Matronics Email Lists :: View topic

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Diesel Zenith
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

lsabuilder(at)yahoo.com
Guest

Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 8:37 am Post subject: Diesel Zenith

List,

   

  The turbo-diesel web site that Sebastian took pictures of and mentioned on the Zenith web site, is now open.  Very little information yet, but the first will be in a 701.  I e-mailed the site and got a quick reply.  I hope these guys make a go of it. Someone needs to compete with Rotax.

   

  BOB



   Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate

in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. [quote][b]

Jari Kaija

Joined: 23 Feb 2006
Posts: 69

Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:09 am Post subject: Diesel Zenith

>The turbo-diesel web site that Sebastian took pictures of and mentioned  

 > on the Zenith web site, is now open.  Very little information  yet, but the 

 > first will be in a 701.  I e-mailed the site and got a quick  reply.

  



 WWW link?

  

 http://www.jarikaija.com

http://www.project-ch701.net

 http://www.advertiser.fi



   [quote][b]

zodierocket(at)hsfx.ca
Guest

Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:38 am Post subject: Diesel Zenith

http://vulcanaircraftengines.com/index.html  

   

   

     

Mark Townsend  Alma, Ontario  

Zodiac 601XL C-GOXL, CH701 just started  

www.ch601.org / www.ch701.com/ www.Osprey2.com  

  

--

planecrazydld(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 1:24 pm Post subject: Diesel Zenith

I must have missed the original posting. I assuem that this is very expensive and can run on jet-A? How about RPM and weight?

  Thanks.

Jari Kaija <jari.kaija(at)pp.inet.fi> wrote:

  [quote]          >The turbo-diesel web site that Sebastian took pictures of and mentioned 

  > on the Zenith web site, is now open.  Very little information yet, but the 

  > first will be in a 701.  I e-mailed the site and got a quick reply.

  WWW link?

  http://www.jarikaija.com

[url=http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=43909/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail]Get Yahoo! Mail for Mobile[/url] and 

[url=http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=43909/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail]always stay connected[/url] to friends. [quote][b]

planecrazydld(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 1:59 pm Post subject: Diesel Zenith

never mind!

  do not archive

David Downey <planecrazydld(at)yahoo.com> wrote:

  [quote]  I must have missed the original posting. I assuem that this is very expensive and can run on jet-A? How about RPM and weight?

  Thanks.

Jari Kaija <jari.kaija(at)pp.inet.fi> wrote:

  [quote]          >The turbo-diesel web site that Sebastian took pictures of and mentioned 

  > on the Zenith web site, is now open.  Very little information yet, but the 

  > first will be in a 701.  I e-mailed the site and got a quick reply.

   Be a PS3 game guru.

Get your game face on with [url=http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=49936/*http://videogames.yahoo.com]the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games.[/url] [quote][b]

PatrickW

Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 380
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:57 am Post subject: Re: Diesel Zenith

I didn't see any pricing.  Anybody know...?



I would have (would still?) seriously considered a diesel for my 601 if one were available for a reasonable price (Delta Hawk diesels are WAY expensive).



I've got a VW TDI and an old MB diesel, and if I could I'd run diesel in all my stuff.



- Patrick

601XL/Corvair

john.marzulli(at)gmail.co
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 12:26 pm Post subject: Diesel Zenith

To me, the biggest advantage of a diesel would be the ability to run Jet-A and not have to worry about the ethanol content of fuel. There just doesn't seem to be a good 100LL alternative engine for the 701.



- John in Seattle 



On 2/18/07, PatrickW <pwhoyt(at)yahoo.com (pwhoyt(at)yahoo.com)> wrote:[quote] --> Zenith-List message posted by: "PatrickW" <pwhoyt(at)yahoo.com (pwhoyt(at)yahoo.com)>



I didn't see any pricing.  Anybody know...?



I would have (would still?) seriously considered a diesel for my 601 if one were available for a reasonable price (Delta Hawk diesels are WAY expensive). 



I've got a VW TDI and an old MB diesel, and if I could I'd run diesel in all my stuff.



