Press release;
Diamond Aircraft has announced that on 8 January 2013 the engine AE80R which has been in development for two and a half years successfully performed on the Austro Engine test bench.
As a final target it will have a weight of 27kg with an output of 80hp (58kw). According to Diamond, compared to the AE50R (55 PS Austro Engine rotary engine) the new engine has no loss lubrication system anymore which results in an extremely low oil consumption. A dual FADEC (Full Authority Digital Engine Control) controlled fuel injection system will keep fuel consumption on the lowest possible level. The engine is designed to power small manned or unmanned aircraft.
According to Christian Dries, Chairman and Owner Diamond Aircraft, the AE80R might has the potential to become one of the leader in the extremely weight sensitive market of LSA (Light Sport Aircraft) and ultra-light aircraft. “The engine has no vibration and therefore it is ideal to power UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) with highly sensitive equipment,” he added.
New 80hp engine
Moderators: John Dean, Moderator
-
Bill McCarthy
- Posts: 488
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 4:06 pm
- Location: Caithness
Re: New 80hp engine
Don't tell them about UAV ENGINES LTD then - it's a pity they don't supply GA though.
032125
-
John Price
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 7:27 pm
- Location: Eynsford
-
Paul Hendry-Smith
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:41 pm
- Location: Little Snoring
- Contact:
Re: New 80hp engine
This is the old Midwest Engines project, nothing new just a rehash, they brought it when Midwest went pear shaped and have sat on it for the past 10 years.
Paul
Paul
If you're faced with a forced landing, fly the thing as far into the crash as possible.
(Bob Hoover)
(Bob Hoover)
-
Chris Martyr
- Posts: 584
- Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:58 am
- Location: Horsted Keynes Sussex
Re: New 80hp engine
I guess the take-up of this engine will depend on interest shown by kit manufacturers/suppliers , and whether it manages to stir any loins in LAA/BMAA Engineering.
I did notice that the F-word was used in the engines description, [ FADEC ] which will probably excite the techno-freak fraternity, who will probably bask in the satisfaction of being able to fly around with the FADEC protection afforded to products that roll out of Toulouse and Seattle - Unfortunately, that's not quite the case.
The systems data,temp.sensors and pressure sensors on multi-engined passenger jets all have dual-channelled redundancy, and the failure of any one component would not make a jot of difference to engine performance . Also, after each flight sector the A/Cs maintenance computers are interrogated by engineers for any defect messages which can be immediately acted upon. Closer monitoring can be carried out if necessary by down-linking realtime in-flight data to the operators engineering base.
In the event of a real ' bad FADEC day ' , the PiC can by selective switching, go over to an alternate mode, which on a GE Enginewill normally involve monitoring the relationship between N1/ EGT, and on a RR Engine is usually its Engine Pressure Ratio [EPR].
Sorry if this sounds like an RAeS lecture, but the point I'm trying to make here is that whilst FADEC technology has been used successfully for several decades on larger A/C , the maintenance and engineering framework in a GA context just isn't there . Just look at how many Thielert engined Diamonds ended up getting mentioned in GASIL, mostly thanks to their FADECs.
And in a PtF scenario , the first sign of trouble would probably be an unexplained rough running engine as the FADEC goes into 'Limp Home' mode.
Potentiometers and transducers are fine in Approved, Type Certificated designs, whereby every example flying in the world is built to exactly the same technical specification , but despite the fact that most LAA administered Permit types are built to a very high standard indeed , no two are the same , that's why we are on Permits in the first place. And as grass-roots flyers, are we not fortunate indeed. Interesting little engine though .
I did notice that the F-word was used in the engines description, [ FADEC ] which will probably excite the techno-freak fraternity, who will probably bask in the satisfaction of being able to fly around with the FADEC protection afforded to products that roll out of Toulouse and Seattle - Unfortunately, that's not quite the case.
The systems data,temp.sensors and pressure sensors on multi-engined passenger jets all have dual-channelled redundancy, and the failure of any one component would not make a jot of difference to engine performance . Also, after each flight sector the A/Cs maintenance computers are interrogated by engineers for any defect messages which can be immediately acted upon. Closer monitoring can be carried out if necessary by down-linking realtime in-flight data to the operators engineering base.
In the event of a real ' bad FADEC day ' , the PiC can by selective switching, go over to an alternate mode, which on a GE Enginewill normally involve monitoring the relationship between N1/ EGT, and on a RR Engine is usually its Engine Pressure Ratio [EPR].
Sorry if this sounds like an RAeS lecture, but the point I'm trying to make here is that whilst FADEC technology has been used successfully for several decades on larger A/C , the maintenance and engineering framework in a GA context just isn't there . Just look at how many Thielert engined Diamonds ended up getting mentioned in GASIL, mostly thanks to their FADECs.
And in a PtF scenario , the first sign of trouble would probably be an unexplained rough running engine as the FADEC goes into 'Limp Home' mode.
Potentiometers and transducers are fine in Approved, Type Certificated designs, whereby every example flying in the world is built to exactly the same technical specification , but despite the fact that most LAA administered Permit types are built to a very high standard indeed , no two are the same , that's why we are on Permits in the first place. And as grass-roots flyers, are we not fortunate indeed. Interesting little engine though .
022516