• Welcome aboard HomebuiltAirplanes.com, your destination for connecting with a thriving community of more than 10,000 active members, all passionate about home-built aviation. Dive into our comprehensive repository of knowledge, exchange technical insights, arrange get-togethers, and trade aircrafts/parts with like-minded enthusiasts. Unearth a wide-ranging collection of general and kit plane aviation subjects, enriched with engaging imagery, in-depth technical manuals, and rare archives.

    For a nominal fee of $99.99/year or $12.99/month, you can immerse yourself in this dynamic community and unparalleled treasure-trove of aviation knowledge.

    Embark on your journey now!

    Click Here to Become a Premium Member and Experience Homebuilt Airplanes to the Fullest!

Push-Pull powerplant

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
F

fly scared!

Last week another engine-out in a field I know... pilot injured, aircraft burned...
What's SO wrong with multi-engines in light aircrafts?

If I think of the typical two-seater ULM pusher, I can't see why a redundant engine could not be mounted in front of the aircraft.
A small two-stroker would weight maybe 50 kg (including the beefed up forward structure), and that could be easily balanced by the main aft engine, boom et c..
Strengthwise, it would lower maybe 10% the one-engine specs (say 4 g rather than 4.4 g)
50~60 HP would easily keep altitude (and probably climb) at Vy.
It could be turned off at altitude to lower noise and fuel burn, if desidered.
It would probably add some 10,000 USD to the price, if keeping the "standard" (Rotax...) rear engine.
It could even possibly cost less, by selecting a lower-cost rear engine (say a VW) due to the increased global redundancy.

Yeah, I know... "you should always be ready for an engine-out"... easy to say at 3.000 ft, much less at take-off, or at the maximum ceilings (500 ft in Italy) imposed to ULMs.

I guess I'm missing something...? :confused:
 
Back
Top