- Patrick

601XL/Corvair





Read this topic online here:



 

http://701Builder.blogspot.com/



"Flying a plane is no different than riding a bicycle... it's just a lot harder to put baseball cards in the spokes.  [quote][b]

Float Flyr

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 2704
Location: Campbellton, Newfoundland

Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 1:50 pm Post subject: Diesel Zenith

Don't forget about the fuel  efficiency.... you won't have to carry as much fuel either.  Also no plugs  to foul and no mixture to worry about!

  

  

 

Noel [quote]   

   --

_________________
Noel Loveys
Kitfox III-A
Aerocet 1100 Floats

NYTerminat(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 2:09 pm Post subject: Diesel Zenith

Noel, 

 Diesel/JetA is heavier than AvGas or MoGas

  

  

 In a message dated 2/18/2007 4:56:43 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  noelloveys(at)yahoo.ca writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		     Don't forget about the fuel    efficiency.... you won't have to carry as much fuel either.  Also no    plugs to foul and no mixture to worry  about!

	


 

  

  [quote][b]

craig(at)craigandjean.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 2:14 pm Post subject: Diesel Zenith

>   Don't forget about the fuel efficiency.... you won't have to  carry as much fuel either.  Also no plugs to foul and no mixture to worry  about! 

  

 Somewhere it was pointed out that although Diesel engines get better  miles per gallon they get about the same miles per pound of fuel.  True?

  

 -- Craig 

  

   [quote][b]

Crvsecretary(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 2:31 pm Post subject: Diesel Zenith

Hello Craig:

  

 Not true.  Diesels by design and by fuel chemistry deliver more miles  per pound of fuel.  

  

 Rule of thumb: The heavier the fuel the more energy per pound.  OK,  before all the chemical engineers flame me, I'm just making the comparison that  #4 bunker oil that is thick as sludge and has to be moved while hot contains  more energy per pound than a light distillate.  Diesel fuel and Jet-A (more  similiar to kerosene than #2 diesel) have more oomph than gasoline.

  

 Gasoline has to run at (approximately) 14.5 to 1 to burn - diesels idle at  as little as 100 to 1 and at full power come close to 14 to 1.  Many of the  old big rigs that have mechanical injection are overfuelled when they belch  black smoke because they are running rich...there is not enough oxygen to burn  all the fuel.  So, whe you are at cruise power, there is always excess  oxygen in the cylinder for a complete burn..and the single lever control will  see to it.  Goodbye mixture knob !

  

 I will be following these light sport diesels very carefully.  The  Vulcan and the DAIR-100 from the UK look VERY promising.  The DAIR is a  TWO-STROKE design very similiar to the Fairbanks-Morse design that powered the  majority of the old US diesel submarine fleet and are still being made for  stationary and marine applications.

  

 The DeltaHawk is looking to be a fine design, but just too much for our  Zeniths; same for the Thielert.  The SMA diesel isn't even looking at the  experimental market...is it ?

  

 Tracy Smith

 do not archive

  

  

 In a message dated 2/18/2007 5:20:17 PM Eastern Standard Time,  craig(at)craigandjean.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		      >     Don't forget about the fuel efficiency.... you won't have    to carry as much fuel either.  Also no plugs to foul and no mixture to    worry about! 

    

   Somewhere it was pointed out that although Diesel engines get better    miles per gallon they get about the same miles per pound of fuel.    True?

    

   -- Craig 

    

	


 

  

  [quote][b]

pilot4pay

Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 171
Location: Louisville, KY

Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:16 pm Post subject: Diesel Zenith

Tracy, your observations  about some of the new power plant makers not even concerned about the  experimental market is interesting. When, after spending considerable sums of  money in development, the makers find that the certified manufacturers do not  start buying or only one manufacturer seems to get the contracts, you will see  them come running to the home-builders to sell whatever they can.

 One would think that the  minimum of red tape to cut in the exp market to be a very attractive incentive.  On the other hand you'll not see a more frugal group of people either. That I  believe is the reason for ignoring us. The investors want return quickly as  possible, and have planned for an adoption by TC manufactures for big  contracts.

