each pod. So, how many
here have ever flown an aircraft with 4 honkin' engines? g

That would make some sense. Two to maintain flight, and 4 for takeoff
and climb.

I think it would probably need to have tip tanks and wet wings, though!
:-))
--
Jim in NC

I have personally wasted more time with a scratch pad than I really care
to admit--exploring the concept of a multi engine homebuilt. In the end,
except for a few special cases like the Cri-Cri or the Air-Cam, I doubt
that there is enough of a market to develope a kit.

Basically, if you demand the ability to maintain altitude with one engine
inoperative and you eliminate the constant speed props that make multi
engined aircraft competitive; then you make no gain in speed or payload
compared to an equivalent single using a climb prop. You do gain usefull
load, but it goes into added fuel; and you gain gross weight, but it goes
into the additional engine, fuel, and structure.

Alternatively, if you add in the costs and complexity of the parts that
normally make multi engine viable, such as constant speed props; then the
cost and the build time increase dramatically. In the end, a used and
type certified twin makes more sense--unless it simply does not exist for
the proposed mission.

Peter

I ran pretty much the same numbers and came to the same conclusion.

My goal was a personal airplane that could carry a motorcycle weighing about
600 pounds. Hoisting a bike this size in through a side door didn't look
attractive so I wound up with a sort of baby C-130 with two engines and a
tail ramp.

For economy reasons I really wanted a single but the geometry just gets
really weird. Any cargo that heavy has to go on the CG if you intend to be
able to fly without it. With the price of avgas these days, it makes more
sense to just ride the motorcycle to the destination.

Bill D

Bill Daniels

On Jan 16, 5:58*pm, wrote:
I'm doing some research on what kits are available that are a twin-
engine design.

I'm looking at possibly building and was curious since Google finds
the obvious but didn't want to wade through 20 pages of stuff to find
the non-obvious.

Thanks.

-brad walker

this might be fun:

http://www.zenithair.com/gemini/

Even though they have a prototype it is on hold ...