A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Car engine FAA certified for airplane use



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 26th 04, 04:21 AM
Cy Galley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Car engine FAA certified for airplane use



Hans Conser wrote:

Page 18 Feb issue of Flying:

"FAA Certifies Auto Engine Conversion

In November the FAA granted type certification to the Thielert
Aircraft
Engines (TAE) TAE 125-01 four cylinder aviation diesel engine. The
model is a diesel automotive engine, made by DaimlerChrysler, which
TAE
converts for airplane use by adding a gearbox and other aviation
specific parts.
The certification for the engine, known as the Centurion 1.7, is the
first of its kind for the FAA. The approval surprised many industry
observers because it entailed producing an engine with parts that the
manufacturer (DaimlerChrysler) would not verify. But the FAA was
surprisingly willing to work within this restriction and allowed
Thielert to verify, through a combination of component testing, parts
validation, test stand runs, and ongoing testing that the engine, and
the parts that make it up, meet an acceptable level of safety.
To our knowledge, the certification of the engine also entails

another
first, the approval of a powerplant with a timer before before
replacement (TBR) limit--1000 hours or 12 years, whichever is
first--with no overhaul allowed. When the engine reaches one of

those
milestones the owner must replace it with a new engine. The company
is
working toward a 2,400 hour TBR, and will pro-rate replacement

engines
from the beginning at the 2400 hour figure.
Thielert plans to offer an STC for retrofit installations of the
engine
in Cessna Skyhawks. Diamond is developing its Twin-Star light twin
around the Centurion 1.7 engine, and OMF is working on a diesel
version
of its two-place Symphony."

Perhaps it is time to certify the 13B.

Hans


Al Gietzen wrote:

Hum-m-m; kind of puts Lycoming and Continental on notice, doesn't it?





  #2  
Old January 28th 04, 01:50 AM
Dan Thomas
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thielert already has a 2400 hour TBR in hand for this engine. And they
have an STC for the 172 N and P series airplanes, as well as some
Piper models, but last I heard they were having some troubles with a
shortage of vendor-supplied items. They didn't specify what those
items were, but I imagine it has to do with engine mounts or radiators
or something. I hope it isn't the engine manufacturer being stubborn.
The 1.7 is a 135 HP engine. It produces more static thrust than
the original Lycoming it replaces, although that's through a CS prop.
The HP is rated at 2300 RPM, which is why the airplane's performance
isn't affected by the lower HP. At the 2700 RPM of the Lyc so much
power is lost to the much higher propeller drag that the 135 at 2300
is able to match it.
It burns a bit over 4 GPH of diesel or Jet A, and fuel savings
over the life of the engine we have figured at about $40,000 CDN. The
engine's cost is about the same as a factory reman Lyc O-320, but I
imagine the initial installation would add considerably to that.
Go to http://www.centurion-engines.com/

Dan


"Cy Galley" wrote in message news:UA0Rb.22152$U%5.168426@attbi_s03...

Hans Conser wrote:

Page 18 Feb issue of Flying:

"FAA Certifies Auto Engine Conversion

In November the FAA granted type certification to the Thielert

Aircraft
Engines (TAE) TAE 125-01 four cylinder aviation diesel engine. The
model is a diesel automotive engine, made by DaimlerChrysler, which

TAE
converts for airplane use by adding a gearbox and other aviation
specific parts.
The certification for the engine, known as the Centurion 1.7, is the
first of its kind for the FAA. The approval surprised many industry
observers because it entailed producing an engine with parts that the
manufacturer (DaimlerChrysler) would not verify. But the FAA was
surprisingly willing to work within this restriction and allowed
Thielert to verify, through a combination of component testing, parts
validation, test stand runs, and ongoing testing that the engine, and
the parts that make it up, meet an acceptable level of safety.
To our knowledge, the certification of the engine also entails

another
first, the approval of a powerplant with a timer before before
replacement (TBR) limit--1000 hours or 12 years, whichever is
first--with no overhaul allowed. When the engine reaches one of

those
milestones the owner must replace it with a new engine. The company

is
working toward a 2,400 hour TBR, and will pro-rate replacement

engines
from the beginning at the 2400 hour figure.
Thielert plans to offer an STC for retrofit installations of the

engine
in Cessna Skyhawks. Diamond is developing its Twin-Star light twin
around the Centurion 1.7 engine, and OMF is working on a diesel

version
of its two-place Symphony."

Perhaps it is time to certify the 13B.

Hans

Al Gietzen wrote:

Hum-m-m; kind of puts Lycoming and Continental on notice, doesn't it?



  #3  
Old January 28th 04, 02:34 AM
Big John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Cy

Wonder how they are going to prevent miss-fueling 172's with two types
of engines? Have different nozzles like used for unleaded gas in
automobiles or???????????

If I had a 172 with a Lyc or Con, I'd stand and watch each fueling to
be sure I got the correct fuel when the Centurions start showing up..

Big John


On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 04:21:08 GMT, "Cy Galley"
wrote:



Hans Conser wrote:

Page 18 Feb issue of Flying:

"FAA Certifies Auto Engine Conversion


----clip----
  #4  
Old January 28th 04, 03:11 AM
Kevin Horton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 17:50:51 -0800, Dan Thomas wrote:

Thielert already has a 2400 hour TBR in hand for this engine. And they
have an STC for the 172 N and P series airplanes, as well as some Piper
models, but last I heard they were having some troubles with a shortage of
vendor-supplied items. They didn't specify what those items were, but I
imagine it has to do with engine mounts or radiators or something. I hope
it isn't the engine manufacturer being stubborn.
The 1.7 is a 135 HP engine. It produces more static thrust than
the original Lycoming it replaces, although that's through a CS prop. The
HP is rated at 2300 RPM, which is why the airplane's performance isn't
affected by the lower HP. At the 2700 RPM of the Lyc so much power is lost
to the much higher propeller drag that the 135 at 2300 is able to match
it.
It burns a bit over 4 GPH of diesel or Jet A, and fuel savings
over the life of the engine we have figured at about $40,000 CDN. The
engine's cost is about the same as a factory reman Lyc O-320, but I
imagine the initial installation would add considerably to that.
Go to http://www.centurion-engines.com/

Dan

It is interesting that they think static thrust is so important. Static
thrust is only important if you are using the aircraft to pull out stumps.
The thrust changes as soon as you start rolling ahead and then the
comparisons of static thrust become meaningless.

There is an FAQ on their web site "In a PA28 or a C172 with a CENTURION
1.7, can I expect the same or better take off, climb and cruise?" They
admit that the climb performance with the Centurion engine will be lower
(due to the lower power output - even with the constant speed prop). And
they carefully don't mention cruise speed at all. I wonder why?

--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
e-mail: khorton02(_at_)rogers(_dot_)com

  #6  
Old January 28th 04, 07:58 AM
Craig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Cy Galley" wrote in message news:W9GRb.167062$I06.1661204@attbi_s01...
Jet fuel has a larger nozzle. I don't know whether you can fuel a gas 172
with the larger nozzle. I know at one time Beech was trying to get
restrictors in the openings of Bonanzas.


Make it even easier to prevent misfueling....go to single point refueling...


Craig C.

  #7  
Old January 28th 04, 09:03 PM
Cy Galley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I don't understand how single point fueling will do a better job of
preventing using the wrong fuel.

"Craig" wrote in message
om...
"Cy Galley" wrote in message

news:W9GRb.167062$I06.1661204@attbi_s01...
Jet fuel has a larger nozzle. I don't know whether you can fuel a gas

172
with the larger nozzle. I know at one time Beech was trying to get
restrictors in the openings of Bonanzas.


Make it even easier to prevent misfueling....go to single point

refueling...


Craig C.



  #8  
Old January 29th 04, 03:28 AM
Craig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Cy Galley" wrote in message news:msVRb.177072$na.286827@attbi_s04...
I don't understand how single point fueling will do a better job of
preventing using the wrong fuel.


Going to a single point system requires the use of a special pressure
feed nozzle. The nozzle locks onto a mating recepticle on the a/c.
With this system, all tanks are filled through the single connection.
The system is a bit of overkill ( to put it mildly ) for small a/c,
but we are going to start seeing it soon with the practicality of the
personal jet ever closer.

Craig C.

  #10  
Old January 30th 04, 01:15 AM
Charlie England
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Big John wrote:
Cy

Wonder how they are going to prevent miss-fueling 172's with two types
of engines? Have different nozzles like used for unleaded gas in
automobiles or???????????

If I had a 172 with a Lyc or Con, I'd stand and watch each fueling to
be sure I got the correct fuel when the Centurions start showing up..

Big John

snipped

I have an RV-4 with a Lyc & I stand and watch each fueling to be sure I
got the correct fuel (type & quantity). Now. Centurion powered 172's or not.

Charlie

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Accident Statistics: Certified vs. Non-Certified Engines Ron Wanttaja Home Built 23 January 18th 04 05:36 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 1 January 2nd 04 09:02 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 October 2nd 03 03:07 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 4 August 7th 03 05:12 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 July 4th 03 04:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2023 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.