 The problem with that  strategy, TC manufacturers (in general) are not early adopters of anything, but  would rather see an established track record of a given technology before taking  a risk with it.

 On economy/fuel  efficiency, I remember reading an article that did a rather good job of breaking  down the available energy in the fuels, then comparing it with the efficiencies  of the motors. If I find that piece, I'll reference it so everyone can look it  up. You are correct, diesel/jet-a/kerosene have more energy per pound. Biggest  problem is the reciprocating piston internal combustion engine, is not very  efficient at converting that to useable mechanical output. Then there's the  weight thing associated with the higher compression combustion needing more  robust construction....

 My future choice for a  power plant is tentatively the innodyn turbine. I'm just hoping they can deliver  on the promised technology. AFAICT there have not been too many shipments of  product. I wish them well, but won't send any deposit until there are units in  the field.

 Craig Smith (not the  other Craig)



   From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com  [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of  Crvsecretary(at)aol.com

Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:31  PM

To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Zenith-List:  Re: Diesel Zenith

 

  Hello Craig:

  

 Not true.  Diesels by design and by fuel chemistry deliver more miles  per pound of fuel.  

  

 Rule of thumb: The heavier the fuel the more energy per pound.  OK,  before all the chemical engineers flame me, I'm just making the comparison that  #4 bunker oil that is thick as sludge and has to be moved while hot contains  more energy per pound than a light distillate.  Diesel fuel and Jet-A (more  similiar to kerosene than #2 diesel) have more oomph than gasoline.

  

 Gasoline has to run at (approximately) 14.5 to 1 to burn - diesels idle at  as little as 100 to 1 and at full power come close to 14 to 1.  Many of the  old big rigs that have mechanical injection are overfuelled when they belch  black smoke because they are running rich...there is not enough oxygen to burn  all the fuel.  So, whe you are at cruise power, there is always excess  oxygen in the cylinder for a complete burn..and the single lever control will  see to it.  Goodbye mixture knob !

  

 I will be following these light sport diesels very carefully.  The  Vulcan and the DAIR-100 from the UK look VERY promising.  The DAIR is a  TWO-STROKE design very similiar to the Fairbanks-Morse design that powered the  majority of the old US diesel submarine fleet and are still being made for  stationary and marine applications.

  

 The DeltaHawk is looking to be a fine design, but just too much for our  Zeniths; same for the Thielert.  The SMA diesel isn't even looking at the  experimental market...is it ?

  

 Tracy Smith

 do not archive



   [quote][b]

_________________
Craig Smith
CH640 builder
SN: 0078

"Just think how stupid the average person is,
and then realize that half of them are even stupider!"
--George Carlin

Float Flyr

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 2704
Location: Campbellton, Newfoundland

Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:20 pm Post subject: Diesel Zenith

True...   But not nearly so  heavy as pure water (10 lb/Imp Gal).  Gas is around 6 lb/Imp Gal and Jet A  around 7Lb/Imp gal..  You should also only need a lot less fuel  by weight to do the same work.  The fuel is not near as volatile as gas but  packs a lot more BTU per Gal.  this is why they run turbine engines on the  stuff.  If there were more power in gas it would be easy to make the  adjustments in the turbines to run effective in it.

  

  

 

Noel [quote]   

   --

_________________
Noel Loveys
Kitfox III-A
Aerocet 1100 Floats

Float Flyr

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 2704
Location: Campbellton, Newfoundland

Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:28 pm Post subject: Diesel Zenith

No... There is more power (BTU)  in a pound of Diesel than there is in a pound of Gasoline  It also is not  as volatile.  One down side could be that diesels are notoriously hard to  start in cold weather.  They do need good size starters and probably heavy  batteries.  

  

  

 

Noel [quote]   

   --

_________________
Noel Loveys
Kitfox III-A
Aerocet 1100 Floats

Float Flyr

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 2704
Location: Campbellton, Newfoundland

Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 5:35 pm Post subject: Diesel Zenith

Sorry Group I answered this one twice before I got to read  Tracey's reply.

