@EstorilEm 2 reasons. #1 the engine was not made for thrust it was made for torque to turn a helicopter transmission in turn also the rotors. So converting it to thrust will result in alot of loss.
#2 A turbojet engine provides lots of high speed power but poor low speed power. In the thick air down here it's basically a noisemaker. If this plane could get up to 30,000ft it would easily do 400kts, but I doubt it could make it that high.
@vjet900 What's missing with these equations here? How is it that a 310-hp IO550-powered Velocity can cruise at 250kts yet a 1400hp turbine gets you 235? Fuel burn is roughly twice as much versus the continental - which is understandable if you're achieving jet-like speeds, but it's slower?
Don't get me wrong, it's a beautiful aircraft and it's implemented very well, but I'm trying to justify all that hard work!
maybe a J33 williams international might be fun compared to the economy of that engine i bet your fuel consumption might be better by at least .25 extending your range by at least 350nm. How long to reach FL290? even if the answer was 25 min you probably have at least a current range of 1350nm or better huh, w/aux fuel?
Shaft horsepower is 1350. Fuel burn depends on altitude. Takeoff 100 g/h. Cruising at low altitude 40-50 g/h. At high altitude 24-29 thousand (25-35 g/h). We are using a standard fuel tank (100 gallon capacity), we have 2 external tanks that can be attatched for an addition 70 gallons of fuel. The top speed was limited to 235 knots, which is 90% of the power. This aircraft is still in its testing phase.
@EstorilEm 2 reasons. #1 the engine was not made for thrust it was made for torque to turn a helicopter transmission in turn also the rotors. So converting it to thrust will result in alot of loss.
#2 A turbojet engine provides lots of high speed power but poor low speed power. In the thick air down here it's basically a noisemaker. If this plane could get up to 30,000ft it would easily do 400kts, but I doubt it could make it that high.
superskullmaster 1 month ago
A very neat plane.. but seems a gas gussler. let me know o of any improvements.
josephdupont 8 months ago
@vjet900 What's missing with these equations here? How is it that a 310-hp IO550-powered Velocity can cruise at 250kts yet a 1400hp turbine gets you 235? Fuel burn is roughly twice as much versus the continental - which is understandable if you're achieving jet-like speeds, but it's slower?
Don't get me wrong, it's a beautiful aircraft and it's implemented very well, but I'm trying to justify all that hard work!
EstorilEm 1 year ago
seems underpowered
0248959 1 year ago
Just extremely sweet! Way to go!!
sabre6986 1 year ago
maybe a J33 williams international might be fun compared to the economy of that engine i bet your fuel consumption might be better by at least .25 extending your range by at least 350nm. How long to reach FL290? even if the answer was 25 min you probably have at least a current range of 1350nm or better huh, w/aux fuel?
punas1 1 year ago
@iamsam87v He probably did, it comes as a kit and I have never built one but apparently they are quite easy to build
marco21falcon 1 year ago
You built that at home??
iamsam87v 1 year ago
Great plane! Great scenery. Thanks
xgi36 1 year ago
@eurofighter47
Shaft horsepower is 1350. Fuel burn depends on altitude. Takeoff 100 g/h. Cruising at low altitude 40-50 g/h. At high altitude 24-29 thousand (25-35 g/h). We are using a standard fuel tank (100 gallon capacity), we have 2 external tanks that can be attatched for an addition 70 gallons of fuel. The top speed was limited to 235 knots, which is 90% of the power. This aircraft is still in its testing phase.
Thank you for your inquire.
vjet900 2 years ago