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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Car engine FAA certified for airplane use
Hans Conser wrote: Page 18 Feb issue of Flying: "FAA Certifies Auto Engine Conversion In November the FAA granted type certification to the Thielert Aircraft Engines (TAE) TAE 125-01 four cylinder aviation diesel engine. The model is a diesel automotive engine, made by DaimlerChrysler, which TAE converts for airplane use by adding a gearbox and other aviation specific parts. The certification for the engine, known as the Centurion 1.7, is the first of its kind for the FAA. The approval surprised many industry observers because it entailed producing an engine with parts that the manufacturer (DaimlerChrysler) would not verify. But the FAA was surprisingly willing to work within this restriction and allowed Thielert to verify, through a combination of component testing, parts validation, test stand runs, and ongoing testing that the engine, and the parts that make it up, meet an acceptable level of safety. To our knowledge, the certification of the engine also entails another first, the approval of a powerplant with a timer before before replacement (TBR) limit--1000 hours or 12 years, whichever is first--with no overhaul allowed. When the engine reaches one of those milestones the owner must replace it with a new engine. The company is working toward a 2,400 hour TBR, and will pro-rate replacement engines from the beginning at the 2400 hour figure. Thielert plans to offer an STC for retrofit installations of the engine in Cessna Skyhawks. Diamond is developing its Twin-Star light twin around the Centurion 1.7 engine, and OMF is working on a diesel version of its two-place Symphony." Perhaps it is time to certify the 13B. Hans Al Gietzen wrote: Hum-m-m; kind of puts Lycoming and Continental on notice, doesn't it? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Thielert already has a 2400 hour TBR in hand for this engine. And they
have an STC for the 172 N and P series airplanes, as well as some Piper models, but last I heard they were having some troubles with a shortage of vendor-supplied items. They didn't specify what those items were, but I imagine it has to do with engine mounts or radiators or something. I hope it isn't the engine manufacturer being stubborn. The 1.7 is a 135 HP engine. It produces more static thrust than the original Lycoming it replaces, although that's through a CS prop. The HP is rated at 2300 RPM, which is why the airplane's performance isn't affected by the lower HP. At the 2700 RPM of the Lyc so much power is lost to the much higher propeller drag that the 135 at 2300 is able to match it. It burns a bit over 4 GPH of diesel or Jet A, and fuel savings over the life of the engine we have figured at about $40,000 CDN. The engine's cost is about the same as a factory reman Lyc O-320, but I imagine the initial installation would add considerably to that. Go to http://www.centurion-engines.com/ Dan "Cy Galley" wrote in message news:UA0Rb.22152$U%5.168426@attbi_s03... Hans Conser wrote: Page 18 Feb issue of Flying: "FAA Certifies Auto Engine Conversion In November the FAA granted type certification to the Thielert Aircraft Engines (TAE) TAE 125-01 four cylinder aviation diesel engine. The model is a diesel automotive engine, made by DaimlerChrysler, which TAE converts for airplane use by adding a gearbox and other aviation specific parts. The certification for the engine, known as the Centurion 1.7, is the first of its kind for the FAA. The approval surprised many industry observers because it entailed producing an engine with parts that the manufacturer (DaimlerChrysler) would not verify. But the FAA was surprisingly willing to work within this restriction and allowed Thielert to verify, through a combination of component testing, parts validation, test stand runs, and ongoing testing that the engine, and the parts that make it up, meet an acceptable level of safety. To our knowledge, the certification of the engine also entails another first, the approval of a powerplant with a timer before before replacement (TBR) limit--1000 hours or 12 years, whichever is first--with no overhaul allowed. When the engine reaches one of those milestones the owner must replace it with a new engine. The company is working toward a 2,400 hour TBR, and will pro-rate replacement engines from the beginning at the 2400 hour figure. Thielert plans to offer an STC for retrofit installations of the engine in Cessna Skyhawks. Diamond is developing its Twin-Star light twin around the Centurion 1.7 engine, and OMF is working on a diesel version of its two-place Symphony." Perhaps it is time to certify the 13B. Hans Al Gietzen wrote: Hum-m-m; kind of puts Lycoming and Continental on notice, doesn't it? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Cy
Wonder how they are going to prevent miss-fueling 172's with two types of engines? Have different nozzles like used for unleaded gas in automobiles or??????????? If I had a 172 with a Lyc or Con, I'd stand and watch each fueling to be sure I got the correct fuel when the Centurions start showing up.. Big John On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 04:21:08 GMT, "Cy Galley" wrote: Hans Conser wrote: Page 18 Feb issue of Flying: "FAA Certifies Auto Engine Conversion ----clip---- |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 17:50:51 -0800, Dan Thomas wrote:
Thielert already has a 2400 hour TBR in hand for this engine. And they have an STC for the 172 N and P series airplanes, as well as some Piper models, but last I heard they were having some troubles with a shortage of vendor-supplied items. They didn't specify what those items were, but I imagine it has to do with engine mounts or radiators or something. I hope it isn't the engine manufacturer being stubborn. The 1.7 is a 135 HP engine. It produces more static thrust than the original Lycoming it replaces, although that's through a CS prop. The HP is rated at 2300 RPM, which is why the airplane's performance isn't affected by the lower HP. At the 2700 RPM of the Lyc so much power is lost to the much higher propeller drag that the 135 at 2300 is able to match it. It burns a bit over 4 GPH of diesel or Jet A, and fuel savings over the life of the engine we have figured at about $40,000 CDN. The engine's cost is about the same as a factory reman Lyc O-320, but I imagine the initial installation would add considerably to that. Go to http://www.centurion-engines.com/ Dan It is interesting that they think static thrust is so important. Static thrust is only important if you are using the aircraft to pull out stumps. The thrust changes as soon as you start rolling ahead and then the comparisons of static thrust become meaningless. There is an FAQ on their web site "In a PA28 or a C172 with a CENTURION 1.7, can I expect the same or better take off, climb and cruise?" They admit that the climb performance with the Centurion engine will be lower (due to the lower power output - even with the constant speed prop). And they carefully don't mention cruise speed at all. I wonder why? -- Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) Ottawa, Canada http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/ e-mail: khorton02(_at_)rogers(_dot_)com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Jet fuel has a larger nozzle. I don't know whether you can fuel a gas 172
with the larger nozzle. I know at one time Beech was trying to get restrictors in the openings of Bonanzas. -- Cy Galley Editor, EAA Safety Programs or "Big John" wrote in message news Cy Wonder how they are going to prevent miss-fueling 172's with two types of engines? Have different nozzles like used for unleaded gas in automobiles or??????????? If I had a 172 with a Lyc or Con, I'd stand and watch each fueling to be sure I got the correct fuel when the Centurions start showing up.. Big John On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 04:21:08 GMT, "Cy Galley" wrote: Hans Conser wrote: Page 18 Feb issue of Flying: "FAA Certifies Auto Engine Conversion ----clip---- |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Cy Galley" wrote in message news:W9GRb.167062$I06.1661204@attbi_s01...
Jet fuel has a larger nozzle. I don't know whether you can fuel a gas 172 with the larger nozzle. I know at one time Beech was trying to get restrictors in the openings of Bonanzas. Make it even easier to prevent misfueling....go to single point refueling... Craig C. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I don't understand how single point fueling will do a better job of
preventing using the wrong fuel. "Craig" wrote in message om... "Cy Galley" wrote in message news:W9GRb.167062$I06.1661204@attbi_s01... Jet fuel has a larger nozzle. I don't know whether you can fuel a gas 172 with the larger nozzle. I know at one time Beech was trying to get restrictors in the openings of Bonanzas. Make it even easier to prevent misfueling....go to single point refueling... Craig C. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Cy Galley" wrote in message news:msVRb.177072$na.286827@attbi_s04...
I don't understand how single point fueling will do a better job of preventing using the wrong fuel. Going to a single point system requires the use of a special pressure feed nozzle. The nozzle locks onto a mating recepticle on the a/c. With this system, all tanks are filled through the single connection. The system is a bit of overkill ( to put it mildly ) for small a/c, but we are going to start seeing it soon with the practicality of the personal jet ever closer. Craig C. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Big John wrote:
Cy Wonder how they are going to prevent miss-fueling 172's with two types of engines? Have different nozzles like used for unleaded gas in automobiles or??????????? If I had a 172 with a Lyc or Con, I'd stand and watch each fueling to be sure I got the correct fuel when the Centurions start showing up.. Big John snipped I have an RV-4 with a Lyc & I stand and watch each fueling to be sure I got the correct fuel (type & quantity). Now. Centurion powered 172's or not. Charlie |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Accident Statistics: Certified vs. Non-Certified Engines | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 23 | January 18th 04 05:36 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 1 | January 2nd 04 09:02 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | October 2nd 03 03:07 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 4 | August 7th 03 05:12 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | July 4th 03 04:50 PM |