  

 Do not  archive.

 

Noel [quote]   

   --

_________________
Noel Loveys
Kitfox III-A
Aerocet 1100 Floats

2thesky

Joined: 30 Jun 2006
Posts: 18

Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 12:10 am Post subject: Re: Diesel Zenith

 	  Float Flyr wrote: 	
		   One down side could be that diesels are notoriously hard to  start in cold weather.  They do need good size starters and probably heavy  batteries. 	




Only diesel engines that aren't properly cared for, have fuel pressure problems, or are worn out are hard to start.  I currently own five diesel engines and have owned many more in the past.  Every time I have had a hard to start engine, I have been able to find and fix a problem that corrected the problem of being hard to start.  You can just crank on it loger, use bigger and more batteries to suck fuel up to the injectors, and that will work and is, in fact, what most folks do, but I have always been able to fix mine so that they start easily through keeping the fuel system in top shape.  I own one diesel in a Ford F-250 pickup.  I also own two tractor trailers with big 550 hp engines and smaller diesel powered aux. power units on them, too.  None of these are hard to start in the cold because they are all equipped with block heaters that keep the coolant warm.  When it gets REALLY cold, I also use a heated dipstick that tends to keep the engine oil close to 85 degrees.  All of my trucks start just fine in really cold weather.  It has been hovering around 0 degrees here for a couple of weeks and all of my trucks started everyday with no problems, usually after just a couple of turns of the engine.  One of my trucks sat outside in North Dakota for three days last week.  It started on the third turn.  In fact, I drive my diesel pickup more in the cold weather because the oil and coolant is warm all the time, and my car has to start cold.  The diesel engines run smooth from the start and my car and farm tractor complain to me for the first few seconds.  It is my opinion that because of the block and oil heating devices, my diesels suffer less wear than my gas engines from cold weather starts.  It is simply a matter of plugging it in to a 110 volt electrical outlet at night, or just a couple of hours or so before starting (depending on the temp).  I prefer to leave them plugged in all the time when not in use.  For an airplane, I think I would leave the block heater off and just use  the heated dipstick so not to add any extra flying weight.  To me, that sounds easier than the propane powered pre-heater that I use on the PA-28 I rent now.  Just show up at the hangar, unplug and remove the heated dipstick, and replace the normal dipstick.  You are ready to rock and roll. 



As for the starters and batteries, both of my semi's are equipped with auxiliary power units so that we don't need to idle the big engine for overnight stays and still run the heat/AC, provide electricity in the sleeper for lights, refrigerator, microwave, engine block heaters, battery charging for the big engine, etc.  These units use lighter twin cylinder diesel engines, made by Kubota, and require only a single battery that is lighter than the one in my little V-6 powered car.  It will spin and start the little Kubotas very easily.  The starters are pretty much the same as a lawn mower.  I doubt that for these lighter aircraft diesels, any huge heavy battery or starter would be needed.   We do use huge starters on truck diesels, but I think that it is because manufacturers realize that most will allow small air leaks in the fuel system exist.  I think these diesels could be great for airplanes if they can just keep the installed weight down.  I hope by the time I am finally ready to start building, I will have a choice of engines that can run on diesel or Jet-A.  I like it more than gas because of the volatility of gasoline.   Also, my auto and truck diesels last a whole heck of a lot longer than my gas engine cars.  One of my truck engines has 1.2 million miles on it.  I usually run trucks to 1.5 million before trading them in or rebuilding them with meticulous maintenance, of course.  I am sure most aircraft owners, particularly folks who built them are very good about maintenance.  I hope that longevity will be the same in aircraft diesels.   Just my opinions.

_________________
Every takeoff is optional, but every landing is mandatory!

Crvsecretary(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 4:17 am Post subject: Diesel Zenith

Good Morning !

  

 Great post - thank you.  I would just like to add one more comment -  preheaters and block heaters are not the only answer, we have technology  !!

