Raptor Composite Aircraft

Discussion in 'Aircraft Design / Aerodynamics / New Technology' started by Dexacare, Mar 28, 2016.

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes Forum by donating:

  1. Aug 23, 2019 #1321

    rbarnes

    rbarnes

    rbarnes

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2015
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Texas
    That pricing is better than it looks at first glance.

    $90k is actually for a turn key firewall forward installation by DeltaHawk into your experimental plane. Including prop, fuel system and electronics. True turn key install. When adding all that cost to the engine 90k is not that bad.

    They're offering this installed kit for the first dozen or so engines to get some engines flying in people's planes as quick as possible
     
  2. Aug 23, 2019 #1322

    TarDevil

    TarDevil

    TarDevil

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2010
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    125
    Location:
    Coastal North Carolina/USA
    Yeah, my thoughts. High, but not horrible considering they will get thrust for you at that price.
    The bigger issue with a Deltahawk engine is power. I don't think they have anything powerful enough to produce a climb in Raptor.
     
    rv6ejguy likes this.
  3. Aug 23, 2019 #1323

    BoKu

    BoKu

    BoKu

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    2,251
    Likes Received:
    2,807
    Location:
    Western US
    I really enjoyed No Short Days by Kimble D. McCutcheon. It's available as a series of .pdfs from the Aircraft Engine Historical Society: https://www.enginehistory.org/engines.shtml
     
    wsimpso1 likes this.
  4. Aug 23, 2019 #1324

    BJC

    BJC

    BJC

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    9,355
    Likes Received:
    6,131
    Location:
    97FL, Florida, USA
    Their engine (180 HP) is not enough HP for the Raptor.

    As quick as possible will be good: they have only been developing the engine for 22 years.


    BJC
     
  5. Aug 23, 2019 #1325

    FarmBoy

    FarmBoy

    FarmBoy

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2012
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    Gainesville, VA
    A turbo itself, yes, selection, integration, and control of a set of turbos to provide both engine intake pressure normalization and bleed air for cabin pressurization over a defined range of temperatures and pressures customized for a specific engine not so much.

    My thought about this unit was that it would be relatively simple to add as a source for cabin and engine pressure normalization to a desired altitude (e.g. 8-10,000 ft), providing an ability to use as a turnkey option to add to a wide range of standard (sea level optimized) engines (turbo or non-turbo) with little regard to displacement or RPM. It this regard, this is a very clever, 'elegant' device (that is itself basically a CVT belt driven turbo) that could be programmed to only provide make-up pressure as demanded by ambient pressure and would otherwise cause little to no load on an engine at low altitude.
     
  6. Aug 23, 2019 #1326

    rv6ejguy

    rv6ejguy

    rv6ejguy

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,749
    Likes Received:
    2,776
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    The DeltaHawk is still unproven in my book as far as power, longevity and reliability goes. No way I'd be the first to drop $90K on their promises. They rate right up their with the Zoche diesel and the 6 cylinder Pmag promises. They all lost credibility years ago in my book.

    Raptor needs at least 350 hp to be viable, perhaps 400 if the bloated weight can't be brought down a bunch. Maybe these folks could help: https://advanced-aero.com/product/g3-standard-turbo-lycoming-engine-tio-540-br-385hp/
     
  7. Aug 23, 2019 #1327

    gtae07

    gtae07

    gtae07

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,781
    Likes Received:
    1,050
    Location:
    Georgia
    But we have computers now! Everything should be perfect the first time!

    Besides, any fool would know that test failures, schedule slips, and budget exceedences would have all been prevented had proper risk reduction taken place and detailed program management been applied.


    (we need a sarcasm tag here...)
     
    akwrencher and BoKu like this.
  8. Aug 23, 2019 #1328

    bmcj

    bmcj

    bmcj

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    12,758
    Likes Received:
    4,744
    Location:
    Fresno, California
    At this point, it seems like the best engine choice might be a turbine or turboprop. That could provide the necessary power, and more. Weight savings on the engine, but you’ll need to carry more fuel.
     
