Canard Community Forum  

Go Back   Canard Community Forum > Plane Specific Questions Tips, Tricks Area for All Canard Kits and Plans Planes
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 06-02-2005, 10:03 PM
John Slade's Avatar
John Slade John Slade is offline
Flying TurboRotaryCozyIV
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: KWST
Posts: 3,836
Default

Quote:
John, you are absolutely right of course, but do allow a newbie some dreaming space, OK?
Sure. Dreaming and scheming is good. I was just a bit worried that you were going to try to dive in too deep too fast. What you describe sounds like an excellent plan.

You might try my local school - http://www.pbflight.com This is a relatively small FBO (7 or 8 planes) at my local field, KLNA just South of West Palm Beach. I know the owner, Marion, and have a good friend, Danny, that works the scheduling. He would give good advice on which instructor to go with. Having said that, last time he gave me a newbee for my biannual to see if he would cope with someone like me. He did - just barely. Given that I'm the paying customer, I tend to lay out the rules before we start. You DO NOT touch knobs switches or buttons without checking with me. Don't try to help. Never EVER touch the yoke or rudders without saying "I have" first. Don't remind me about stuff 2 seconds after you think I should have done it. Wait until its either dangerous, or obvious that I've REALLY forgotten it.

If they behave I let them have the controls for a few minutes at the end of the flight. I can relax, and learn from watching them - but only if they behave. They break the "I have" rule just once and we go straight back for a new instructor.

Unfortunately my favorite instructor there has retired - his debrief on a biannual amounted to 5 words. "Well, you don't scare me!" said in a tone as if he's really suprised.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 06-02-2005, 10:15 PM
Kumaros's Avatar
Kumaros Kumaros is offline
It's all Greek to me
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by argoldman
That's reeley great
Found it! Thanks to my stash of old Kitplanes.
Kumaros
It's all Greek to me
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Pict0005.jpg
Views:	68
Size:	171.8 KB
ID:	1044  
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 06-02-2005, 10:40 PM
argoldman argoldman is offline
Rich
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: chicago area
Posts: 481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumaros
Found it! Thanks to my stash of old Kitplanes.
Kumaros
It's all Greek to me
Pix looks great, however, my guess is that to do the photo they found a puddle just deep enough. In reality, the engine being heavy and non-bouyant, it would probably be partially submerged and the fusc would be in a nose-high attitude.

You have two eyes and two ears but only one brain. Believe only 1/2 of what you see or hear!!
__________________
CANARDLY CONTAIN MYSELF
Rich
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 06-03-2005, 12:09 AM
rutanfan rutanfan is offline
Ray V.
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Logan, Utah
Posts: 229
Default Weight Efficient????

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteK
Diesel contains more BTU's per gallon, and is thus more weight-efficient - you CAN go longer per gallon that gasoline. Rutan's decision was likely based on the fact that there was no viable diesel engine available for the mission.
I doubt there is a person on this forum that is not well aware of Diesel fuel’s superior thermal units per volume. My thermal dynamics book suggests 138.7kBtu versus 125.0kBtu for a gallon of gasoline (sorry. No avgas values.)

But, with all due respect, quoting Bunsen burner values as factual data around the hanger is one thing. But on an Internet message board, you have the potential to mislead a lot of impressionable people. I suggest you provide real numbers. Once you do so the benefits will be less obvious.

Regarding your analysis of Rutan’s decision to go Teledyne Continental… You might not be aware that Kumaros is going auto-conversion. I find it hard to fathom, that even 15 years ago, Scaled Composites was less capable of converting a Volkswagen TDI than Kumaros is today. (I can’t even type that without laughing.)
__________________
I think; therefore I am. - Rene Descartes
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 06-03-2005, 12:40 AM
Kumaros's Avatar
Kumaros Kumaros is offline
It's all Greek to me
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rutanfan
snipped ...
I find it hard to fathom, that even 15 years ago, Scaled Composites was less capable of converting a Volkswagen TDI than Kumaros is today. (I can’t even type that without laughing.)
While avgas engine technology has been almost stationary for the last 50 not 15 years, since the wide adoption of turbines, common rail turbodiesels have been progressing by leaps and bounds for the last five years or so. Go read about current diesels:
http://www.germancarfans.com/news.cf...id/2050502.003
especially this part of the article:

