Twice as fast for less gas

[Phil J]

I don't know if this guy's ideas would work, but it's a shame he
hasn't had a chance to really try them out...

http://www.airspacemag.com/issues/2008/february-march/tiny_turbines.php

[Edward A. Falk]

Vaporware is always faster, cheaper, and less buggy. Call me when
someone actually builds one.

--
-Ed Falk,
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

[Edward A. Falk]

In article >,
Edward A. Falk > wrote:
>Vaporware is always faster, cheaper, and less buggy. Call me when
>someone actually builds one.

Ummm, that said, If he *does* build it, I really, really want one.

--
-Ed Falk,
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

[Phil J]

On Jan 28, 6:45*pm, (Edward A. Falk) wrote:
> In article >,
> Edward A. Falk > wrote:
>
> >Vaporware is always faster, cheaper, and less buggy. *Call me when
> >someone actually builds one.
>
> Ummm, that said, If he *does* build it, I really, really want one.
>
> --
> * * * * -Ed Falk,
> * * * *http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

Amen, brother.

Phil

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Edward A. Falk" > wrote in message
...
> Vaporware is always faster, cheaper, and less buggy. Call me when
> someone actually builds one.

The concept of building an ultra high bypass engine, with lower pressure
ratios and slower intake speeds does make a heck of a lot of sense.

As it was said, for a switch from low and slow to low and fast. A jet that
is built to go faster than pistons, but low.

Asking the high running jet engines to run down in the lower altitudes is
like making a high compression turbocharged piston engine run without the
turbocharger running. Of course it is not going to run well, or
efficiently.

If I had a few million to put up, I would do it. It would be a revolution,
and one whose time should come.
--
Jim in NC

[Neil Gould]

Recently, Phil J > posted:

> I don't know if this guy's ideas would work, but it's a shame he
> hasn't had a chance to really try them out...
>
> http://www.airspacemag.com/issues/2008/february-march/tiny_turbines.php
>
Very interesting article, and given Gerry Merrill's credentials, quite
plausible. Unfortunately, it isn't surprising that he has repeatedly run
into the wall presented by a market too small to support such a project.
The notion seems to be, "If we build it... they still won't come."
Remember the BD-5?

Neil

[Phil J]

On Jan 29, 11:15*am, "Neil Gould" > wrote:
> Recently, Phil J > posted:
>
> >http://www.airspacemag.com/issues/2008/february-march/tiny_turbines.php
>
> Very interesting article, and given Gerry Merrill's credentials, quite
> plausible. Unfortunately, it isn't surprising that he has repeatedly run
> into the wall presented by a market too small to support such a project.
> The notion seems to be, "If we build it... they still won't come."
> Remember the BD-5?
>
> Neil

Yeah, it's an interesting concept. I suspect the dollar amounts he
mentions are way optimistic though. I don't think his engine would be
any cheaper than a turbine engine like the PT6A. Lancair has a 4-
place kit powered by a PT6A, and they estimate the total cost at
$750,000 to $1,000,000. And that is for a kit. Still, the VLJs have
proven there is a market for small jets. Maybe there is a market for
even smaller jets.

Phil

[kontiki]

Phil J wrote:
> On Jan 29, 11:15 am, "Neil Gould" > wrote:
>> Recently, Phil J > posted:
>>
>>> http://www.airspacemag.com/issues/2008/february-march/tiny_turbines.php
>> Very interesting article, and given Gerry Merrill's credentials, quite
>> plausible. Unfortunately, it isn't surprising that he has repeatedly run
>> into the wall presented by a market too small to support such a project.
>> The notion seems to be, "If we build it... they still won't come."
>> Remember the BD-5?
>>
>> Neil
>
> Yeah, it's an interesting concept. I suspect the dollar amounts he
> mentions are way optimistic though. I don't think his engine would be
> any cheaper than a turbine engine like the PT6A. Lancair has a 4-
> place kit powered by a PT6A, and they estimate the total cost at
> $750,000 to $1,000,000. And that is for a kit. Still, the VLJs have
> proven there is a market for small jets. Maybe there is a market for
> even smaller jets.
>
> Phil

This is all very possible. The brick wall will be the certification
costs and insurance issues. I hope it will happen because we need
things like this to keep GA a viable segment of the economy and
aviation in general.

[[email protected]]

kontiki > wrote:
> Phil J wrote:
> > On Jan 29, 11:15 am, "Neil Gould" > wrote:
> >> Recently, Phil J > posted:
> >>
> >>> http://www.airspacemag.com/issues/2008/february-march/tiny_turbines.php
> >> Very interesting article, and given Gerry Merrill's credentials, quite
> >> plausible. Unfortunately, it isn't surprising that he has repeatedly run
> >> into the wall presented by a market too small to support such a project.
> >> The notion seems to be, "If we build it... they still won't come."
> >> Remember the BD-5?
> >>
> >> Neil
> >
> > Yeah, it's an interesting concept. I suspect the dollar amounts he
> > mentions are way optimistic though. I don't think his engine would be
> > any cheaper than a turbine engine like the PT6A. Lancair has a 4-
> > place kit powered by a PT6A, and they estimate the total cost at
> > $750,000 to $1,000,000. And that is for a kit. Still, the VLJs have
> > proven there is a market for small jets. Maybe there is a market for
> > even smaller jets.
> >
> > Phil

> This is all very possible. The brick wall will be the certification
> costs and insurance issues. I hope it will happen because we need
> things like this to keep GA a viable segment of the economy and
> aviation in general.

The brick wall will be finding a market for the engines to cover all
the R&D, certification, etc. costs such that the engine costs aren't
a killer.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Neil Gould]

Recently, Phil J > posted:

> On Jan 29, 11:15 am, "Neil Gould" > wrote:
>> Recently, Phil J > posted:
>>
>>>
http://www.airspacemag.com/issues/2008/february-march/tiny_turbines.php
>>
>> Very interesting article, and given Gerry Merrill's credentials,
>> quite plausible. Unfortunately, it isn't surprising that he has
>> repeatedly run into the wall presented by a market too small to
>> support such a project. The notion seems to be, "If we build it...
>> they still won't come." Remember the BD-5?
>>
>> Neil
>
> Yeah, it's an interesting concept. I suspect the dollar amounts he
> mentions are way optimistic though. I don't think his engine would be
> any cheaper than a turbine engine like the PT6A. Lancair has a 4-
> place kit powered by a PT6A, and they estimate the total cost at
> $750,000 to $1,000,000. And that is for a kit. Still, the VLJs have
> proven there is a market for small jets. Maybe there is a market for
> even smaller jets.
>
> Phil
>
I think Merrill's pricing reflects large production quantities. Lancair's
production volume reflects the number they expect to be able to sell, and
I suspect those numbers seem more realistic to potential investors.
Consider the number of GA pilots that would pursue the ratings, pay the
insurance, and so forth. If anything, Jim Bede's planes demonstrated just
how shallow that pool really is (that, and little matters like I can't fit
in a BD-5... there is no way the canopy would close without my head in my
knees, and though I got in, I had one heck of a time getting out).

Neil