REFLECTOR: Re: Turbine XL

johnward n120rj at gulftel.com
Wed Jul 14 22:40:27 CDT 2004


Wayne,
        Thanks for the info about the Affordable Turbine Power company.
Good to know they are Bull Shi**ers and thieves.  Their web site is
tempting.  They say the engine weighs 188 lbs. with horse power ratings of
165 to 255.  Now called Innodyn Aviation and the web site is
www.atpcoinc.com if you want to check out their info.
John Ward

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Wayne Lanza" <wlanza at bellsouth.net>
To: "Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list" <reflector at tvbf.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 8:31 PM
Subject: REFLECTOR: Re: Turbine XL


>   I am some what versed with the Allison B17F and would offer the
> following operational facts.
> This is the same engine you may have seen as a conversion for the
> Bonanza, C210, Glasair 3
> and several other aircraft. The core engine is basically the same as
> used in many helicopters,
> most notably in the Bell jet ranger. The B17F is the only variant in
> the lower HP ranges that is
> set up for propeller use. The engine will weigh about 250# installed
> and would be a reasonable
> fit/conversion for an XL. The B17F is rated at 455HP and will maintain
> about 300HP at 20K feet.
> Operation at altitude will get the miles per gallon number competitive
> with a recip, but you will
> have a flight duration of about 2 hours. That's the good news...
>   The caveats are:
> * Engine cost - $50K for a decent run out, another $50K for an overhaul
> (typical - varies with core
> condition). If you are interested in a new engine - forget it, they
> won't sell to home builders (a new
> engine is about $350K!!) If you find a rebuilt, expect to it to be
> $150K to $250K.
> * Fuel consumption, which is about 50% higher than a sloppy recip
> (typical SFC for the B17F is
> 0.72P/H/HP - Lycomings are good for 0.52 or less).
> * The propeller will have to be a custom - No you can't put an Ivo on
> it!! I got a quote from MT, the
> correct prop will cost about $15K plus governor (remember that this is
> a constant speed engine).
> * Correct use of a turbine has been problematic - they are easily
> damaged by unqualified operators.
>
>   The bottom line is that turbines are not yet ready for us, we all wish
> otherwise... If you haven't heard
> the facts about ATP or whoever they are calling themselves now... DONOT
> be mislead by these guys!
> To be kind they are thieves and Bull Sh--ers, We have three of the T62
> engines that they use as cores.
> They run great, are light weight, very small and extremely simple - but
> burn all of the gallons per hour!
> ATP has somehow bent, stretched, and found ways of defying the laws of
> physics and metallurgy - all
> the while building a turbine engine in their garage that burns less
> fuel than a piston engine! WOW, do
> you know what this means? GE, P&W, Garrett, RR and Williams have a lot
> of explaining to do!!
>
> Fly Safe & see you at Oshkosh,
> Wayne Lanza
> Composite Design
> ________________________________________________________________________
> _______
>
> On Jul 14, 2004, at 6:56 PM, Greg Poole wrote:
> >
> > No, not contemplating a turbine Scott unless they ever approach
> > piston/rotary running cost (including overheads)....but ...curious
> > again...what makes the RR Model 250-B17 so special?  (read; HP? fuel
> > burn?
> > W&B effect for a Velocity?) ...you don't have one or two for sale do
> > you??!
> > ;^)
> >
> > Greg
>
> _______________________________________________
> To change your email address, visit
http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>
> Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
> user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
> Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>




More information about the Reflector mailing list