If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Thielert (Diesel Engines)
Bertie the Bunyip writes:
There's nothing made up about "No sparks, no power" I wouldn't buy one because of this. My club was looking at one ofr a Cherokee and decided against it because of the lack of limp home capability. What kind of sparks does a Diesel need? -- A host is a host from coast to & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Thielert (Diesel Engines)
David Lesher wrote in news:fp1t8e$8vr$4
@reader2.panix.com: Bertie the Bunyip writes: There's nothing made up about "No sparks, no power" I wouldn't buy one because of this. My club was looking at one ofr a Cherokee and decided against it because of the lack of limp home capability. What kind of sparks does a Diesel need? This ine has a FADEC. No electricity and you have a big weight up front. Worse, in the twin star installation, both engines are tied to an electrical system that can punch out both at the same time. in this case, when the gear was retracted... http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...FADEC-0-a.html Nice eh? Bertie |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Thielert (Diesel Engines)
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:24:52 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote: David Lesher wrote in news:fp1t8e$8vr$4 : Bertie the Bunyip writes: There's nothing made up about "No sparks, no power" I wouldn't buy one because of this. My club was looking at one ofr a Cherokee and decided against it because of the lack of limp home capability. What kind of sparks does a Diesel need? This ine has a FADEC. No electricity and you have a big weight up front. Worse, in the twin star installation, both engines are tied to an electrical system that can punch out both at the same time. in this case, when the gear was retracted... http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...FADEC-0-a.html Nice eh? To be fair, there was an immediate AD requiring a backup battery systtem to power the FADECs after that event. I'm surprised it wasn't required for certification in the first place since it appears to me that it was a forseeable failure mode, but still. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Thielert (Diesel Engines)
Peter Clark wrote in
: On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:24:52 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote: David Lesher wrote in news:fp1t8e$8vr$4 : Bertie the Bunyip writes: There's nothing made up about "No sparks, no power" I wouldn't buy one because of this. My club was looking at one ofr a Cherokee and decided against it because of the lack of limp home capability. What kind of sparks does a Diesel need? This ine has a FADEC. No electricity and you have a big weight up front. Worse, in the twin star installation, both engines are tied to an electrical system that can punch out both at the same time. in this case, when the gear was retracted... http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...FADEC-0-a.html Nice eh? To be fair, there was an immediate AD requiring a backup battery systtem to power the FADECs after that event. I'm surprised it wasn't required for certification in the first place since it appears to me that it was a forseeable failure mode, but still. There's lots of ways you can lose all electrics. Corrosion, lightning, poor maintenance... A manual reversion mode or at least a fail safe to a constant power setting weould be a major improvement and the ony thing that would make the engine a viable modern airplane engine in my view. I've flown single ignition airplanes, but there is a world of difference between flying an antique with low approahc speeds and a modern(ish) lightplane. Bertie |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Thielert (Diesel Engines)
On Feb 15, 4:12*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Thomas Borchert wrote : Peter, AFAIK this was forced on them by all the failure Sorry, but that's completely wrong. "Power by the hour" was a Thielert concept from the get-go. But I bet the "scrap" engines get reworked by Thielert You lose. Why is it that each and every innovation in GA is met by people spouting OWTs and made-up speculation, when a minute or two of simple research would provide the facts? What picture does that paint of the pilot population and their "hangar talk"? How about a simple "I don't know and that's why I keep quiet on this" instead of spouting made-up negatives? Sorry, but this is really annoying. There's nothing made up about "No sparks, no power" I wouldn't buy one because of this. My club was looking at one ofr a Cherokee and decided against it because of the lack of limp home capability. You based a decision on an engine on the fact it did not need electricity? Since when does adding a complex ignition system add reliability? All a diesel needs is air and fuel, the fuel pump and injectors are no more complicated that for petrol engines so that would be a big boost in potential reliability (given the poor performance of mags and plugs) in my book.. That apart, I'd like to dig a bit deeper into this reliability issue. What percentage of Lycs or Cons mahe it to TBO without major part replacements (such as cylinders, cylinder heads, magnetos etc.). Put another way, is there anyone here who has _ever_ seen one go to TBO without major working? Cheers |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Thielert (Diesel Engines)
On Feb 15, 6:20*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Thomas Borchert wrote : Bertie, None of them regard electricity. So what? Who decides electricity is somehow a more relevant failure than others? I believe I just did. Look, you're obviously free to make that decision. Your club is, too. But don't make it sound like there is something inherently wrong about an engine just because it has different failure modes than the ones you are used to. It has the same modes plus that one. And that one is avoidable, therefore unacceptable. http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...FADEC-0-a.html I agree, there is no fundamental need for the FADEC in a diesel. They must have adde it due to pressure from the marketing department! However, FADEC adds a failure mode but removal of sparks takes one away. The reduced risk of fire would remove another. Add that to the removal of 100LL and the damage that will be caused by ethanol addition and diesel starts to look better all the time. Cheers |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Thielert (Diesel Engines)
On Feb 15, 7:11*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
WingFlaps wrote : On Feb 15, 4:12*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote: Thomas Borchert wrote innews:VA.000077db.005 : Peter, AFAIK this was forced on them by all the failure Sorry, but that's completely wrong. "Power by the hour" was a Thielert concept from the get-go. But I bet the "scrap" engines get reworked by Thielert You lose. Why is it that each and every innovation in GA is met by people spouting OWTs and made-up speculation, when a minute or two of simple research would provide the facts? What picture does that paint of the pilot population and their "hangar talk"? How about a simple "I don't know and that's why I keep quiet on this" instead of spouting made-up negatives? Sorry, but this is really annoying. There's nothing made up about "No sparks, no power" I wouldn't buy one because of this. My club was looking at one ofr a Cherokee and decided against it because of the lack of limp home capability. You based a decision on an engine on the fact it did not need electricity? Read it again. That apart, I'd like to dig a bit deeper into this reliability issue. What percentage of Lycs or Cons mahe it to TBO without major part replacements (such as cylinders, cylinder heads, magnetos etc.). Put another way, is there anyone here who has _ever_ seen one go to TBO without major working? I have. Plenty of them. Seen at least one A-65 go to almost 4,000 hours In a cub trainer, in fact. I've seen lenty of others go past 2,000 with no nuttin changed. all working airplanes, though. OK, but % of engines is that (is plenty say 1 in 20)? (I'll admit skepticism on the idea of a 4000 hour engine life with no rework -I can't imagine the compression figures) I question whether the reliability argument of petrol is not as sound as it might be so that people want a new engine to be unrealistically reliable without regard to other advantages. Cheers |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Thielert (Diesel Engines)
WingFlaps wrote in
: On Feb 15, 6:20*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote: Thomas Borchert wrote innews:VA.000077df.009 : Bertie, None of them regard electricity. So what? Who decides electricity is somehow a more relevant failure than others? I believe I just did. Look, you're obviously free to make that decision. Your club is, too. But don't make it sound like there is something inherently wrong about an engine just because it has different failure modes than the ones you are used to. It has the same modes plus that one. And that one is avoidable, therefore unacceptable. http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...FADEC-0-a.html I agree, there is no fundamental need for the FADEC in a diesel. They must have adde it due to pressure from the marketing department! However, FADEC adds a failure mode but removal of sparks takes one away. The reduced risk of fire would remove another. Add that to the removal of 100LL and the damage that will be caused by ethanol addition and diesel starts to look better all the time. No. What I meant was, you lose power to the fadec, you lose power. it's gone. You;'re gliding. End of flight. There are Fadecs installed on a lot of turbines. Fadecs and similar devices. they all have a manual reversion of some description. It's usually a coarser throttle response, but you still have power.... With the thielert system, you don't. I can only imagine they lifted the FADEC straight out of the car with the engine. Bertie |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Thielert (Diesel Engines)
On Feb 15, 6:46*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Peter Clark wrote : On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:24:52 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote: David Lesher wrote in news:fp1t8e$8vr$4 : Bertie the Bunyip writes: There's nothing made up about "No sparks, no power" I wouldn't buy one because of this. My club was looking at one ofr a Cherokee and decided against it because of the lack of limp home capability. What kind of sparks does a Diesel need? This ine has a FADEC. No electricity and you have a big weight up front. Worse, in the twin star installation, both engines are tied to an electrical system that can punch out both at the same time. in this case, when the gear was retracted... http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...FADEC-0-a.html Nice eh? To be fair, there was an immediate AD requiring a backup battery systtem to power the FADECs after that event. *I'm surprised it wasn't required for certification in the first place since it appears to me that it was a forseeable failure mode, but still. There's lots of ways you can lose all electrics. Corrosion, lightning, poor maintenance... I agree. Isn't that a problem for electrical ignition systems? Limp home should be excellent in a diesel... Cheers |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Thielert (Diesel Engines) | Charles Talleyrand | Piloting | 108 | February 19th 08 04:59 PM |
diesel 160-200HP engines | geo | Home Built | 27 | April 2nd 04 04:27 PM |
Diesel engines for Planes Yahoo Group Jodel Diesel is Isuzu Citroen Peugeot | Roland M | Home Built | 3 | September 13th 03 12:44 AM |
Diesel engines for Planes Yahoo Group Jodel Diesel is Isuzu Citroen Peugeot | Roland M | General Aviation | 2 | September 13th 03 12:44 AM |
Diesel engines for Planes Yahoo Group Jodel Diesel is Isuzu Citroen Peugeot | Roland M | Rotorcraft | 2 | September 13th 03 12:44 AM |