  9. Aug 24, 2019 #1329

    Tiger Tim

    Tiger Tim

    Tiger Tim

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    2,842
    Likes Received:
    1,583
    Location:
    Thunder Bay
    I was thinking the same. Maybe a nearly run-out Walter?
     
  10. Aug 24, 2019 #1330

    Kyle Boatright

    Kyle Boatright

    Kyle Boatright

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2012
    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    372
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Good idea. Ain't like the amazing projected range has any real utility. Lindbergh and Max Conrad are the only two people I know of who were dedicated enough to sit in an SEL seat for that long...
     
  11. Aug 24, 2019 #1331

    FarmBoy

    FarmBoy

    FarmBoy

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2012
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    18
    Location:
    Gainesville, VA
    A normally aspirated 540 has a dry weight of 438 lbs - might as well go with an LS3.

    As noted previously, one of these - https://www.vividracing.com/ford-racing-23l-mustang-ecoboost-crate-engine-p-151854857.html - is 340lbs full up and with the right ECU programming and a good IC can easily produce 350+ FWHP at 4000 RPM from the stock crate engine (https://www.drivingline.com/articles/ecoboosted-adding-96-hp-to-ford-s-23l-ford-mustang). Add a Ballistic PSRU and for less than $15K (with an SDS EFI) you have a solid power plant. Add a Torotrak V-charge and you should be good to go with pressurization up to 25,000 ft. You ought to able to complete a firewall back package for with prop (including air conditioning) with this setup and save 2-300 lbs from his current configuration.
     
  12. Aug 24, 2019 #1332

    rv6ejguy

    rv6ejguy

    rv6ejguy

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,749
    Likes Received:
    2,776
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    Peter had originally listed PT6s as an engine choice but the engine was worth much more than he wanted to sell the whole airplane for so that was passed by. Might have been better to go after fewer turbine sales than the mass market but then he'd be competing directly against Lancair IVPs which already demonstrate superior performance over his projected numbers.

    For 4 cylinder engines, there is still the question of TV with the PSRU and I'd never try to get over 100hp/L out of an engine for aircraft use. Chances are that the long term durability wouldn't be there, especially at 150hp/L.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2019
    BoKu likes this.
  13. Aug 24, 2019 #1333

    TFF

    TFF

    TFF

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,445
    Likes Received:
    3,182
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    This project is the perfect real world example on how hard it is to be different. Nothing off the shelf means you’re not getting any relief in someone else’s knowledge covering part of the project spec. 100% responsible is hard to swallow when it is a real 100%.

    Develop an engine gearbox combo; do you have the time? Even putting off the shelf parts together takes time and testing. Once you add that up, is the value better. You might have squeezed the turnip to get the initial parts and never figure out how to mate them. 100% Fail.

    I have seen so many projects where the owner will not finish something because it needs $100 a piece bolts. Throw $20,000 away because of principle of 5 hundred dollar bolts, fail. Principal is misplaced. The bolts have no ego.

    A Titan 51 V8 FWF is about $45K with all the discounts. Close to $60k if no connection to their airplanes. Minimum you will spend the same $45K in time and parts to duplicate it to equal operating reliability. That is what it will cost to fly a $7000 engine. That is if you are 100% self sufficient know it all. Need help? Better have the right friends or pay.

    You can do it better? We are watching the we can do it better right now.

    If he has been smarter, he should have developed the airframe and engine separate. Not because he could have divided the development problems into separate areas. He could have had two viewerships and double if not triple the people watching. Whichever side of the project was a turnoff could be deferred to the other. Keep the train wrecks separate.
     
  14. Aug 24, 2019 #1334

    Tom Nalevanko

    Tom Nalevanko

    Tom Nalevanko

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    122
    Location:
    Camarillo, CA
    FB report — no leaks with latest design.

    Best,

    Tom
     
    BoKu likes this.
  15. Aug 25, 2019 #1335

    BBerson

    BBerson

    BBerson

    Well-Known Member HBA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    11,695
    Likes Received:
    2,199
    Location:
    Port Townsend WA
    For over water flights to Hawaii, I think maybe a Lycoming dual pack twin engine, with both into one prop shaft might work. Using two turbocharged Lycoming engines with wide belt drives to the prop shaft, and with overrunning clutches if one engine fails. Like the 8" wide belt drive on a turbocharged Enstrom. These engines could be overhauled used engines instead of new. His Audi engine was used, I think. Overhauled Lycoming engines would not be worse than any new diesel even if any brand new diesel auto engine is available to buy. Since diesels tend to tear up the PSRU with the high compression shocks.
    The Rutan Voyager went around the world without using any Diesel engines. They had two engines and shut one down for extended range. Over water two is better but one can be shut down for reserve if needed.
     
  16. Aug 25, 2019 #1336

    TFF

    TFF

    TFF

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    11,445
    Likes Received:
    3,182
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    I just put a new belt on one of the company’s Enstrom last week so I know them well, but the obvious choice is two 540’s, Piaggio style. At least you could kill the butterfly with a hammer. Anyone buying into one of these projects is not really caring about cheap, they want to be different. I have a friend who built a Defiant. He sold it a couple of years ago because he was trying to update it and the project bogged down. Last year he bought a ready to fly Velocity. He had a V8 juice moment. He could not figure out new doors, and once he had the Velocity it became obvious copying the Velocity doors would have allowed him to fix the last update problem. By the way his Defiant had originally two auto conversions. He had lots of problems. It has Lycomings on it now.
     
  17. Aug 25, 2019 #1337

    rbarnes

    rbarnes

    rbarnes

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2015
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Texas
    My comment was not based on using the DeltaHawk in the Raptor, just on your comment that "$90k was expensive". I think once it is offered in certified version the engine alone will price out similarly to a Cont TSIO 360 (which is admittedly a very expensive 200hp engine)
    Before the Rudd Family came along with their half a billion in deep pockets I would have agreed with you. The DeltaHawk is legit now. (finally) It has the funding it always needed and a family with a passion for aviation and long proven history in running a successful industrial manufacturing business.

    I've been following the Raptor since day one and was fascinated to watch the CNC mold building process. I commented on YT at the beginning that he was making a huge mistake with the initial engine choice and his reply was "if it doesn't work we can stick a Continental in there" .... which turned out to not be true with progressively narrower and narrower tunnel vision being displayed by Peter.

    He almost lost me when he weighed the engine alone. He really started pushing me over the edge when he weighed the whole plane. I gave up on this thing ever working when I watched him stick 100lbs in the nose as "ballast". o_O
    Like watching a slow motion car wreck at this point. All you can do is cringe and wait for the crunch...
     
    rv6ejguy and BoKu like this.
  18. Aug 25, 2019 #1338

    rv6ejguy

    rv6ejguy

    rv6ejguy

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,749
    Likes Received:
    2,776
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    The Deltahawk, no matter what how deep the pockets are behind it, is still unproven in my view. When they get 100 flying and they accumulate 2000 hours each, trouble free, they will have arrived. They must have spent many tens of millions on R&D in the last couple decades, that money needs to be earned back and I'm not convinced that will be any time soon even at that $90K price which includes prop, engineering and labor. I don't believe the market is there in North America given the price of avgas and the fact that the BSFC is little better in cruise than a Lyconental running LOP with EIs. There will never be a net cost savings even over 2000 hours. We'll see on that one.

    Military and foreign sales where avgas prices are much higher may boost the numbers of course. Now, DH has lots of competition from the Continental and Austro diesels which are well proven. Too late to the market to take a big share now.
     
  19. Aug 25, 2019 #1339

    Bert

    Bert

    Bert

    Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2016
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    Stony Plain
    If memory serves me, he put that ballast in to keep the nose from accidentally rising during high speed taxi tests. It is not intended to be there once flying begins.
     
  20. Aug 25, 2019 #1340

    rv6ejguy

    rv6ejguy

    rv6ejguy

    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2012
    Messages:
    3,749
    Likes Received:
    2,776
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    I think that ballast will stay there given the massive weight of the propulsion package. He doesn't have an idea of where the C of G is anymore but almost all weight has gone in aft.

    In 2013, the empty weight estimate was 1800 pounds, it's now likely more than 3200... Huge miscalculation and weight growth.
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2019

Share This Page

arrow_white