Pilots helping pilots

View over 100 airline profilesAdd to Google



Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums > Career Builder > Engineers & Technicians
Register FAQ Advertising Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Engineers & Technicians Aeronautical engineering and aircraft MX

 

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums

    Already registered? Login above

OR
 
To take advantage of all the site's features, become a member of
the largest community of airline pilots in the U.S. and beyond.

The advertising to the left will not show if you are a registered user.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-23-2012, 05:41 PM   #121 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubdriver View Post
Nice of you to stop in, Hindsight.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Game changer" now that's an original phrase. The new diesel Skylane will work with biofuel Jet-A in due course of time. It's nice they are selling them now so the few that sell depreciate by time the cost per gallon of "bio-A" becomes decent in 2020 or 30. I still can't believe a 182 runs half million bucks though. Maybe it mixes martinis.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cessna unveils "Turbo NXT" Skylane

(AOPA ePilot, 7/23/12, S, Brown) A Cessna 182 powered by a 230-horsepower Jet-A-burning piston engine will be available in the second quarter of 2013, Cessna Aircraft announced July 23. The thinly masked Turbo182 NXT on display at the Cessna exhibit at EAA AirVenture drew widespread attention even before the official start of the show and unveiling. Cessna’s Jeff Umscheid said the aircraft is a response to customer demand. “This is what the market has been begging for,” he said, calling the aircraft a game changer. Powered by a turbocharged, direct-drive SMA SR305-230E-C1 engine, the Turbo 182 NXT will burn 11 gph at a max cruise speed of 155 knots, Umscheid said, granting owners a lower fuel burn and increased range from avgas counterparts...
11 gph at 155 knots? Biofuel or not, that's not very efficient for a turbo diesel. 16 statute miles per gallon...
threeighteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Advertising above will not show if you are a registered user.
Old 07-23-2012, 06:59 PM   #122 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 249
Default



Wow, General aviation is saved!!!

Now everyone can have a half million airplane to fly to work.
CrimsonEclipse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 03:22 AM   #123 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
detpilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Trying not to crash
Posts: 753
Default

?
Quote:
Originally Posted by threeighteen View Post
11 gph at 155 knots? Biofuel or not, that's not very efficient for a turbo diesel. 16 statute miles per gallon...
Are you kidding? It's not amazing, but it is by no means inefficient. That's a comparable burn and speed to a cirrus sr-20. I challenge you to find a car that gets 16mpg at 177mph.
detpilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 04:43 PM   #124 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
hindsight2020's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Posts: 229
Default

It's a turbo though, that thing will rip you apart come overhaul time. Who are we kidding, the thing is half a million bucks. GA is screwed.
hindsight2020 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 09:14 PM   #125 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 1,252
Default

Like a 182RG, but just a bit slower!

155ktas isn't much of a problem for a NA 182RG, turbo 182 can do like 173 at 14gph, 162kts at 12gph...Twinstar with 14gph is doing better than 160kts...that's TWIN engine burn.

What disappoints me almost as much as the cost is the weight. A new 172 weighs as much (nearly 1800) as an old 182 RG....RG for gods sakes! I realize there are some improvements to crashworthiness, but with cars these improvements are usually incorporated while at the least not increasing weight, these things have become pigs...

I love cessnas, but you can't keep wrapping the same turd sandwich up in new clothes and making it less desirable. It's like one of those tricked out Caddys from the 80s. It pretty much starts to suck at EVERYTHING. While not the fastest, a good useful load and ruggedness offset this. Now it has a much lower useful load with less excess performance. Offer it in a more bare-bones lightweight package. Let the customers outfit it with the A/C, anti-ice, power seats, televisions, etc. They should NOT be trying to compete against SR20/22s and DA50s with 182s.
JamesNoBrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2012, 06:18 AM   #126 (permalink)
Prime Minister
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: CRJ
Posts: 14,224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by threeighteen View Post
11 gph at 155 knots? Biofuel or not, that's not very efficient for a turbo diesel. 16 statute miles per gallon...

If you can get an airplane in the ballpark of a passenger car, you are doing OK.

An airline ticket is break-even on fuel consumption vs. driving long distances as long as the plane is pretty fuel (they usually are) and the driver is sole occupant (often the case).

The airplane's a lot faster on a TRANSCON, but anywhere you can drive to in a day, you'll save a bunch of money by driving if you have a family of five.
rickair7777 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2012, 02:20 PM   #127 (permalink)
Self Employed.
 
SkyHigh's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Self-employed, C-150 CA
Posts: 6,909
Default Airplane VS House

In the mid-1970's my parents bought a nice home in the suburbs. I remember at the time that the purchase price was about the same as a Cessna 172 at the time. Decades later and the same home is now valued in the upper 300 to lower 400K range. About the same as a new Cessna 172 today.

The thing that is different is that we lost 18 years of plane production during the 1980's and 1990's. As such we have sticker shock since we have not had anything new to look at in recent memory. In addition GA is missing 18 years of used inventory to help bridge the gap.

All we have really is old 1970's junk and very new 2000 and up. It is kind of discouraging for the new generation who is not comfortable with older stuff like that.

Skyhigh
__________________
Work smart. Work to live. Don't live to work.
SkyHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 03:46 PM   #128 (permalink)
Moderator
 
Cubdriver's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: Commercial Pilot
Posts: 4,774
Default

Looks like Conti is going to jump on the diesel bandwagon as well. Cessna uses mostly Lycos and Textron owns Lycoming, but the Columbia uses Continentals so it would be sort of cool if there were a turbodiesel Columbia available at some point.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Continental Motors unveils plans for trio of diesels

(D. Hirschman, AOPA, 7/27/12) Continental Motors will obtain FAA certification this year on the first of what the company promises will be a full line of diesel aircraft engines ranging from 150 to 350 horsepower. "These kinds of commitments allow our customers and our suppliers to know and plan their activities," said Continental CEO Rhett Ross. "We will certify a (diesel engine) this year, and we will be in rate production in the first quarter of 2013. Continental hasn't announced any launch customers for the three sizes of diesel engines it plans to produce. (Cessna Aircraft chose an SMA diesel engine for the recently announced Turbo 182 NXT. Continental's first diesel engine will be a turbo-charged 200- to 250-hp model called the TD-300. The TD-450, a 300- to 350-hp version, will go into production in 2015; and a TD-220, a 160- to 180-hp version, will be produced beginning in 2017. The push into engines designed to burn kerosene-based fuels is driven by the lack of leaded avgas in some international markets and uncertainty about the future of 100LL in the United States, Ross said. At the same time, Continental is moving to address questions about the cost and availability of avgas by certifying low-compression piston engines to run on unleaded auto fuel—even auto fuel that contains ethanol. "We are not abandoning the higher horsepower engines," Ross said. "We fully desire a drop-in replacement for 100LL--but we're not going to wait for it."...
__________________
Turn the heat O-F-F!
Cubdriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 04:31 PM   #129 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 1,252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubdriver View Post
Looks like Conti is going to jump on the diesel bandwagon as well. Cessna uses mostly Lycos and Textron owns Lycoming, but the Columbia uses Continentals so it would be sort of cool if there were a turbodiesel Columbia available at some point.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Continental Motors unveils plans for trio of diesels

(D. Hirschman, AOPA, 7/27/12) Continental Motors will obtain FAA certification this year on the first of what the company promises will be a full line of diesel aircraft engines ranging from 150 to 350 horsepower. "These kinds of commitments allow our customers and our suppliers to know and plan their activities," said Continental CEO Rhett Ross. "We will certify a (diesel engine) this year, and we will be in rate production in the first quarter of 2013. Continental hasn't announced any launch customers for the three sizes of diesel engines it plans to produce. (Cessna Aircraft chose an SMA diesel engine for the recently announced Turbo 182 NXT. Continental's first diesel engine will be a turbo-charged 200- to 250-hp model called the TD-300. The TD-450, a 300- to 350-hp version, will go into production in 2015; and a TD-220, a 160- to 180-hp version, will be produced beginning in 2017. The push into engines designed to burn kerosene-based fuels is driven by the lack of leaded avgas in some international markets and uncertainty about the future of 100LL in the United States, Ross said. At the same time, Continental is moving to address questions about the cost and availability of avgas by certifying low-compression piston engines to run on unleaded auto fuel—even auto fuel that contains ethanol. "We are not abandoning the higher horsepower engines," Ross said. "We fully desire a drop-in replacement for 100LL--but we're not going to wait for it."...
Now THIS I agree with! It's time the large engine manufacturers embrace it.
JamesNoBrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2012, 12:31 PM   #130 (permalink)
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 639
Default

Neat!
threeighteen is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
 

 
Reply
 



« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Future Fuels for Jets Cubdriver Engineers & Technicians 117 04-23-2013 06:00 AM
JetBlue Volunteer LOA and future plans? Tor2ga Major 0 10-17-2008 08:26 PM
Investing for the future par8head Money Talk 19 10-05-2008 07:26 PM
The Financial Crisis and Future of America FloridaGator Hangar Talk 26 10-02-2008 10:24 AM
The financial Crisis and future of America FloridaGator Regional 1 09-29-2008 07:28 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:29 PM.


vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2012 Internet Brands, Inc.