"The potential savings which could be achieved through increased adoption of diesel engines in the USA are enormous. An increase in the proportion of diesel-powered cars and light commercial vehicles from the present one percent to around thirty percent would save the USA approximately 1.4 million barrels of crude oil per day - equivalent to the entire amount of oil imported by the USA from Saudi Arabia. If we were to assume a 50 percent market share for diesels, as in western Europe, the potential amount saved in a year would be an astronomical 133 billion litres!."

then you can go on laughing, if you want. Ray, you are living in an artificial environment of cheap gas that's distorting your vision. Wake up before it's too late.
Kumaros
It's all Greek to me

Last edited by Kumaros : 06-03-2005 at 01:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 06-03-2005, 01:13 AM
Ben Ben is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 149
Default

From Thielert (certified diesel):
"The specific fuel consumption of the CENTURION 1.7 is at best economy operation 212 g/kWhr (0.36 lb/hphr)."

100hp from the Thielert requires 5.23 gallons/hour (Jet A at 6.84#/gallon).

100hp from a Lycoming at .46lb/hp/hr requires 7.67 g/h (avgas a 6#/g).

What are the current avgas vs diesel prices in Greece?

Fuel price survey for europe, africa, and mid east, some data is old:
http://www.tmdg.co.uk/misc/fuel.php
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 06-03-2005, 01:23 AM
Kumaros's Avatar
Kumaros Kumaros is offline
It's all Greek to me
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben
From Thielert (certified diesel):
"The specific fuel consumption of the CENTURION 1.7 is at best economy operation 212 g/kWhr (0.36 lb/hphr)."

100hp from the Thielert requires 5.23 gallons/hour (Jet A at 6.84#/gallon).

100hp from a Lycoming at .46lb/hp/hr requires 7.67 g/h (avgas a 6#/g).

What are the current avgas vs diesel prices in Greece?

Fuel price survey for europe, africa, and mid east, some data is old:
http://www.tmdg.co.uk/misc/fuel.php
Ben, according to your numbers, that's an efficiency advantage of a little more than 30%, consistent with my answer to Rutanfan: "doing the math".
In a nutshell: the 30 to 40% efficiency advantage of the diesel engines multiplied by the four to one price ratio of avgas vs. diesel gives an overall advantage of almost seven to one.
Kumaros
It's all Greek to me
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 06-03-2005, 01:59 AM
CBarber's Avatar
CBarber CBarber is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 802
Default

No offense to my Greek friend, but if I understand it correctly (which I may not) it is the Europeans that are living in an artificially INFLATED market for gas in that the vast majority of the cost difference is due to government taxation.

That being said, I like diesel and think my Jaguar will be replaced with a diesel Jetta....when the time comes.

All the best,

Chris
__________________
Chris Barber
www.LoneStarVelocity.com
Houston, Texas
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 06-03-2005, 02:02 AM
rutanfan rutanfan is offline
Ray V.
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Logan, Utah
Posts: 229
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumaros
Ray, lets do the math: the average (auto) diesel is 30% more efficient than the average (auto) gas engine, the average liquid cooled auto engine is again another 10 to 30% more efficient than an air-cooled aviation engine. Let's agree on a conservative 40% advantage of diesel against "aviation" engines.
Good day Kumaros. Regarding the above numbers, I prefer using hard data when possible. It has been my experience that formulating decisions based on rule of thumb figures often provides inerrant conclusions. I’ll tell you what. If you can find a flying, well proven (500+ hrs on 10 or more aircraft) diesel that is 5% more efficient than the T/C IOL-200 used on the voyager 15 years ago, I’ll concede that I’m wrong.

According to fuel consumption figures, the Voyager demonstrated a specific fuel consumption of 0.37 lbs/hp/hr. Those are real data numbers, and that’s 15 years ago! And incidentally those are numbers that Pete suggested would be inferior to diesel. “Weight Efficiency.” (his term, not mine)

Now jog on over to DeltaHawk’s website and see what they’re quoting: 0.39 lbs/hp/hr

http://www.deltahawkengines.com/specif00.shtml

Let’s see… DeltaHawk’s promotional website is quoting numbers for a liquid cooled diesel that is 5% less efficient than the air cooled engine that pushed the Voyager around the world 15 years ago. 0.39 lbs/hp/hr is entirely possible with garden variety Lycoming IO-360’s given intelligent leaning and propeller settings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumaros
Then we have the price difference of avgas at around 8 dollars per gallon in Europe versus 2 dollars per gallon for diesel or Jet-A. In a 1,000 hours, your average Lycoming IO-360 would use about 10,000 gallons of avgas at a cost of US$80,000, the 180 HP diesel would use about 6,000 gallons of diesel at a cost of US12,000.
I’m not sure where you’re going with this, as I already conceded that I would go diesel if I were in your shoes. I’d however lean toward a DeltaHawk or Thielert before I tried to pioneer an auto conversion on my own. As I said before, it is a statistical fact that auto conversions are more failure prone. You may remind me of Diesel engine reliability all you want, and I’ll remind you that Paul Connor’s equally reliable rotary vapor locked and if not for his cool head and exceptional pilot skills, could have cost him his life on that occasion… (I should reiterate that I’m not making any assumptions as to what ultimately caused his fatal crash.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumaros
How much would you fly, if it would cost you 80 bucks an hour, just for gas, even given your higher incomes in the USA?
The EAA suggests that even with our higher incomes in the USA, we tend to fly less than 200 hours on average. So how much are you suggesting we’ll ultimately save?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumaros
The fact remains, however, that diesels are inherently more reliable than gas engines, no carb icing, no vapor lock, no fouled plugs, no high tension leaking or arcing, etc. etc. Take a first generation diesel, give it air and fuel and it'll turn for an eternity.
The proven statistical fact remains that auto conversions are more failure prone than certified engines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumaros
I'm sure Burt used the liquid cooled Continental because that was the best available at that time; given present day options, I think he would have gone for the Thielert Centurion.
I’ve seen the interviews where Burt described the helpless empty feeling as he watched Dick disappear and wondered if he would ever see his brother again. The engine had three requirements. 1) that it be reliable 2) that it be the most efficient engine possible 3) that it be light as possible. The Thielert doesn’t have the 60-year track record to even compare it to the Continental, and looses on item 3. Do you know the efficiency? My hunch is that it’s not quite as efficient, but I don’t have the data to back it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kumaros
then you can go on laughing, if you want. Ray, you are living in an artificial environment of cheap gas that's distorting your vision. Wake up before it's too late.
You are living in an artificial reality if you think this country will ever elect a President that even suggests allowing gas prices to reflect it’s actual cost. Also, I’m not sure what you mean by “Wake up before it’s too late?” Are you suggesting that by converting to diesel we’d somehow solve the finite energy crisis? When the solution comes it won’t be diesel.
__________________
I think; therefore I am. - Rene Descartes
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 06-03-2005, 02:06 AM
Ben Ben is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Earth
Posts: 149
Default

Note that the Thielert numbers include "best economy" which isn't defined. Moreover, the Thielert includes FADEC which a backyard conversion probably won't have.

Don't forget that the diesel is going to require a $10k+ prop.

If I were in Europe on a budget I'd build a lightweight Varieze with a 80hp Jab and go flying. Scared of crashing? Wear a chute or find a popcorn factory to crash into. 150 knots on $40/hour (in a $20k plane) is a bargain anywhere on the planet, and totally doable today in Greece no?

