New Bombardier-Rotax engines

[rgb]

Take a look at those 2 new V piston engines :-)

http://www.vaircraftengines.com/en/theConcept.asp

Not bad ! I might call for prices :-)

[Mike Rapoport]

They won't give them to you.

Mike
MU-2


"rgb" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> Take a look at those 2 new V piston engines :-)
>
> http://www.vaircraftengines.com/en/theConcept.asp
>
> Not bad ! I might call for prices :-)
>

[Big John]

rgb

We've had aluminum auto engines without liners and as I recall they
had a pretty high cylinder failure rate?

If they have solved that problem with their 'electro-deposit' coating.
fine, but I sure wouldn't be the 'first one' to buy.

Think one of the problems is that any coating of the aluminum cylinder
expands at a different rate than the aluminum and this starts the
failure?

Should be some experts on aluminum engines around here on rah that can
give good technical advice about what they are trying to do and
expected results and longevity.

Big John


On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 00:41:42 -0400, rgb > wrote:

>
>Take a look at those 2 new V piston engines :-)
>
>http://www.vaircraftengines.com/en/theConcept.asp
>
>Not bad ! I might call for prices :-)

[Montblack]

I thought they were also working on a diesel?

--
Montblack

("rgb" wrote)
> Take a look at those 2 new V piston engines :-)
>
> http://www.vaircraftengines.com/en/theConcept.asp
>
> Not bad ! I might call for prices :-)

[Thomas Borchert]

Big,

> We've had aluminum auto engines without liners and as I recall they
> had a pretty high cylinder failure rate?
>

Can you explain further? Are the engine blocks aluminum on the
Bombardiers? That's quite common in the auto industry, isn't it? Also,
do you have the feeling anything could be much worse with regard to
premature cylinder problems than current TCM/Lycoming stuff?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Montblack,

> I thought they were also working on a diesel?
>

Not them. Thielert and sma are the main diesel contenders right now.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Pepperoni]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Big,
>
> > We've had aluminum auto engines without liners and as I recall they
> > had a pretty high cylinder failure rate?
> >
>
> Can you explain further? Are the engine blocks aluminum on the
> Bombardiers? That's quite common in the auto industry, isn't it? Also,
> do you have the feeling anything could be much worse with regard to
> premature cylinder problems than current TCM/Lycoming stuff?
>
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
>

They appear to be coated aluminum cylinders. The problem that I see is that
the engines run up to 6000 rpm, and are geared 3:1. This makes for a lot of
piston (wear) strokes, and also the added possibility of gearbox problems.
The FADEC engine controls eliminate some control complexity, but more
problems seem folded back in with the liquid cooling.

I don't see a lot of folks standing in line to replace their current engines
until someone *else* runs a few to TBO and publishes cost and performance
analysis.

I think everyone is waiting for a bulletproof JP fueled diesel.

[rgb]

Neither Lycoming or Continental do :-( too bad !

Mike Rapoport wrote:
> They won't give them to you.
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>
>
> "rgb" > wrote in message
> .. .
>
>>Take a look at those 2 new V piston engines :-)
>>
>>http://www.vaircraftengines.com/en/theConcept.asp
>>
>>Not bad ! I might call for prices :-)
>>
>
>
>

[rgb]

I don't know alot about engines :-/ I'm still a little private pilot who
rent plane ...

Some folks seems to be pretty please with there Rotax 912S so I was
thinking those 2 new engines might give Lycoming and Continental a
little challenge, maybe not ...
For what I can see thoses good old Lycomings are quiet good, but kindof
expensive .

:-)


Big John wrote:

> rgb
>
> We've had aluminum auto engines without liners and as I recall they
> had a pretty high cylinder failure rate?
>
> If they have solved that problem with their 'electro-deposit' coating.
> fine, but I sure wouldn't be the 'first one' to buy.
>
> Think one of the problems is that any coating of the aluminum cylinder
> expands at a different rate than the aluminum and this starts the
> failure?
>
> Should be some experts on aluminum engines around here on rah that can
> give good technical advice about what they are trying to do and
> expected results and longevity.
>
> Big John
>
>
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 00:41:42 -0400, rgb > wrote:
>
>
>>Take a look at those 2 new V piston engines :-)
>>
>>http://www.vaircraftengines.com/en/theConcept.asp
>>
>>Not bad ! I might call for prices :-)
>
>

[Corky Scott]

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 09:49:00 -0500, Big John >
wrote:

>rgb
>
>We've had aluminum auto engines without liners and as I recall they
>had a pretty high cylinder failure rate?
>
>If they have solved that problem with their 'electro-deposit' coating.
>fine, but I sure wouldn't be the 'first one' to buy.
>
>Think one of the problems is that any coating of the aluminum cylinder
>expands at a different rate than the aluminum and this starts the
>failure?
>
>Should be some experts on aluminum engines around here on rah that can
>give good technical advice about what they are trying to do and
>expected results and longevity.
>
>Big John

Big John, the only all aluminum engine I can recall that was like you
describe was the four cylinder engine in the Cheverolet Vega. That
engine was cast from aluminum that had a high silicon content, and the
cylinder bores were etched such that the aluminum was dissolved away
and the piston rings scraped on a silicon surface. You're right, that
didn't work, or at least didn't work well. Didn't sound real snappy
either, my recollection was that it was a great imitation of someone
going "duuuhhhh". Bombardier isn't using that technology, they are
electro plating the cylinder bores with nickasil. The piston rings
aren't scraping against bare aluminum.

I think I read somewhere that the Bombardier engines have been run for
literally thousands of hours on test stands. So they appear have
already run to TBO and beyond. If they did not run successfully, do
you think they'd be displaying them now?

For those who worry about the numerous piston cycles and how at the
high rpms it would wear excessively, it doesn't happen that way.
Small pistons running at high rpm just do not wear at the same kind of
rate that large pistons whuffing slowly away do, so you can't compare
them directly.

Liquid cooling is a **GOOD THING**, not bad. It means carbon monoxide
free heat for the cabin and no worries about shock cooling. If
automobiles can run their water pumps for 10 years and longer without
failing, I'm guessing Bombardier can do it too.

The higher rpm does a lot of nice things too, for one thing, the
engine will be extremely smooth. In addition, it comes with a real
muffler, and spins the prop slowly. This means you could fly out of
any airport, over the most cantankerous of neighbors and not upset
them.

The V configuration makes for a narrow package, compared to Lycomings.
We've, well I have anyway, been beefing about how old the technology
is of aircraft engines. Here's a truly new design, utilizing many of
the features that should give it a very big step up over the slow
revving Lycomings and Continentals. Think of it as half a baby
Merlin.

Bombardier would not have announced such engines, in my opinion,
without having done enormous amounts of research, both from a
technical and market aspect, and tested them exhaustively.

Bombardier isn't Zoche, after all, they are a for profit company. :-)

Corky Scott

[Dave Stadt]

"Big John" > wrote in message
...
> rgb
>
> We've had aluminum auto engines without liners and as I recall they
> had a pretty high cylinder failure rate?

Chevy Vega. About as close to100 percent failure rate as you can get.

[John Galban]

rgb > wrote in message >...
>
> Some folks seems to be pretty please with there Rotax 912S so I was
> thinking those 2 new engines might give Lycoming and Continental a
> little challenge, maybe not ...
> For what I can see thoses good old Lycomings are quiet good, but kindof
> expensive .

Liquid cooling looks like it'll make it difficult to retrofit to
existing designs. I wouldn't be surprised to see a company like
Diamond modify one of their designs for it.

How they can run a 10.8 to 1 compression ratio on 87 octane gas is a
neat trick. I'm sure temp stabilization from liquid cooling helps,
but that still seems like a very high ratio for the low octane fuel.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Big John]

Corky

Tnx for adding more info to the thread. Knew there were others with
some good basic data.

On their hard inside coating of the cylinders, unless it has the same
expansion rate as the aluminum block I would expect sluffing off and
failures? If they have solved this problem may have a winner?

Also running on a test stand will check a lot of things about the
engine but giving it to the 'numb nuts' in the field and letting them
operate is the only way to really check out.

Some of the things I invented and patented, I checked for 100's of
thousands of cycles and yet when put in field, always found someone
who could tear them up <G> I guess you call that trying to design for
the lowest common denominator (which don't always work as the lower
you get on the "Darwin' scale the harder it is to keep people from
using the wrong way and tearing up). <G>

Do wish them success using current technology which might cause Lyc
and Con to upgrade???.

