Cessna's New Turbo Diesel 172 Skyhawk

[morfidea]

Centurion 4.0 engines are problems like mine gave me a serious accident tube because the engine was broken in flight and also with the aggravation that broke a 150 A fuse vessels which are in the back of the plane could not replace flight, I left without any functioning electrical system the outcome was that I crash with a motor that was in the home warranty and does not take responsibility Centurion Mindful of those who buy these motoresleer While the contract

[Thinkcity]

The TBO of this early JET A1 engine is not the point.The removal of 100LL from the marked starting 2016 is the real issue. I have an Arrow III and will remove the Lycoming engine as soon as DeltaHawk engine is certified and STC´d.

[dragstar7039]

So could I pull my truck up next to it and transfer pump from my trucks auxiliary tank.

[1948stan]

@atheuma: mandatory inspection at 1200hrs, TBR (no TBO) at 2400hrs

[atheuma]

I like diesel engines in aircraft since JET A1 is cheaper and the diesel engines are more economic. However what this video doesnt say is that the centurion 2.0 diesel engine in this cessna 172 has a TBO of 1200hrs ONLY!!!! Therefore if you include maintenance costs, I would say that operating costs are higher than to a normal lycoming engine stc'd to run on normal unleaded (mogas).

[crapper1]

LAND ER AT YOUR LOCAL PILOT OR FLYING J AND TAXI OVER TO THE FUEL STANDS

BTW PUN INTENDED

[OI8APC2]

Wow, old Chris there might want to think about a 206. He's a big big guy!

[jmitterii2]

Is Jet A cheaper than 100LL? Haven't checked the prices lately. And I'm confused, he says its a deasel, but it can be fueled by Jet A?

[llaughridge]

Diesel engines can run on Jet A, if so tuned.

[tchapman1977]

It depends upon how the engine is built. Some piston engines can get a supplemental type certificate to run on automobile gas instead of 100LL (my father's Piper Cherokee 235 had that certification). You have to adjust your maintenance schedules if you do use car gas (i.e. they're performed sooner, rather than later). It's possible w/a diesel as Jet-A is similar to diesel. It depends upon the price differentials of fuel vs. maintenance costs whether it's financially beneficial to do so.

[SVnerd]

@jmitterii2

It's not that it's cheaper but it's a question of availability. A flight school here in Saudi has to import 100LL from Europe because no one here refines the oil into 100LL. This means that the school is charging $300 an hour to rent a C-172SP! That and cessna spare parts are hard to come by in the middle east.

[cardinaldriver]

Sorry, I meant DA-42 in that last comment...just caught that.

[cardinaldriver]

Too bad Thielert flaked out like it did. They had a good thing going until they started mismanaging the company. I just feel sorry for all those DA-40 owners who bought those with the Thielert's and now, can't get parts for them.

[louisluigi]

Finally another fuel propelled engine in these aircraft. Man aviation is so fucking conservative, unbelievable. But hey, better late then never!

[sideslide23]

I hope this aircraft runs on Bio diessle, because if it does, I'll be dieing to buy this plane

[futurepilot764]

Actually there is a video on my favorites and they said by 2016 we'll have bio diessle jet fuel that is cleaner burning and is about 50 cents a galllon. And the best part is you won't need to make changes to today's aircraft.

[bobdagangster]

@freddytuber

you are wrong. To power a c-172 with only electrical power continuously, and assuming that you can catch all the energy with the solar panel(100% efficiency in full sunshine), you would need a solar panel with an area bigger than the wing area of a 747. An other problem is that commercial solar panels are no more than 15% efficient.

Conclusion: you obviously can't power a conventionnal plane(not a glider/motor glider like sunseeker) from solar power only.

[freddytuber]

Solar panel efficiency is up to almost 30% now and still improving. SUNSEEKER already flew in a solar power sustain mode, so I don't get your 747 wing area since it is already proven that it works on a converted sail plane.

[tpvalley]

Can u buy diesel at airports?

or will this run on jet A?

[freddytuber]

Who cares? Gas is dead and so is diesel! Make a brushless electric alternative with solar cells on the wings and forget reinventig these old technologies. The time to let them go is NOW. Use the 172, make it a 2 seater with a lot of batteries and park it in the sun to charge, then I will get one.

[zfaylor]

yea thats practical...or we could use diesel and run it on vegetable oil or atf or used motor oil or another one of the thousands of products a diesel can burn. i love how ppl like you think electricity comes from magic.

[chrismd00]

You would never have enough energy from those solar panels. That is a foolish idea. That would never work in this plane. Look at the shape and size of current solar powered craft.

[tpvalley]

actually there is a solar powered plane!

A huge unmanned flying wing, takes hours to each height, it wasgoing to be used as a satelite altenative etc! as it could stay up for ages

[freddytuber]

Absolutely right, thoug it was unmanned. The SONEX and SUNSEEKER are manned planes.

[freddytuber]

Never? That's what I call positive thinking. Pretty dumb actually since SUNSEEKER already proved otherwise.

[freddytuber]

Not enough energy from solar panels? SUNSEEKER has a solar sustain mode and already flew with an average of 50 mph on it. And cells will get more efficent all the time.

[bikersrule07]

you are bang on sir, i was a electrical engineer,and i love people like freddytuber,who thinks the whole would can run on elec power,hmmm how and where would you get all this power from?...

[freddytuber]

Electrical engineer? Ha, you don't even know of solar cells! If the plane is parked, wind generators could also be deployed. During flight wind generators could be used to reduce induced drag and charge batteries. Do your homework befoer posting here.

[bikersrule07]

Really Freddytuber, if its soooooooo easy to make,you make it.....you make the promise that it will work,you go to the banks,to get a loan to build it.

and how in the fuck,would adding turbines to an airfoil reduce induced drag?? please explain that 1 ,instead of blowing crap out of your ass

[freddytuber]

You assume a lot my friend and it makes you look dumb. I am talking about wind generators, not turbines. How I would do it? Pay me and I tell you! You are an idiot - so shut up, biker. Everthing is easy if put your mind to it. Well, maybe not exactly YOUR mind.

[bikersrule07]

okay as i said,you goto the bank,you get the loan,and i sure hell aint paying you crap,im not an idiot,and you still havent said anything about how adding wind gens to wings would reduce induced drag,i really dont think you know what your talking about when it comes to induced drag.

[freddytuber]

How said magic? Solar cells on the wings! Like the SUNSEEKER plane on YouTube did.

[Merlin2Stage2Speed]

With light aircraft such as the 172, the power to weight ratio is an especially critical design element. Sure, there are a range of electric motors light enough and compact enough to fit the 172, with > 110Kw power ratings and high torque. But the excessive weight of the batteries that would be required to provide any decent sort of range effectively kills the concept of an electric powered 172. You'd never get the aircraft off the ground.

[triumphrider97]

The manufacturer of the engine Thielert has gone into insolvency and the founder and his CFO have been fired. They were accused of booking false sales to pump up the financial results.

The Cessna Skyhawk TD has been delayed due to this action. Don't look for it anytime soon.

[marick626]

its not been delayed, its no longer going to be made with thielert engines. Until they find an alternative, its not delayed, its gone basicaly.

[jokeingkider]

Very helpfull video, but whats the difference between a constant speed propeller and the other one he mentioned?

[dparson]

CS props have the ability to change their angle...the blades of the prop actually rotate within the prop hub. Pilots usually have a control to regulate the blade angle and its used to set the RPM of the engine. A pilot might set the RPM to be 2500rpm, then no matter how much throttle you apply, the blades of the CS prop will change angle to maintain the 2500rpm. Regular, fixed pitch props only have 1 blade angle obviously and don't have this feature. CS props effectively give the plane gears

[jokeingkider]

Wow, thanks for explaining that to a ultralight flyer! I deeply apriciate it!

[curtiskinoo]

Way to go!!!

[billaire1]

Its about time!

[1000BaseT]

This airplane is the answer to a question no one is asking...

[italy430]

maybe you weren't listening to the improvements this new turbo diesel has over the lycomings...

[joecatsean]

It has a number of advantages, and lots of folks ARE asking the question "how do we replace leaded avgas?" 100LL is the only leaded fuel still available, and it's days are numbered. EPA is already looking to get rid of it, and the lead additive is only produced by one plant. We are one stroke of the pen by EPA or the company board, or one plant accident away from ALL of us scrambling to find new engines.

[s172mch]

well you dont understand diesel technology these days

burns 50% less fuel than a gas engine

expect a 5gph or so rate

[agcatdriver]

Maybe to recereational pilots who only fly a hundred or so hours a year. I am chief pilot for a large pipeline patrol company (13 172's that each fly on average 1000 plus hrs a year) and we are SERIOUSLY considering this aircrft as an alternative.