  

 The early production Dodge-Cummins diesel uses a screen-type heater to warm  the incoming air to aid in starting.  I have no experience with it but I do  remember it was equipped with TWO huge batteries.  This engine appeared to  me to be more old-truck-technology than new, but it has evolved over the years  as well.  The breakthrough high-rpm small diesel was from Volkswagen.

  

 The Volkswagen TDI (Turbo-Direct Injection) engine has been around since  the early '90's.  This small 98hp engine did not even have a block coolant  heater or an oil dipstick heater available as an option in the United States -  instead, it was engineered to start in very cold weather just using glow  plugs.  In this design, the fuel is sprayed directly into  the combustion chamber, as opposed to a prechamber which was the most common  design up to that point.  This greatly improved efficiency...some say  direct injection increased the infamous 'diesel knock' you hear especially at  idle, but a two-stage injection pulse helped quiet things down.  Today's  modern common-rail diesel designs pulse the fuel MANY,MANY times into the  combustion chamber at injection pressures well above 28,000 psi!  The  smaller the fuel droplet, the more efficient the burn and the engine is quieter  as well.  The new TDI's, as well as the Mercedes CDI are common rail, and I  believe I read the Vulcan will be common-rail as well. (OK, some TDI's are  pumpe-duse - a technology VW pioneered which combine the injection pump  and the injector into one unit, but that discussion need not belong here).

  

 Common-rail minuses?  For aviation, this places us in electronic fuel  injection territory that is percieved to be complex and with no simple  mechanical backups.  Both the SMA engine and the DAIR-100 use mechanical  injection for simplicity.  Indeed, the Bosch mechanical injection fuel  pumps are marvles of mechanical engineering....and I certainly would NOT call  them 'simple'....but they sure are durable !!

  

 I truely believe the aviation diesel is the way to go.  The biggest  problem will NOT be owner-operator acceptance, no, the greatest opposition will  be the old-school A&P's and the ability to get someone who is receptive to  something NEW to work on it.  I see the problem all the time with my TDI  which is why any VW diesel enthusiast who really wants to know his powerplant  looks at www.tdiclub.com for brilliant  answers to everyday questions the dealer cannot answer!  

  

 I'm not bashing A&P's...please....but when the aviation diesel starts  to sell the marketplace will demand skills the established labor pool  cannot (yet) provide.  This is where WE, the homebuilders, will have an  advantage.  WE talk technology.  WE will be able to BUILD our support  networks and fix problems.  Look at the aviation diesels currently  available or proposed.  All that I have seen are talking TBR, not  TBO.  TBR is Time Before Replacement..they see these engines as being  incredibly rugged, but the skills to rebuild them as lacking in the  marketplace.  I can't say I blame them, as diesels are designed and built  to different tolerances (remember the General Motors/Oldsmobile V-8 diesel  disaster?).  

  

 Sorry for the long post...

  

 Tracy Smith

 Do Not Archive

  

  

 In a message dated 2/19/2007 3:17:58 AM Eastern Standard Time,  biggerspurs(at)HOTMAIL.COM writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  -->    Zenith-List message posted by: "2thesky"    <biggerspurs(at)hotmail.com>

Float Flyr wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		    One    down side could be that diesels are notoriously hard to  start in cold    weather.  They do need good size starters and probably heavy     batteries.


	




Only diesel engines that aren't properly cared for, have    fuel pressure problems, or are worn out are hard to start.  I currently    own five diesel engines and have owned many more in the past.  Every time    I have had a hard to start engine, I have been able to find and fix a problem    that corrected the problem of being hard to start.  You can just crank on    it loger, use bigger and more batteries to suck fuel up to the injectors, and    that will work and is, in fact, what most folks do, but I have always been    able to fix mine so that they start easily through keeping the fuel system in    top shape.  I own one diesel in a Ford F-250 pickup.  I also own two    tractor trailers with big 550 hp engines and smaller diesel powered aux. power    units on them, too.  None of these are hard to start in the cold because    they are all equipped with block heaters that keep the coolant warm.     When it gets REALLY cold, I also use a heated dipstick that tends to keep the    engine oil close to 85 degrees.  A!

