Why Gas Engines Are Far From Dead - Biggest EV Problems

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Dan Thomas

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
5,340
And that is the point.


BJC
Exactly. Even the proposed 110-hp certified diesel doesn't exist.

The closest thing to a two-place convertible-gear airplane I know of is the Glastar. I designed and carried out the installation of a 2.2l Subaru RAF conversion in one. By the time it was done the owner could have had an O-235. Any new training airplane needs to use what's available right now, not something that's nothing more than a proposal. And it will cost $300K at least because the R&D and certification all has to be amortized, to say nothing of the factory tooling and training. It won't happen until we're out of old airplanes or until an awful lot of people suddenly decide they want to learn to fly.
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
11,223
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
I’ve never flown a GlaStar, but I had a nice flight in its bigger brother, my Sportsman 2+2, yesterday. Glasair Aviation has been working on type certificating the Sportsman for over a year, but I don’t know the status of that effort. If / when they are successful, I expect that a factory built, equipped like typical homebuilts, will cost close to $400,000.

Note that the GlaStar, with a steel tube internal aft fuselage, was TC’ed under contract in Germany as the Symphony. IIRC, that operation was relocated to Canada before they ceased operations with around 30 aircraft built.


BJC
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
13,013
Location
Memphis, TN
I would have to look at numbers but I think the 152 useful load might be a hair less than the 150. They started stuffing pretty interiors in them and made them heavy. 24v 152s are a pain too. The 150 family and 172 are save your ass airplanes. The attrition at the flight school has been from dumb stuff and a couple of wind storms. I know of one ran out of gas, one flew low and caught a wire, there is a couple of others. This was a student owned one with a moonlighting airline pilot. No one has been hurt in any of them. The wreck is the start of a stall spin that was like lucky to be close to the ground. Facing the wrong way from traffic that day. The flight school has a Skycatcher for people who want “new”. It sits. They had a DA40 for a couple of years. So they have tried a bunch of things. I know the warrantee work on the Skycatcher has exceeded the purchase price. It’s not a robust aircraft.
 

Attachments

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
11,223
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
I would have to look at numbers but I think the 152 useful load might be a hair less than the 150.
I don’t recall the book numbers, but I guarantee that a 152 will carry a heavier payload.

24v 152s are a pain too.
That definitely was one of the dumber things that Cessna did.

The wreck is the start of a stall spin that was like lucky to be close to the ground.
It takes a determined effort to get a 152 to spin.

I know the warrantee work on the Skycatcher has exceeded the purchase price. It’s not a robust aircraft.
It will be interesting to see what the current crop of LSAs look like after they have 10,000 + instructional flight hours.

BJC
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
4,945
Location
US
It will be interesting to see what the current crop of LSAs look like after they have 10,000 + instructional flight hours.
It would be interesting to explore a business case for restarting C-152 (or C-150) production.
- Buy the type certificate from Cessna (it wouldn't seem to have much value to them. The Skycatcher debacle has probably extinguished any desire Cessna had to re-enter the primary trainer market)
- Use modern CNC to produce match-holed parts
- assemble them where it can be done at acceptable cost to acceptable standards. Robotic riveting where it makes sense (equipment capitalization costs vs labor costs).
- If Lycoming won't/can't provide a lot of O-235s at low cost for a big contract, consider other certified options.
- Similarly, shop around for a reasonable cost provider for a simple glass instrument panel. Steam gauges available as a customer option.

The existing C-152s won't last forever, and flight schools may be willing to pay for an aircraft with known flight, repair, and maintenance characteristics. Accountants, loan officers, and insurance actuaries like predictability a lot.

Consider selling kits to E-AB builders. The tooling to cut, drill, and bend the metal is already there, might as well see if folks want to buy parts to roll their own airplane, fit their own engines (want batteries/electric, go ahead!) etc, and get a repairman's certificate to maintain it. As long as the FAA maintains the "wall" between certified and E-AB aircraft uses, you wouldn't be cutting into your own trainer market.