Big John





On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 19:42:33 GMT,
(Corky Scott) wrote:

>On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 09:49:00 -0500, Big John >
>wrote:
>
>>rgb
>>
>>We've had aluminum auto engines without liners and as I recall they
>>had a pretty high cylinder failure rate?
>>
>>If they have solved that problem with their 'electro-deposit' coating.
>>fine, but I sure wouldn't be the 'first one' to buy.
>>
>>Think one of the problems is that any coating of the aluminum cylinder
>>expands at a different rate than the aluminum and this starts the
>>failure?
>>
>>Should be some experts on aluminum engines around here on rah that can
>>give good technical advice about what they are trying to do and
>>expected results and longevity.
>>
>>Big John
>
>Big John, the only all aluminum engine I can recall that was like you
>describe was the four cylinder engine in the Cheverolet Vega. That
>engine was cast from aluminum that had a high silicon content, and the
>cylinder bores were etched such that the aluminum was dissolved away
>and the piston rings scraped on a silicon surface. You're right, that
>didn't work, or at least didn't work well. Didn't sound real snappy
>either, my recollection was that it was a great imitation of someone
>going "duuuhhhh". Bombardier isn't using that technology, they are
>electro plating the cylinder bores with nickasil. The piston rings
>aren't scraping against bare aluminum.
>
>I think I read somewhere that the Bombardier engines have been run for
>literally thousands of hours on test stands. So they appear have
>already run to TBO and beyond. If they did not run successfully, do
>you think they'd be displaying them now?
>
>For those who worry about the numerous piston cycles and how at the
>high rpms it would wear excessively, it doesn't happen that way.
>Small pistons running at high rpm just do not wear at the same kind of
>rate that large pistons whuffing slowly away do, so you can't compare
>them directly.
>
>Liquid cooling is a **GOOD THING**, not bad. It means carbon monoxide
>free heat for the cabin and no worries about shock cooling. If
>automobiles can run their water pumps for 10 years and longer without
>failing, I'm guessing Bombardier can do it too.
>
>The higher rpm does a lot of nice things too, for one thing, the
>engine will be extremely smooth. In addition, it comes with a real
>muffler, and spins the prop slowly. This means you could fly out of
>any airport, over the most cantankerous of neighbors and not upset
>them.
>
>The V configuration makes for a narrow package, compared to Lycomings.
>We've, well I have anyway, been beefing about how old the technology
>is of aircraft engines. Here's a truly new design, utilizing many of
>the features that should give it a very big step up over the slow
>revving Lycomings and Continentals. Think of it as half a baby
>Merlin.
>
>Bombardier would not have announced such engines, in my opinion,
>without having done enormous amounts of research, both from a
>technical and market aspect, and tested them exhaustively.
>
>Bombardier isn't Zoche, after all, they are a for profit company. :-)
>
>Corky Scott
>
>
>

[alexy]

Big John > wrote:


>Some of the things I invented and patented, I checked for 100's of
>thousands of cycles and yet when put in field, always found someone
>who could tear them up <G> I guess you call that trying to design for
>the lowest common denominator (which don't always work as the lower
>you get on the "Darwin' scale the harder it is to keep people from
>using the wrong way and tearing up). <G>

Well-known principle; whenever you think you have a fool-proof design,
they come out with a better class of fool!
--
Alex
Make the obvious change in the return address to reply by email.

[Big John]

alexy

Never heard it that way before but of course your right <G>

Big John

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 02:51:23 GMT, alexy >
wrote:

>Big John > wrote:
>
>
>>Some of the things I invented and patented, I checked for 100's of
>>thousands of cycles and yet when put in field, always found someone
>>who could tear them up <G> I guess you call that trying to design for
>>the lowest common denominator (which don't always work as the lower
>>you get on the "Darwin' scale the harder it is to keep people from
>>using the wrong way and tearing up). <G>
>
>Well-known principle; whenever you think you have a fool-proof design,
>they come out with a better class of fool!

[Thomas Borchert]

Pepperoni,

> The problem that I see is that

Based upon what? Are you an engine construction engineer specializing in
aluminum engines? Or is it just "gut feel"?

> the engines run up to 6000 rpm, and are geared 3:1.

Not in cruise.

> but more
> problems seem folded back in with the liquid cooling.
>

Again: Says who? Liquid cooling seems to be a total non-issue with the
Rotaxes, the new diesels and engines in general.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Rgb,

> I don't know alot about engines
>

So how do you know the material they are made of is a problem, as you
say in your original post?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Rgb,

> For what I can see thoses good old Lycomings are quiet good,
>

Well, time to become an owner then. And then you'll change your mind real
quick, after, say 600 hours or so.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

John,

> Liquid cooling looks like it'll make it difficult to retrofit to
> existing designs.
>

Why? The Thielert diesel is liquid cooled and is being retrofitted to
C172s and PA28s as we speak. Everything firewall forward is replaced,
so where's the problem?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Jim,

Well, then check on the prices for the Thielert. You'll be surprised.
Also, the sma has come down to 60k, AFAIK.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Pepperoni]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
>
> > the engines run up to 6000 rpm, and are geared 3:1.
>
> Not in cruise.

Even in cruise, the engine will run much higher rpms than your "usual"
engines. Your current engine will run 1200 rpm to spin the output shaft at
1200rpm, the new engine will be running 3600rpm to spin the shaft at
1200rpm. If you don't believe *Me*, ask someone competent to do the math
for you.

>
> > but more
> > problems seem folded back in with the liquid cooling.
> >
>
> ........ Liquid cooling seems to be a total non-issue with the
> Rotaxes, the new diesels and engines in general.

Liquid cooling does become an issue when you run out of coolant. A 2 gallon
reservoir is fine on a test stand with 3 techs standing around to keep an
eye on the run, but at night in the clouds or mountains, you will be
wondering how long it will take the engine to overheat and time to an
airport when a hose or gasket lets go.

Will an "engine in general" run for more than 30 minutes without coolant,
and would you bet your favorite coon dog's life on it?

[Thomas Borchert]

Pepperoni,

> the new engine will be running 3600rpm to spin the shaft at
> 1200rpm. If you don't believe *Me*, ask someone competent to do the math
> for you.
>

Well, yes, but will that affect engine longevity in any way? That's the
question.

As for liquid cooling: Your oil/air cooled engine won't work either when the
oil leaves. Happens a lot, doesn't it? Oh wait, it doesn't. Hmm...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[John Galban]

Thomas Borchert > wrote in message >...
> John,
>
> > Liquid cooling looks like it'll make it difficult to retrofit to
> > existing designs.
> >
>
> Why? The Thielert diesel is liquid cooled and is being retrofitted to
> C172s and PA28s as we speak. Everything firewall forward is replaced,
> so where's the problem?

I didn't say it was impossible. Maybe I should rephrase that to say
"...looks like it'll make it difficult to cost-effectively retrofit to
existing designs".

From what I've seen over the years, most firewall forward engine
conversions tend to approach the value of the unconverted plane.
Unless these engines are going to sell for substantially less than
their air cooled bretheren, all of those necessary bits and pieces are
going to make the conversion look pretty unattractive from an economic
standpoint (at least for the lower end of the market, i.e C-172s and
PA28s).

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Thomas Borchert]

John,

Depends on a lot of factors. Let's look at the Thielert Centurion 1.7
diesel, not yet available in the US (due to stalling of the FAA,
AFAIK), but certified in Europe. AFAIK, the engine is 20,000 $,
including all accessories and a guarantee for 2400 hours (TBR) or 12
years. If something breaks before, you'll get the new engine prorated.

The conversion kit for the 172 is 40,000 $. The Centurion will use 4
gallons or so of JetA1.

If you calculate the difference between the amount of JetA1 used by the
Centurion and the Avgas used by an O-320, factor in the cost of the
engine per hour (guaranteed with the Centurion, full of surprises with
the Lyc), you'll find that the point at which you'll get the extra
20,000 for the conversion back depends very much on local fuel cost and
similar factors - but the point will come.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Paul Sengupta]

Had a problem with the V8 engine on my BMW 740i. The BMW V8s
originally came with aluminium cylinder liners. It was found these were
affected by (if I remember correctly) the sulphur in petrol. These
eventually caused a failure in my engine (well, when my father owned the
car). The liners were replaced with steel ones. Apparently BMW were
supposed to fit these for free, but since we didn't have a full BMW service
history, my father had to pay...not cheap!

http://www.koalamotorsport.com/tech/misc/v8shortblock.htm

By the way, is this the process you're talking about?

http://www.autofieldguide.com/columns/jeff/0600mat.html

Looks like if you want to see if it works over time, watch some
Mercedes cars...

Paul

"Big John" > wrote in message
...
> rgb
>
> We've had aluminum auto engines without liners and as I recall they
> had a pretty high cylinder failure rate?