Saturday, March 01, 2014

Engines

Which engine to get is a hard nut to crack. I have updated my list and also included TBO. The reason is that the geography in Norway is very different from the European or American mainland. Good emergency landing spaces are far apart, 99% of the country is either woods, mountains or water, and none of those are good places to land in an emergency. I have to be somewhat lucky to survive, very lucky not to be injured and extremely lucky not to wreck the aircraft. Having flown only in Norway, mostly with certified Lycoming/Continentals or the ever-running Rotax, I haven't given it that much thought until I the engine stopped in a Piper Pawnee last year. I was extremely lucky to be able to glide back to the airfield and make a good power off landing with no damage whatsoever, but will I ever be that lucky again? From a practical point of view surviveability is handled in one of three ways for a single engine aircraft.

  1. A very reliable engine.
  2. Low impact velocity and or low kinetic energy (low stall speed and low weight).
  3. Emergency ballistic system or parachute.
It is obvious from the above list that the single most important factor to protect pilot and airplane is a reliable engine combined with good airmanship (always look for emergency landing spots etc). 2 will most certainly help regarding both surviveability and damage to the aircraft if the engine stops. The Onex do not have a particularly low stall speed, but the weight is low. Number 3 I am not sure is such a good idea at all in relation to the risk of engine stopping. I see 3 as a solution to other cases such as the risk of colliding in gliders or perhaps mechanical failure of the aircraft structure when doing aerobatics.

The only meaningful obtainable number regarding the reliability of an aircraft engine is the TBO. TBO is not the same as MTTF, but it is correlated. A set TBO means the MTTF is well within acceptable limits, if the engine is maintained properly and is operated within the TBO. My general experience also suggests that Lycoming, Continental and Rotax are extremely reliable engines, and these three all have a TBO of 2000+ hours.

With this in mind, the choice of engine becomes more interesting. TBO will be a number to take into consideration. Originally my position was to find an alternative to the Aerovee, one that was not too costly and one that I didn't have to put together myself. Today my position is in fact to find good and relevant reasons (excuses?) for not installing a Rotax 912. This means my engine alternatives have changed and have narrowed down to Rotax, Sauer and ULPower with Jabiru 2200/3300 as possible options.

Name Type HP(max) RPM(max) cc kg Price € TBO [H]
Rotax 912 UL 80 2200 1300 72 € 12 142 2 000
Rotax 912 ULS 100 2200 1400 75 € 13 499 2 000
Rotax 912iS 100 2200 1400 75 € 18 329 2 000
Sauer 1800 UL 68 3200 1835 64 € 7 845 1 600
Sauer 2200 UL 85 3000 2234 66 € 9 567 1 600
Sauer 2400 UL 100 3500 2332 75 € 10 574 1 600
Sauer S 2100 ULT 110 3000 2161 76 € 13 586 1 600
Limbach L2400 EFI 100 3000 2424 76 € 23 900 1 600
D-Motor LF26 92 3000 2690 57 € 12 600 1 500
ULPower 260i 97 3300 2592 72 € 14 700 1 500
ULPower 260iS 107 3300 2592 72 € 15 800 1 500
D-Motor LF39 130 3000 3993 79 € 17 800 1 500
ULPower 350i 118 3300 3503 78 € 18 800 1 500
Limbach L2400 EB 84 3200 2424 82 € 19 500 1 400
Verner Scarlet 7H 110 3500 4127 82 € 11 990 600
Hummel 2400 85 3600 2400 76 € 4 850 0
AeroVee 2.1 80 3400 2180 73 € 5 083 0
Great Plains 2300 80 3600 2276 75 € 5 199 0
Revmaster 2300 85 3200 2331 77 € 5 729 0
AeroVee 2.2T 100 3400 2180 80 € 7 266 0
Viking Honda 110 2300 1500 81 € 9 439 0
Jabiru 2200 85 3300 2200 64 € 11 263 0
Jabiru 3300 120 3300 3300 84 € 14 460 0

Engines with no TBO (zero TBO) runs in a state of "on condition". This is the same state as a Lycoming/Rotax that has exceeded its TBO runs in. What does this really mean? Well, this is basic maintenance and reliability theories in action in real life. An engine that runs within its TBO has an MTTF or MTBF that is constant and known. That is, as long as the engine is operated and maintained according to the factory documents,  the failure modes are known and happens so seldom that the risk is acceptable. The risk of sudden catastrophic failure of the engine parts (considering everything else is OK) is non existent from a practical point of view. When exceeding the TBO, the wear and tear on the engine starts to affect the reliability and any number of random things may happen at any time.

A TBO assures the engine will be reliable within its TBO, with a predetermined and very specific set of maintenance. With no TBO the engine can also be just as reliable, theoretically, but you have no idea what kind of maintenance is needed, or how often you have to do it. With no TBO, it runs "on condition". For a Lycoming this is OK for a limited time because the large number of engines in operation has limited the things to look for to a few points during condition inspection. For an engine that is put together by random aftermarket auto parts with no track of the origin, you have no idea, literally. You have no idea what to look for, thus no idea how to maintain it to assure it will run without failure the next hour.

So, an engine with a TBO is a world of difference better than an engine with no TBO, anyone saying differently don't know what they are talking about. It is better because you know how to maintain it, you know what to maintain and you know when to maintain it to be sure it will run without problems the next hours.

For practical purposes this means that a VW engine wizard will have no problems operating and running a VW aero engine conversion, and it will be every bit as reliable as a Lycoming. He knows what to look for, he knows what parts are OK, which aftermarket manufacturers are OK, how long each part last and so on. He will always be one step ahead of any failure waiting to happen. Myself, I am no VW engine wizard, I am no [any engine] engine wizard. So the only way for me to achieve a reliable engine is an engine with a TBO and a specific maintenance schedule within that TBO.

No comments: