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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Thielert (Diesel Engines)
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:53:10 +0100, Thomas Borchert wrote:
So how are we to classify the SMA engine? A diesel, but not good for airplanes? Or not a diesel? Ah, let's just say that was not my most coherent posting ;-) Fair enough. I'm sure all those old fashioned diesels accept your apology laugh. But of course you're correct about this being an "old style" engine. That's rather the point. Does that make it a poor choice for aircraft? Numerous articles about flight test, along with commentary by current users, suggests that the SMA engine works quite well in a 182. Hmm. I've heard and read quite the opposite. SMA has never met their goals with regard to certification both of the engine itself and with airframes. I'm not sure what you mean. Scheduling? It's no big shock to me when aviation schedules are extended (esp. regarding certification issues which necessarily involve the FAA). But the SMA is currently certified in at least a couple of 182 models. Plus, users seem happy with it. My club has been looking into SMA-ing a 182Q, so we've collected some opinions from existing customers. Both the names we received from SMA and those we found ourselves (ie. via CPA's forum) seemed to praise the engine. Oddly, I have to admit, this praise came even from a couple of the very first recipients. This is odd to me because they seemed to have a lot of "start up" problems. Perhaps that SMA handled these at no cost swayed the customers' opinions, but I've have considered that a necessity for so new a product. They had a ton of cooling problems, AFAIK they still have altitude restrictions which are rather low for a turbocharged engine. The restriction is FAA/US only. In the EU, those are regularly "violated". So they appear less an engine issue and more a certification issue. They had an airframe from Cirrus to fit the engine to and Cirrus was more than willing to go forward with them, but in the end they gave up because of a mountain of problems. Given the timeframe that SMA and Cirrus were involved together, I can absolutely understand that. [...] But that doesn't address the possibility that the retasked engine may not be as appropriate for the new task as the engine designed specifically for that task. True. I'm just looking at the evidence so far. Number of aviation diesels designed from a car engine: 1 (I think). Percentage of those flying in numbers for several years: 100. Number of aviation diesels designed from the ground up: 3 (? - Zoche, sma, Deltahawk). Percentage flying in numbers for several years: 0. But all of this could be explained by marketing and timing. And I'd suggest an engine with more failure modes is less desirable - esp. for SE aircraft - than an engine with fewer failure modes. Sure. But just because Bertie says it's so, doesn't mean the Thielert does in fact have more. Different ones, for sure. Bertie might be like that proverbial clock, too: correct once or twice a day. What failure modes does the SMA have that the Thielert lacks? That the latter requires electrical power for the FADEC is clear, but what's "the other side"? [...] Or are there truly technical reasons for the Thielert to be chosen over the SMA? Might OEMs still buy into the SMA (Cessna may not have much choice for 182s, since I don't think Thielert has a good replacement for the O-470)? I think they really tried. I know Cirrus did. Cessna did (as an OEM), too. Socata did. But now that the SMA is certified, what might happen? Or is this all for naught now that Continental is [claiming to be] entering the diesel market? - Andrew |
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 |