ll of my trucks start just fine in    really cold weather.  It has been hovering around 0 degrees here for a    couple of weeks and all of my trucks started everyday with no problems,    usually after just a couple of turns of the engine.  One of my trucks sat    outside in North Dakota for three days last week.  It started on the    third turn.  In fact, I drive my diesel pickup more in the cold weather    because the oil and coolant is warm all the time, and my car has to start    cold.  The diesel engines run smooth from the start and my car and farm    tractor complain to me for the first few seconds.  It is my opinion that    because of the block and oil heating devices, my diesels suffer less wear than    my gas engines from cold weather starts.  It is simply a matter of    plugging it in to a 110 volt electrical outlet at night, or just a couple of    hours or so before starting (depending on the temp).  I prefer to leave    them plugged in all the time when not in use.  For an airplane, I think I    would l!

eave the block heater off and just use  the heated dipstick    so!

  not to 



add any extra flying weight.  To me, that    sounds easier than the propane powered pre-heater that I use on the PA-28 I    rent now.  Just show up at the hangar, unplug and remove the heated    dipstick, and replace the normal dipstick.  You are ready to rock and    roll. 



As for the starters and batteries, both of my semi's are    equipped with auxiliary power units so that we don't need to idle the big    engine for overnight stays and still run the heat/AC, provide electricity in    the sleeper for lights, refrigerator, microwave, engine block heaters, battery    charging for the big engine, etc.  These units use lighter twin cylinder    diesel engines, made by Kubota, and require only a single battery that is    lighter than the one in my little V-6 powered car.  It will spin and    start the little Kubotas very easily.  The starters are pretty much the    same as a lawn mower.  I doubt that for these lighter aircraft diesels,    any huge heavy battery or starter would be needed.   We do use huge    starters on truck diesels, but I think that it is because manufacturers    realize that most will allow small air leaks in the fuel system exist.  I    think these diesels could be great for airplanes if they can just keep the    installed weight down.  I hope by the time I am final!

ly ready to    start building, I will have a choice of engines that can run on diesel or    Jet-A.  I like it more than gas because of the volatility of    gasoline.   Also, my auto and truck diesels last a whole heck of a    lot longer than my gas engine cars.  One of my truck engines has 1.2    million miles on it.  I usually run trucks to 1.5 million before trading    them in or rebuilding them with meticulous maintenance, of course.  I am    sure most aircraft owners, particularly folks who built them are very good    about maintenance.  I hope that longevity will be the same in aircraft    diesels.   Just my opinions.



--------

Every takeoff is    optional, but every landing is mandatory!

	


 

  

  [quote][b]

Crvsecretary(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 6:53 am Post subject: Diesel Zenith

Hello Craig:

  

 My comments on the diesel manufacturers were mainly aimed at SMA and  Thielert.  Yes, Deltahawk, Vulcan, and Diesel-Air appear to be actively  courting the experimental market.  Unfortunatly, none of these  manufacturers are shipping product !!!!   Maybe SMA and Thielert have  the right strategy for right now ???

  

 I agree that SMA and Thielert want to pursue a minimum of "customers" and  go for critical mass in the marketplace, but that means gearing up to train lots  of technicians on new technology.  I see a lot of overhead built into thier  selling costs to bring service help to stranded engines so these planes can get  home.

  

 I agree with your position on Innodyn - I feel the same way about  Diesel-Air.  BTW, the licencee for Diesel-Air here in the US responded to  one of my emails saying they expect to retail the DAIR-100 at about $24,000  !!!!!  At that price, I'm not a early adopter !!

  

 Tracy Smith

 Do Not Archive

  

  

 In a message dated 2/18/2007 8:22:52 PM Eastern Standard Time,  pilot4profit(at)sbcglobal.net writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		     Tracy, your    observations about some of the new power plant makers not even concerned about    the experimental market is interesting. When, after spending considerable sums    of money in development, the makers find that the certified manufacturers do    not start buying or only one manufacturer seems to get the contracts, you will    see them come running to the home-builders to sell whatever they    can.

