Engine Upgrades- Worth it? Paul New A&P/IA - InTheHangar
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 жов 2024
- Paul New from Tennessee Aircraft, a renowned A&P/IA in the industry, joins Dan for some talk about how engines were created, what new innovations might be coming (electric?), and what STC engine upgrades are available right now.
Paul New: www.tennesseea...
In The Hangar is sponsored by Gold Seal www.groundscho... iFlyGPS (works on iOS, Android and Windows devices!)
iflygps.com/tak... 90 day trial with that link.
NEW SPONSOR! Looking for a residential mortgage or refinance? Check out Colten Mortgage! ColtenTakingOf...
Join Hangar Club to support our channel at takingoff.s-fi... Order the teeshirts and the new ballcap there as well! Support Christy at patreon.com/pilotchristy
And don't forget to buy your Flying Eyes sunglasses at www.flyingeyesoptics.com using the TAKINGOFF code for 10% off!
On this episode of taking off Dan talking about his dream conversions for his 210 if he won the lottery
Great, highly informative topic! Paul is a great guest, loads of excellent info presented from a position of wisdom & experience.
Maybe your best guest yet. Really enjoyed this video
Got one more with Paul coming up soon.
aftercooler is actually the correct term, it cools the air after the turbo, an intercooler is actually a cooler that is in between 2 stages of compressors in a compound compressor setup. this was very common in warbirds and the name eventually stuck
Great video and great discussion. I love how the host admits his limited knowledge on engines without any hint of an ego. The only thing demonstrated is a willingness to learn and share the information with the viewers. Great job!
Thanks for the kind words.
Thank you for putting on great content that i can learn from and Corey were behind you and look forward to seeing you back in the air when your ready.
Always great to have Paul share his knowledge and insights.
So good!!! Thanks guys I feel like I’m slowly becoming an educated airplane shopper
Always enjoy learning from Paul!
How about the Austra AE300. Fluid cooled, full electric, only sips Jet Fuel.
Hello Dan! I would like to suggest to have a “Technical Guest” and talk about “ Turbocharging, After-cooling, Turbo - Normalizing, Intake Air Density
Good idea.
Dan as always thanks for representing the 210 guys! I have the P210 Javelin conversion that has the lycoming 540 350 HP continuous. Air America did the STC and solved most of the shortcomings of the 210. No overheating during climbing! If you get to the west coast or I get to Texas I will reach out.
Please do!
Surprised you skipped over removing magnetos for electronic ignition so quickly.
Seems that would be the greatest improvement.
Thanks for sharing.
There are a few companies out there who offer electronic ignition, and for the homebuilt market, you can run that whole engine on it, but for certified, the FAA still seems to require at least one mag. I think it's Lycoming that does have a certified fully digital engine, but they don't get much traction with it, and to my knowledge no new aircraft manufacturer has bought into it. Kind of like the Voyager, liquid cooled engine. RAM used it for the 414A, but eventunally took it out and stopped offering that conversion, and I believe converted those aircraft back to air cooled engines.
@@GaryMCurran
Thanks for the update Gary. I believe there is an STC for replacement of a single mag for electronic ignition. Didn't know about the Lycoming full digital engine option.
Thanks again.
SureFly has electronic ignition STC for most airplanes now. You can replace only one magneto for now I believe.
@@davidevigano118 right. But, you still have to have one magneto in the airplane, and that's just kind of crazy. With the reliability of modern electronics, the FAA needs to get its head out and breathe the air of modern technology and come into the 21st, or at least the later 20th century.
@@GaryMCurran couldn't agree more and that's supposed to happen 'soon' according to Surefly. In the meantime they are increasing prices. Hopefully they will have some competition soon.
Nice explanation. I’m kinda a noob started investigacion about airplanes single vs twin etc... like a month ago and asked myself why the diesel were not discussed as much since the rest world do use it. This person plane stuff is interesting. Thanks
You're welcome, and thanks for coming to the channel!
The naming for Inter and post/after cooler stems back to ww2 planes mostly.
Inter-cooler - Located between the Intake/Airbox & The Turbo/Supercharger
(Low pressure Side Inter-stage cooler, Pre cools the air before its boosted so its not as hot/thin)
After-cooler - Located between the Turbo & the Throttle Body/Intake Manifold.
(High pressure Side Post Boost Cooler, Does most of the Charge air Cooling)
And so on…. It is not the first time I hear field experts taking “ Shy” about these technical subjects that many GA pilots believe are not subjects of their competence! We as pilots, must have as a “ Minimum” a basic understanding of our aircraft systems….
Good stuff! Thank you!
I’m an airline pilot. I feel exactly the same about cruise. The difference in time of Mach .78 vs .81is negligible over the distances I fly. It’s sad.
How about Diamond? They seem to be doing well with their Austro and Continental compression ignition engines?
Yeah, saw a video of a Da-42 twin star burning 15 gallons per hour. That’s both engines combined.
Excellent content as usually. If there was a constructive criticism to make, it appeared to be geared towards Continental engines in the 210. It would have been nice to hear Paul's opinions on Gami in Lycoming. Guys I'll have to present it to Ask the A&Ps.
Hey Dan. Great content as always. The audio on this clip was not mastered correctly. Level is much lower then it should be. I notice this in other clips on your channel. Talk to your audio person and create a minimum level standard. Happy New Year!
Very interesting!
Any word on the new findangled unleaded 100?
Great video
Speaking of Continental, they have 6 Jet-A engines with Fadec. Three Diamond aircraft burn Jet-A. Tecnam has the P2010.
What about continental cd-300 in the 210?
You didn't mention Diamonds use of a Mercedes based Diesel which seems to be a winner?
Paul sounded like a real piston enthusiast!! LOL I'm not an A&P by any stretch, but at 70 I've been around awhile LOL There are other big bennies to a turbine! You hit on one, Jet_A. Available everywhere and should be (I think) less $$ than av-gas. Don't hold my feet to the fire on numbers for these. I believe TBO is longer, like 3000 vs 1600-2200? Weight, PT6 385lbs, IO520 572lbs, Number moving parts, way, way less (technical term there 8) Dependability, higher, Maintenance, much less. Cost, Much MORE! Ask a 'transport pilot that flies over the pond, piston or turbine?? Just some things to stick up for the other side LOLOL. Some 'Googling' should get more correct numbers for everything. Thanks Dan, very interesting!! --gary .
I want to turbine.
I think Daher in Florida has a New 'Black' TBM 940 in stock! You would look really good in that Dan!!! PT6-A turbine!! 8) --gary
TurbAero is going to win in the space.
Yeah, I found out that upgrading from my old E-185 to an IO-520 would cost more than I paid for my plane, and I'd burn a lot more fuel while adding less than 10 mph cruise. Plus, I'd be a bit nose-heavy.
What about the Continental CD Jet-A STC’d engines?
Turbin? What does headgear have to do with an engine 😂. Great content
BTW that FAA regulations stuff is focused reliability. If you are going to come out with a new airplane you are going to have to prove the reliability!
I was told once that to go twice as fast you need 4 times the power (as drag increases as a square of speed) and to get 4 times the power you add a lot of weight and the egines are less efficent, so you still don't get the twice the speed, so you then put an even bigger engine in and once you manage to get the 100% increase in speed you are burning at least 5 times the fuel (much reduced range and gas milage), increase the mass of the aircraft to a point that reduces your usefull load and need a runway probably 50% longer to take off and land. The same person said to get the increase in speed, is best done with a reduction in drag, done by buying a faster better designed airframe.
Good comment.
I guess I'm just slightly concerned that you don't know if you have an intercooler on your T210. I mean, to me, this is really important because you want to be able to make sure it's working properly, properly tuned and what kind of cooling you're getting. I know TurboPlus, for their Piper Arrow Intercooler actually makes changes to the manifold pressure and RPM settings for specific power, and you need to update your POH for that.
One of the other things about power conversions is that you're still limited to the structural limitations of the airplane. For example, the Silver Eagle conversions, the top of the green arc now becomes your redline. You actually lose usable airspeed. Of course, if you have a top of the green arc of 200 knots (pulled the number out of the air), at 75% power you may be nudging that at 7,500' in a turbocharged engine, but at 17,500', that same 75% (if you can make it) may only give you an IAS of 160 knots. Having the turbine, though allows you to keep the IAS up there as you climb. But, what cost to do it! Even upgrading a -520 to a -550 won't gain you that much, you may keep the same IAS for another 1,500'.
If you want to go fast, buy an airplane designed to go fast, and be prepared to pay the cost to buy it and maintain it, and put fuel in it.
Yeah, my knowledge deficits are enormous. In my defense, I've been flying for a very short time. I'm learning though.
@@TakingOff Dan, I hope that you didn't feel that I was bashing on you, I wasn't. As to how long you've been flying, I'm sorry, I don't really know. I know that I'm NOT flying any more, and haven't been since the early 1980s. I probably will never hold another medical and I never got past my PPL, so obviously you have more experience than I do.
But, having said that, the T210 IS a complex airplane and it's my opinion that the person who flies ANY airplane should be intimately familiar with the systems in that airplane just from the point of view that knowing about them may keep you alive. But, this isn't just you, it's any pilot. Since the intercoolers were an aftermarket STC (expect on the R model, as Paul mentioned) it's good to know if it's there or not, and what benefits it provides and what maintenance requirements it needs.
I enjoy watching your channel, I enjoy your content, and I enjoy your humility.
@@TakingOff FYI, You have a stock TSIO-520-R (no intercooler's or modified with any STC's). Works well and POH should be up to date...
Yeah I really should know better
No mention of diamond and their Mercedes diesel conversions using their certified aircraft?
I think Diamond is casting their own parts now, after buying the tech from Mercedes? I've heard/seen them on the ramp. They are quiet and sound great, owners really like them! There are a couple transport videos on here, those pilots really like them to!! Good mention!! --gary
I wish Rotax would continue what they started a few years ago they were planning their turbo charged six cylinder FADEC I will probably be first in line to buy one.
Why not go for the UL520T?
P.S: ... or just ask Josh about what he did to his airplane... and what has the outcome. Cheers again.
Remember how it went when Porsche tried to dip it's hands into aircraft engines...
Hi Dan. Some weeks ago, Josh Flowers, from "Aviation101" upgradet his C172 with a new axahust system in Florida and said he almost gained aprox 8/10 Kts. Please, if you have a chance to interview Paul again, why don´t you ask him abot this? Cheers from NE Patagonia, Argentina.
Yeah that’s a tuned induction system. Might be a good topic for a show.
@@TakingOff I forgot to mention that Josh said it increases the fuel economy. It burns 3-4 gallons less than before. Cheers.
7:50 sounds like he isn’t familiar with SDS or EFII fuel injection systems for experimentals
Or the Rotax 915
Electronic ignition: talk about that as an upgrade topic pls. Magnetos fail and are old technology that should really be replaced by now.
"Engine technology hasn't changed much since the 1930's. Why?" The main reason can be summed up in one word; it's the same reason aircraft are so insanely expensive.... LAWYERS!!!!
"Dan, are you from the Big Apple?"
Oh, that's fighting words!!!!! Born and raised in Austin, Texas.
@@TakingOff When you said you walk fast, New Yorkers do that.
🤣
Good modern automobile engines can EASILY run 150 hours at full power. They are extremely reliable. The premise that the auto engine cannot do that is completely false.
But cars don’t run, almost ever, at redline.
Automotive engines go through insane torture testing by the OEMs to ensure durability. For example, Kia (arguably the lowest end car manufacturer in America) runs their new engine designs at full throttle, full load for 300 hrs. That's double the aviation requirement pointed out in this video. Many modern automotive engine designs are far better than traditional aviation engines in every way, including durability. They go through other crazy tests, like extreme thermal shock tests and poor maintenance/sludged oil tests, etc.
It's a myth auto engines aren't up to the aero task. GM's General Standard Durability test includes 300 hours of full throttle operation oscillating between max torque and max HP -- say 4800 to 6500 RPM. After the test, the engine must meet warranty spec. Apparently, they want it to run for the 36000 mile warranty at WOT (wide open throttle.)
Recall Ford ran an Ecoboost engine for over 130,000 miles and won its factory class at Baha after it had big miles including a stunt where it ran at full throttle for 24 hours towing a trailer filled with competitors' trucks. When the engine was torn down at SEMA, it showed little to no wear. Ford’s standard engine durability test run on a 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 was full RPM and maximum turbo boost for 362 hours at full throttle.
Further, Diamond's Austro engine is a Mercedes 2.0L diesel with no internal mods. They remove things like EGR, water cooled exhaust, anti-lag and other turbo mechanicals. It's basically lightened for off-road use. They are working well, but still have a low TBO until data comes in.
The Ford and GM engines could meet certification standards while making far more HP/CID than aero engines, so why not use them? Lycoming and Continental don't have any reason to make changes: they own the market. Luckily Rotax and Yamaha are able to provide PWC and snowmobile engines for cheap, but it's a small market, why bother. How long would a Yamaha marine engine last in an airplane? Well, that's just embarrassing at half the wt/HP ratio.
I have a Subaru engine on my gyrocopter.
Yamaha is supposedly working on an Aero engine.
A good guy trying to explain something to somebody who has not a clue.
We’ve all got to start somewhere Lee. 😜
Diamond? Fadec engines.
Love the videos friends but the rona virtue signaling is exhausting.
Was filmed during a wave earlier in the year.
I thought Autopilot was designed to take the drudgery out of flying.
An intercooler is a cooler between 2 stages of forced induction. If you only have one induction blower, you do not have an intercooler. The auto industry has screwed with the terminology.
No modern certified engines? Has Paul not heard of Rotax? RR--500 no good at altitude v PT-6? Is the guru actually saying the the RR loses power at a higher rate as you ascend than the P&W? If that is true, please, pretty please explain how P&W defies physics. Why no discussion of the Diamonds with diesels--production airplanes that are selling, no? Should not the CFI who gave Dan his last flight review, assuming the review took place in the blown 210 with after market intercooler, be investigated by the FAA for not making sure Dan understood perfectly how the engine should be operated with the intercoller, aftercooler, or, maybe we should call it the between cooler? Does Dan fly in other respects as with such inattention to details that are potentially life and death? Beware this discussion.
You can add horse power but you can't add VNE.
That's a great point! I was kind of shocked at the VNE of some turbines, like TBM, and some older light Jets, Cessna's. A friend flies a Pilatus, he can't use cruise power at FL260, has to pull it back!! Thanks, --gary
Interesting.
I was really excited to watch this episode when I saw the Title, but I was quite disappointed by the content! 98% of the video was on the Cessna 210, which is a total waste of my time! Next time have most of that conversation Off Camera for yourself and try to include some information for some other Aircraft Type Owners. I have the IO360 in my Piper Arrow, and not a word about this engine. This could've been a really informational subject, but nothing really useful came out of the show for any "Non 210" Folk. Remember, we don't all fly 210's.
PS. I always Love your Show, but I just feel that this one had a very narrow focus on what is a broad subject.
Every time I hear a discussion about piston aircraft engine technology it is very depressing. Zero innovation for 80 years. Imagine buying a new car and being charged 2x the price because it has a engine from 1930. There is too much incentive for the entrenched businesses of Continental and Lycoming to keep regulations tight to prevent outside competition and the negate the necessity to innovate. If your only two options are 1930s boxer engines with mags...well then these companies don't need to spend a lick on design. If regulations were ever loosed they would see a rapid and steady fall in sales. Just look at the European market.
Note to self, do not fly with this guy.
Note to self: Tim can never fly with me.