PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Turbine Reliability vs R44 piston
View Single Post
Old 10th Dec 2008, 06:49
  #21 (permalink)  
Runway101
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: airport
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good work Phil77, now we are talking The topic says "vs R44 piston" so of course, we are talking Robinson and not Schweitzer or Hughes or whatever.

As already stated by somebody else, these Lycoming engines date back to as early as 1940 so with some modern high tech German engines the story would look different was always my thought. But then again there comes the Cabri and they use a Lycoming engine again

Anywho, we also wouldn't get into an argument if a Mac is better than a PC better than a Playstation better than an Xbox 360 or a Nintendo Wii, and that was my point. They all do their thing and have their pros and cons and what was yesterday doesn't necessarily mean it's the same today.

N.B. the new (Notar-like) Neo kit helicopter uses a liquid-cooled 180 HP rotary engine (Wankel Engine) from an automobile. Interesting approach, as the advantages of a Wankel design vs traditional reciprocating piston designs are less parts, about half the weight, half the space, less vibration, more reliability and as you would say, less parts moving the opposite direction. In general, the Wankel technology has made a comeback in aviation in recent years.

Last edited by Runway101; 10th Dec 2008 at 07:13.
Runway101 is offline