   One would think that    the minimum of red tape to cut in the exp market to be a very attractive    incentive. On the other hand you'll not see a more frugal group of people    either. That I believe is the reason for ignoring us. The investors want    return quickly as possible, and have planned for an adoption by TC    manufactures for big contracts.

   The problem with that    strategy, TC manufacturers (in general) are not early adopters of anything,    but would rather see an established track record of a given technology before    taking a risk with it.

   On economy/fuel    efficiency, I remember reading an article that did a rather good job of    breaking down the available energy in the fuels, then comparing it with the    efficiencies of the motors. If I find that piece, I'll reference it so    everyone can look it up. You are correct, diesel/jet-a/kerosene have more    energy per pound. Biggest problem is the reciprocating piston internal    combustion engine, is not very efficient at converting that to useable    mechanical output. Then there's the weight thing associated with the higher    compression combustion needing more robust construction....

   My future choice for a    power plant is tentatively the innodyn turbine. I'm just hoping they can    deliver on the promised technology. AFAICT there have not been too many    shipments of product. I wish them well, but won't send any deposit until there    are units in the field.

   Craig Smith (not the    other Craig)



         From: owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com    [mailto:owner-zenith-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of    Crvsecretary(at)aol.com

Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:31    PM

To: zenith-list(at)matronics.com

Subject: Re: Zenith-List:    Re: Diesel Zenith

   

      Hello Craig:

    

   Not true.  Diesels by design and by fuel chemistry deliver more    miles per pound of fuel.  

    

   Rule of thumb: The heavier the fuel the more energy per pound.  OK,    before all the chemical engineers flame me, I'm just making the comparison    that #4 bunker oil that is thick as sludge and has to be moved while hot    contains more energy per pound than a light distillate.  Diesel fuel and    Jet-A (more similiar to kerosene than #2 diesel) have more oomph than    gasoline.

    

   Gasoline has to run at (approximately) 14.5 to 1 to burn - diesels idle    at as little as 100 to 1 and at full power come close to 14 to 1.  Many    of the old big rigs that have mechanical injection are overfuelled when they    belch black smoke because they are running rich...there is not enough oxygen    to burn all the fuel.  So, whe you are at cruise power, there is always    excess oxygen in the cylinder for a complete burn..and the single lever    control will see to it.  Goodbye mixture knob !

    

   I will be following these light sport diesels very carefully.  The    Vulcan and the DAIR-100 from the UK look VERY promising.  The DAIR is a    TWO-STROKE design very similiar to the Fairbanks-Morse design that powered the    majority of the old US diesel submarine fleet and are still being made for    stationary and marine applications.

    

   The DeltaHawk is looking to be a fine design, but just too much for our    Zeniths; same for the Thielert.  The SMA diesel isn't even looking at the    experimental market...is it ?

    

   Tracy Smith

   do not archive



	


 

  

  [quote][b]

paulrod36(at)msn.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 10:18 am Post subject: Diesel Zenith

<?xml:namespace prefix="v" /><?xml:namespace prefix="o" /><![endif]-->  So, acting real casual, like I just wanted to  make conversation, I  walk up next to this guy who knows a lot about diesels, and I very casually ask,  "what's the horsepower, weight and RPM on one of them there Kubota auxiliary  engines?"

  

 Paul Rodriguez

 601XL/Coprvair

 [quote]   ---

Crvsecretary(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 11:21 am Post subject: Diesel Zenith

That would be the Kubota Z-482E rated at 12.5hp at 3600 RPM.   Weight?  Too heavy for light sport applications but really light for a Big  Rig APU.

  

 Thanks for asking.

  

 Tracy Smith

 DEFINITELY Do Not Archive.

  

  

 In a message dated 2/19/2007 1:25:09 PM Eastern Standard Time,  paulrod36(at)msn.com writes:

 [quote]      So, acting real casual, like I just wanted to  make conversation, I    walk up next to this guy who knows a lot about diesels, and I very casually    ask, "what's the horsepower, weight and RPM on one of them there Kubota    auxiliary engines?"

    

   Paul Rodriguez

   601XL/Coprvair

   [quote]     ---

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Zenith-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum