Ixixly: I think the part that would concern a lot of operators, especially Bush Operators is the level of Electronics that is seems to employ to control it, I know a few Engineers that would bring up this point straight away. The more complex you make something the more there is that can break down and the more parts you need to keep instock to keep it flying or get it back in the air! One of the reasons so many people think of Diesel Engines as being a great introduction to their Aircraft would be because of their reputation as being reliable engines elsewhere, but I know from a few Diesel Mechanics that this is because of their simplicity.
Would the savings in fuel that it produces outweigh the extra costs of maintaining the more sophisticated electronics it employs?
I always felt simplicity was why so many of the engines used over the last 50 years are still the ones we use today.
Good points. I did wonder about the the issues created with the use of electronic fuel management. What are the real advantages of having a single lever? Keeping things simple sure helps with reliability.
Will this engine would run into the same problem as the Thielerts where a loss of electrical power means an engine failure. Remember the double engine failure in Germany of the DA42 when the gear was retracted after a jump start. I wouldn't want to fly a Thielert engine any further from a suitable landing area than the battery endurance.