---------------------------------------------------------- RV10-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sat 04/25/15: 7 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 04:04 AM - Re: Re: Fuel Return Line Location? (Danny Riggs) 2. 06:23 AM - Re: Re: Fuel Return Line Location? (Carl Froehlich) 3. 06:51 AM - Re: Re: Fuel Return Line Location? (Bill Watson) 4. 07:09 AM - Re: Re Turbine RV-10 (Kelly McMullen) 5. 07:41 AM - Re: Re Turbine RV-10 (Jim Combs) 6. 02:40 PM - Re: Re Turbine RV-10 (Kelly McMullen) 7. 02:53 PM - Re: Re Turbine RV-10 (Kevin Belue) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 04:04:01 AM PST US From: Danny Riggs Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Fuel Return Line Location? I've been keeping an eye on that -10 turbine conversion since it first appe ared at the air shows. The only advantage I could see was for areas where a v gas was not available or too expensive. The engineering and fabrication i nvolved had to been quite complicated. Of course the "cool factor" is off t he charts! Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Fuel Return Line Location? From: apilot2@gmail.com See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's Kitpla nes. 250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts push ing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the Lyc. But=2C initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After they rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes=2C they have it up to ma tching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K an d maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the engi ne/prop combo cost as much as an entire=2C well equipped Lyc powered -10. B ut if you fly where avgas is unobtainable=2C makes sense. I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed=2C but apparen tly it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly=2C with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for fuel ef ficiency. On Fri=2C Apr 24=2C 2015 at 9:40 AM=2C Bill Watson wrote: The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. 'Anybody' c an build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain it. NO ONE ha s come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest of us can buy at any price point=2C that performs better and longer than what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for success but don't plan on it. ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:23:27 AM PST US From: "Carl Froehlich" Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Fuel Return Line Location? Also off the charts is the fuel burn and the price tag. The engine alone costs more than a flying RV-10 with a brand new Lycoming, and fuel burn in cruise is almost double that of a Lycoming RV-10 (21.7gph versus 11.5gph). Carl From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Danny Riggs Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2015 7:00 AM Subject: RE: RV10-List: Re: Fuel Return Line Location? I've been keeping an eye on that -10 turbine conversion since it first appeared at the air shows. The only advantage I could see was for areas where av gas was not available or too expensive. The engineering and fabrication involved had to been quite complicated. Of course the "cool factor" is off the charts! _____ Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Fuel Return Line Location? From: apilot2@gmail.com See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's Kitplanes. 250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the Lyc. But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After they rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense. I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for fuel efficiency. On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson wrote: The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. 'Anybody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain it. NO ONE has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest of us can buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for success but don't plan on it. ist" target=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List ank>http://forums.matronics.com rget=_blank>http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:51:15 AM PST US From: Bill Watson Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re: Fuel Return Line Location? I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever. I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Lyc - expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there. Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass strip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the '10, mortgage the house... oh nevermind. The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure in the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power. On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's > Kitplanes. > 250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts > pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of > the Lyc. > But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After > they rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it > up to matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel > below 10K and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to > mention the engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped > Lyc powered -10. But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense. > I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but > apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe > the SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount > and fly, with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even > beat the Lyc for fuel efficiency. > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson > wrote: > > > > at > > > The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. > 'Anybody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched > kit. 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us > could maintain it. NO ONE has come up with an alternative engine > solution that the rest of us can buy at any price point, that > performs better and longer than what we can buy from Lycoming. > Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for success but > don't plan on it. > > > * > > > * > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:09:25 AM PST US Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re Turbine RV-10 From: Kelly McMullen You might right about the fuel burn..definitely more than the Lyc. It would be fun to fly with the quiet turbine and simplicity, as long as someone else was paying the bills. On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Bill Watson wrote: > I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever. > > I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Lyc - > expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there. > > Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass > strip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the '10, > mortgage the house... oh nevermind. > > The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where > they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was > reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure > in the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power. > > On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > > See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's > Kitplanes. > 250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts > pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the > Lyc. > But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After they > rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to > matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K > and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the > engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. > But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense. > I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but > apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the > SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, > with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for > fuel efficiency. > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson > wrote: > >> at >> >> >> >> The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. 'Anybody' >> can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. 'Anybody' >> can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain it. NO ONE >> has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest of us can >> buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than what we can >> buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for >> success but don't plan on it. >> >> >> >> > > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > 04/24/15 > > > * > > > * > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:41:55 AM PST US Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re Turbine RV-10 From: Jim Combs The engine web page is here: http://www.pbsvb.com/customer-industries/aerospace/aircraft-engines/tp-100-turboprop-engine It's rated at 200 HP. These guys extended the fuel tanks at least one bay per side. Useful load is reduced. JimC On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > You might right about the fuel burn..definitely more than the Lyc. > It would be fun to fly with the quiet turbine and simplicity, as long as > someone else was paying the bills. > > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Bill Watson > wrote: > >> I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever. >> >> I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Lyc >> - expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there. >> >> Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass >> strip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the '10, >> mortgage the house... oh nevermind. >> >> The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where >> they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was >> reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure >> in the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power. >> >> On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: >> >> See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's >> Kitplanes. >> 250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts >> pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the >> Lyc. >> But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After they >> rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to >> matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K >> and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the >> engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. >> But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense. >> I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but >> apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the >> SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, >> with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for >> fuel efficiency. >> >> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson >> wrote: >> >>> at >>> >>> >>> >>> The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. >>> 'Anybody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. >>> 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain >>> it. NO ONE has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest >>> of us can buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than >>> what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I >>> hope for success but don't plan on it. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> No virus found in this message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> 04/24/15 >> >> >> * >> >> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> tp://forums.matronics.com >> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> >> * >> >> > * > > > * > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 02:40:09 PM PST US Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re Turbine RV-10 From: Kelly McMullen Apparently you are calculating differently than whoever supplied Amy with data. >From her article, 180 ft/lb torque = 241 shp + 9 hp exhaust thrust for 250 total. IIRC they were getting ~175kts on ~19gph. To get that speed on Lyc you likely would need to burn at least 13gph LOP for 75% power. On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Jim Combs wrote: > The engine web page is here: > > > http://www.pbsvb.com/customer-industries/aerospace/aircraft-engines/tp-100-turboprop-engine > > It's rated at 200 HP. These guys extended the fuel tanks at least one bay > per side. Useful load is reduced. > > JimC > > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Kelly McMullen > wrote: > >> You might right about the fuel burn..definitely more than the Lyc. >> It would be fun to fly with the quiet turbine and simplicity, as long as >> someone else was paying the bills. >> >> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Bill Watson >> wrote: >> >>> I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever. >>> >>> I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Lyc >>> - expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there. >>> >>> Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass >>> strip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the '10, >>> mortgage the house... oh nevermind. >>> >>> The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where >>> they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was >>> reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure >>> in the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power. >>> >>> On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: >>> >>> See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's >>> Kitplanes. >>> 250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts >>> pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the >>> Lyc. >>> But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After >>> they rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to >>> matching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K >>> and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the >>> engine/prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. >>> But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense. >>> I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but >>> apparently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the >>> SMA 230 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, >>> with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for >>> fuel efficiency. >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson >>> wrote: >>> >>>> at >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. >>>> 'Anybody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. >>>> 'Anybody' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain >>>> it. NO ONE has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest >>>> of us can buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than >>>> what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I >>>> hope for success but don't plan on it. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> No virus found in this message. >>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >>> 04/24/15 >>> >>> >>> * >>> >>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >>> tp://forums.matronics.com >>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >>> >>> * >>> >>> >> * >> >> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> tp://forums.matronics.com >> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> >> * >> >> > * > > > * > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 02:53:05 PM PST US Subject: Re: RV10-List: Re Turbine RV-10 From: Kevin Belue I'd like to see what the fuel flow is at 150kts. I doubt it changes much wit h speed changes.... Sent from my iPhone On Apr 25, 2015, at 4:35 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: > Apparently you are calculating differently than whoever supplied Amy with d ata. > =46rom her article, 180 ft/lb torque = 241 shp + 9 hp exhaust thrust for 250 total. IIRC they were getting ~175kts on ~19gph. To get that speed on L yc you likely would need to burn at least 13gph LOP for 75% power. > > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Jim Combs wrote: >> The engine web page is here: >> >> http://www.pbsvb.com/customer-industries/aerospace/aircraft-engines/tp-10 0-turboprop-engine >> >> It's rated at 200 HP. These guys extended the fuel tanks at least one ba y per side. Useful load is reduced. >> >> JimC >> >> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 10:06 AM, Kelly McMullen wrot e: >>> You might right about the fuel burn..definitely more than the Lyc. >>> It would be fun to fly with the quiet turbine and simplicity, as long as someone else was paying the bills. >>> >>> On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Bill Watson wro te: >>>> I just checked it out. Very cool... or hot or whatever. >>>> >>>> I thought the fuel burn numbers were more like 50%+ greater than the Ly c - expressed in GPH or MPG. But I might wrong there. >>>> >>>> Anyway, the turbines always get my attention because I live on a grass s trip with a Jet-A tank (!!). Let's see, we sell the Lyc, modify the ' 10, mortgage the house... oh nevermind. >>>> >>>> The tale of the exhaust stack problem is interesting. Far beyond where they guys with the turbine RV-8 were with the cutoff stack. I think it was reviewed a year or two ago. Apparently it produced so much back pressure i n the engine it couldn't achieve anywhere near full power. >>>> >>>> On 4/24/2015 11:57 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote: >>>>> See Amy Laboda's report on the turbine powered RV-10 in this month's K itplanes. >>>>> 250 shp turboprop. It will out climb the Lycoming after the Lyc starts pushing temp limits. Especially because the engine is maybe 1/2 wt of the L yc. >>>>> But, initially it was losing 20+ knots in cruise the the Lyc. After th ey rectified the shape and angle of the exhaust pipes, they have it up to ma tching the Lyc in cruise. It only burns about 20-25% more fuel below 10K and maybe somewhat less into the lower flight levels. Not to mention the engine /prop combo cost as much as an entire, well equipped Lyc powered -10. But if you fly where avgas is unobtainable, makes sense. >>>>> I was concerned it might be pushing the design flutter speed, but appa rently it is sized to provide same power as Lyc. Seems like maybe the SMA 23 0 hp French diesel used in 182's would be easier to mount and fly, with Jet A or diesel fuel available everywhere. Might even beat the Lyc for fuel effic iency. >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bill Watson w rote: >>>>>> at >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The engine is the most complex part of our experimental planes. 'Anyb ody' can build a Van's kit whether a QB or a pre-hole punched kit. 'Anybody ' can mount a Lycoming on the front and most of us could maintain it. NO ON E has come up with an alternative engine solution that the rest of us can buy at any price point, that performs better and longer than what we can buy from Lycoming. Many people have tried and are trying. I hope for success but don't plan on it. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No virus found in this message. >>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >>>>> 04/24/15 >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >>>> tp://forums.matronics.com >>>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >>> tp://forums.matronics.com >>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> >> >> >> get="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List >> tp://forums.matronics.com >> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> > > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message rv10-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/RV10-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/rv10-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/rv10-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.