Regarding gas prices, regardless of what is happening in Europe, I think the US is living in a system with artificially LOW gas prices.

Also will get a diesel Jetta next (wagon).
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 06-03-2005, 08:34 AM
Waiter's Avatar
Waiter Waiter is offline
LongEZ-RG
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Northwestern Ohio
Posts: 1,096
Default

Quote:
Regarding gas prices, regardless of what is happening in Europe, I think the US is living in a system with artificially LOW gas prices.
OR, perhaps other are living in countries with artificially HIGH gas prices.

i.e. Japan, $5.00 per gallon, $4.50 is taxes.

Waiter
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 06-03-2005, 12:32 PM
MarbleTurtle's Avatar
MarbleTurtle MarbleTurtle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dalton, GA.
Posts: 1,344
Default

Power potential is one thing... what everyone seems to be forgetting is that a diesel engine weighs so much more than a gasoline engine generating the same HP.

If someone out there will produce an all alluminum 220 HP diesel that will weigh the same as a gas engine, I'm in. (And don't give me any flack about carry less fuel to offset the weight increase! I don't want a butt heavy plane!)
__________________
Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 06-03-2005, 01:41 PM
bferrell's Avatar
bferrell bferrell is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 174
Default

It doesn't have to, if you check the Deltahawk website they list the dry and total installed weights of the 200HP Lycoming versus DH, and the are virtually identical (+1DH dry, +2-DH wet, +39Ly with fuel).

http://www.deltahawkengines.com/econom00.shtml

B
__________________
Brett Ferrell
Cincinnati, OH
www.velocityxl.com www.eaa974.com
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 06-03-2005, 02:58 PM
rutanfan rutanfan is offline
Ray V.
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Logan, Utah
Posts: 229
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarbleTurtle
Power potential is one thing... what everyone seems to be forgetting is that a diesel engine weighs so much more than a gasoline engine generating the same HP.
Oh come on MarbleTurtle. Just think of all the lead you’ll get to put in your nose. That’s just one of the reasons I don’t think auto converting a Diesel in the US market is a viable option. If DeltaHawk gets a few hundred flying with a couple hundred hours each, I’d have no problem putting one in the back of a CozyIV. Granted the CS prop will increase the cost by 10K, but think of the efficiency you’d get in a turbo normalized Diesel Cozy. Go IFR above the deck at FL20, catch the jet stream from LA to NY and you’ll have something to tell your grandkids about.

In all seriousness, I really think that Kumaros is headed in the right direction. I read on the Yahoo canard forum about a member who flew his family in a Defiant across Europe with a fuel cost of over $10k. He did the math and found that a Diesel would have been $800 (if I remember correctly.)

When/If Kumaros gets a flying Diesel Cozy in the air, I think he’ll be the envy of every private pilot in Greece. My hunch is that he’ll ultimately settle on a slightly underpowered Diesel to reduce ballast and use VG’s to account for the increased weight, but won’t notice due to the CS prop and turbo normalized performance… And when he does, we’ll all respect the hell out of him for it.
__________________
I think; therefore I am. - Rene Descartes
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 06-03-2005, 04:34 PM
Nathan Gifford Nathan Gifford is offline
Nathan Gifford
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Tickfaw, LA
Posts: 897
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben
...Regarding gas prices, regardless of what is happening in Europe, I think the US is living in a system with artificially LOW gas prices...
Its the other way around. Europe is living in a system of artificially HIGH (high taxes, etc) gas prices...

I hope Kumaros is very successful. I wouldn't have any problems using a diesel if the problems are worked out.

Still Kumaros has the problem that there are just not that many flying diesels out there. There are lot more Subaru and rotary installations than diesels with a lot more flight time and a knowledge base to draw from. Engine development is not an easy thing.

That said, once someone shows how to do it, I suspect a lot of people will follow in very short order. Certainly, anyone planning or building a plane today will follow Kumaros posts very intently.

Last edited by Nathan Gifford : 06-05-2005 at 01:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
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


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.