Or, build Ercoupes!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BJC

stanislavz

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Aug 21, 2016
Messages
496
Location
Lt
Use modern CNC to produce match-holed parts
- assemble them where it can be done at acceptable cost to acceptable standards. Robotic riveting where it makes sense (equipment capitalization costs vs labor costs).
- If Lycoming won't/can't provide a lot of O-235s at low cost for a big contract, consider other certified options.
Done already in aeroprakt c-32, except robotic riveting.

Flighydesign tried to enter with its ct derived metal copy - mt. Specially targeted for flight school, but it is ugly at least..
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
11,223
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
- If Lycoming won't/can't provide a lot of O-235s at low cost for a big contract, consider other certified options.
Every time I looked at my 152, I thought that there needs to be a way to slope the windshield more to significantly reduce drag. A lighter engine, such as the (expensive) 915iS would allow some slope improvement. Put it in an A152 airframe, with a flat spring main gear and the tiny wheel in the back, replace the yokes with sticks, add a second seat belt and an inverted fuel and oil system. Much more fun.


BJC
 

stanislavz

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Aug 21, 2016
Messages
496
Location
Lt
A lighter engine, such as the (expensive) 915iS would allow some slope improvement. Put it in an A152 airframe, with a flat spring main gear and the tiny wheel in the back, replace the yokes with sticks, add a second seat belt and an inverted fuel and oil system. Much more fun.
Repeat same with Tailwind - fun is squared :)

There was an efficency report comparising tailwind with modern composite airplane and no clear winner..
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
4,945
Location
US
Done already in aeroprakt c-32, except robotic riveting.



Flighydesign tried to enter with its ct derived metal copy - mt. Specially targeted for flight school, but it is ugly at least..
I couldn't find an "mt" model, but here's what Flight Design says about the CTLS (bold added):
The CTLS has long been popular with Flight schools and Flying clubs due to its low operating cost, easy flight characteristics and large comfortable cabin.
On the other hand, here's the experience of one flight school operator withh the Flight Design CTLS:

So last week, my head CFI, Ed Kalabus, and I took a commercial flight to Memphis, rented a car and then found our way to tiny Somerville, TN where Dennis Long has the Aeroprakt USA distributorship. After dealing with cracking CTLS gear legs (hey, it happens with student pilots), I was looking for something maybe a bit more suited for a primary trainer.
There's "sales brochure" rugged and there's the real-world.
"Oh my God, that's Bobby Doofus in the flare! Woah! He dropped that thing in from 15 feet! Get him on the radio, tell him he's done for the day. Park it in front of the maintenance hangar. And don't hit the ramp cart with the tail--again!"
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
4,945
Location
US
Easy one. Flight Design MC - Wikipedia

And yes, composite is too delicate for school use - especially carbon. It will break in millin pieces, where aluminium would bent.
Thanks. So, it's an "MC" :).

They built the fuselage of metal, but then we read:

The landing gear legs are composite and are adapted from the CTLS.
:eek:Why do that? Especially if the CTLS gear is known for cracking? It's very possible to make sturdy composite gear, but if prospective customers have had a bad experience with a manufacturer's composite landing gear, seems smart to do something different, especially if you've gone to the trouble of making the >rest< of the plane metal.

There's a lot of complaining about marketing folks, but sometimes they make worthwhile points (within their area of expertise).
 

stanislavz

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Aug 21, 2016
Messages
496
Location
Lt
They built the fuselage of metal,
It was an order of marketing guys, to do same lines, but in metal.

Try to find its manual - it have tail section from three cones to reassemble composite cousin tail lines. Where one cone would be nicer/better. Or twin joined as in a-32.

Composite gear leg is not as bullet proof, as same metal rods from Wittman.

But ! Try to look into "standart" eu school airplane - comco ikarus c42. Some tubes with non load bearing panels.
 

BBerson

Light Plane Philosopher
HBA Supporter
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
13,224
Location
Port Townsend WA
The 150 hp Cessna 150 is a very nice performing airplane. I have converted them, wheels and skiis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BJC
Top