Jet turbine reliability

http://youtu.be/oACMOuSoHQc

From the Jonker website:
"M&D decided that rather than convert a model aircraft jet turbine into a glider sustainer, it would be better to develop and certificate a new engine."
I've been on an airliner that has had a major in-flight system failure. It happens to everyone.
Jim

On Tuesday, July 7, 2015 at 7:07:20 PM UTC-7, wrote:
And.......they are still derivatives of model engines made by model engine manufacturers. We're not talking GE or Pratt & Whitney here

On Monday, June 1, 2015 at 6:31:42 AM UTC-4, Jim Pengelly wrote:
I'm considering ordering a JS1-C TJ with the jet turbine. A potential syndicate partner is concerned about the reliability of jet turbines from a 'will it start' point of view and a repair cost point of view. I imagine electric turbos are going to be more reliable because of the relative simplicity but you can't buy an electric JS1 or 29. Any comments on jet reliability?

everyone's complaining about "that engine not being so reliable", "i don't know if i'd trust that MODEL engine", "what if it doesn't start?", "but you have to dive to get it going" and i'm over here flying a pure glider like: ᕙ(⇀‿↼‶)ᕗ

we reallllly hate farmers apparently. a farmer gave me a sandwich and a beer once. dude was solid.

Remember that the drag penalty with an extracted jet is minimal. Also keep in mind that if you are going to step into any glider, that there is a chance you won't be landing it on a runway no matter what you've got. Lastly you shouldn't put yourself where you need the engine in order to not make junk. it's a convenience, not a silver bullet.

Just so you know the ASG-29Es has an electric start, no need to dive to start. 12 seconds to extend and start, much easier than the ASG-29E.

On Wednesday, July 8, 2015 at 6:16:50 AM UTC-7, ND wrote:


everyone's complaining about "that engine not being so reliable", "i don't know if i'd trust that MODEL engine", "what if it doesn't start?", "but you have to dive to get it going" and i'm over here flying a pure glider like: ᕙ(⇀‿↼‶)ᕗ

Sorry John, havent been on the forum for some time. The 40l l/h is what the JDU displayed, and it seems to be reasonably accurate. Also, I dont run it at full throttle, but rather at about 90k RPM.

What is the weight of the JS1 jet and 45 minutes of fuel over the weight of the un-engined version.

On Tuesday, July 14, 2015 at 2:48:49 AM UTC+1, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
What is the weight of the JS1 jet and 45 minutes of fuel over the weight of the un-engined version.

+49.7kg - of which 35.2 kg is fuel. Add to that 7 kg additional nose ballast for a 90 kg cockpit load and the wingloading still low at 38.7kg/m2 in 21m and 41.6 in 18m.

On Monday, July 13, 2015 at 8:51:53 PM UTC+1, OG wrote:
Sorry John, havent been on the forum for some time. The 40l l/h is what the JDU displayed, and it seems to be reasonably accurate. Also, I dont run it at full throttle, but rather at about 90k RPM.

Thanks Oscar that is very interesting information.