Why are turbos rare?

Why do turbocharged piston props seem to be so rare/unfavored? Don't they
provide a substantial advantage over normally aspirated engines?

Mxsmanic opined

Why do turbocharged piston props seem to be so rare/unfavored? Don't they
provide a substantial advantage over normally aspirated engines?

They also add substantial costs.

-ash
Elect Cthulhu!
Vote the greater evil.

On 10/17/2010 2:54 AM, Mxsmanic wrote:
Why do turbocharged piston props seem to be so rare/unfavored? Don't they
provide a substantial advantage over normally aspirated engines?

More expensive to buy, more expensive to maintain, more prone to
problems. Key issues for a private buyer. For a business purchase, the
advantages are mostly ephemeral (arrive fifteen minutes earlier,
smoother ride over weather) and are hard to use to justify the
additional expense.

Ron Wanttaja

On Oct 17, 9:57*am, Ron Wanttaja wrote:
On 10/17/2010 2:54 AM, Mxsmanic wrote:

Why do turbocharged piston props seem to be so rare/unfavored? Don't they
provide a substantial advantage over normally aspirated engines?

More expensive to buy, more expensive to maintain, more prone to
problems. *Key issues for a private buyer. *For a business purchase, the
advantages are mostly ephemeral (arrive fifteen minutes earlier,
smoother ride over weather) and are hard to use to justify the
additional expense.

Ron Wanttaja

The reality is, no one has scaled a turbo down to where it might
replace an IO 360 or IO 540.

a wrote
The reality is, no one has scaled a turbo down to where it might
replace an IO 360 or IO 540.

I think that you mistake "turboCHARGED" for "turboPROP".
I have flown lots of turbocharged TSIO540s.

Bob Moore

Ron Wanttaja wrote:
On 10/17/2010 2:54 AM, Mxsmanic wrote:
Why do turbocharged piston props seem to be so rare/unfavored? Don't they
provide a substantial advantage over normally aspirated engines?

More expensive to buy, more expensive to maintain, more prone to
problems. Key issues for a private buyer. For a business purchase, the
advantages are mostly ephemeral (arrive fifteen minutes earlier,
smoother ride over weather) and are hard to use to justify the
additional expense.

Ron Wanttaja

And to actually utilize it, you need oxygen, an instrument equiped aircraft
and a current instrument rating, which is yet more expense to justify.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Oct 18, 5:55*am, wrote:

And to actually utilize it, you need oxygen, an instrument equiped aircraft
and a current instrument rating, which is yet more expense to justify.


Well -we- always have the locally built PAC Cresco for sale to
interested overseas buyers :-)

On Oct 17, 5:54*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Why do turbocharged piston props seem to be so rare/unfavored? Don't they
provide a substantial advantage over normally aspirated engines?

Because electric airplanes are soon to
replace the fossil fueled redneck planes.

http://energysavinggadgets.net/world...ne/2009061819/

All factors of turbocharged piston props
such as detonation, wastegate management,
compressor stall, a non-negotiable critical
altitude, turbo lag from rotational inertia,
boost thresholds, and high heat oil coking
as well as the components to deal with
these aspects, run up the costs and put the
turbocharged piston planes into speciality
niches, which the fill nicely, eg., small
commercial applications.

Electric planes will replace internal combustion
airplanes. It's a "no-brainer".

---
Mark

On Oct 17, 6:55*pm, Nomen Nescio wrote:
On Sun, 17 Oct 2010 12:52:30 -0700 (PDT), Mark wrote:
Because

*SHAAADDDDDDDDDDDDUUUUUUUPPPPPPPPPP*
--http://www.fropper.com/photos/kuldip1950/496742

Because electric airplanes are soon to
replace the fossil fueled redneck planes.

http://energysavinggadgets.net/world...-airplane/2009...


All factors of turbocharged piston props
such as detonation, wastegate management,
compressor stall, a non-negotiable critical
altitude, turbo lag from rotational inertia,
boost thresholds, and high heat oil coking
as well as the components to deal with
these aspects, run up the costs and put the
turbocharged piston planes into speciality
niches, which the fill nicely, eg., small
commercial applications.


Electric planes will replace internal combustion
airplanes. It's a "no-brainer".


---
Mark

Mark wrote:

Because electric airplanes are soon to
replace the fossil fueled redneck planes.

If by soon you mean maybe in 50 years or so.

http://energysavinggadgets.net/world...-airplane/2009...

Oh, wow, a single place airplane that can fly for all of 2 hours.

Whoopee.

Electric planes will replace internal combustion
airplanes.

Not in the lifetime of anyone old enough to read this.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.