Cessna Skyhawk goes Diesel
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kiwiblue,
The Theilert is a certified engine, else Cessna would not be putting in the 172. See http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/e0f36d2aeb1cff2d862572b300535766/$FILE/E00069EN.pdf for the TCDS.
The Theilert is a certified engine, else Cessna would not be putting in the 172. See http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/e0f36d2aeb1cff2d862572b300535766/$FILE/E00069EN.pdf for the TCDS.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: In the flare
Age: 50
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was my understanding 12 months ago, for the diesel we had in our (very old) Cessna 172, that the TBR was around 2000 hrs. Replacement. All ancilliaries would be kept, but the "engine" is replaced.
Thought it would be a bit pricey at the time, but a year later things must have changed? Something like 70k us$ for the engine.....economies of scale etc.
I think diesel is a great step in the right direction. Especially as 100LL producers are looking to diminish/cease production?
We did, however, have some wiring short out, which would have led to something ugly if it was airborne...
Twinstar sipping Jet A is definately more like it (compared to a 1977 Cessna 172 anyway)!
I just hated having to sump the fuel prior to flight!!! Nasty stuff Jet A.....
Thought it would be a bit pricey at the time, but a year later things must have changed? Something like 70k us$ for the engine.....economies of scale etc.
I think diesel is a great step in the right direction. Especially as 100LL producers are looking to diminish/cease production?
We did, however, have some wiring short out, which would have led to something ugly if it was airborne...
Twinstar sipping Jet A is definately more like it (compared to a 1977 Cessna 172 anyway)!
I just hated having to sump the fuel prior to flight!!! Nasty stuff Jet A.....
nomorecatering, cannot find anything on that regard. Not to say it is not possible.
You would have to ask the question that there is going to be at least a couple of exchanges worth of engines available to you before you sign on the dotted line.
You would have to ask the question that there is going to be at least a couple of exchanges worth of engines available to you before you sign on the dotted line.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: hava guess
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
havick is right, AVGAS is a great fuel and well proven ( made the company car go real well 
) but many producers are moving away from it . the more Desiel engines we get out there the better they will get. especially if there is some competition 
.
Many airframes have been well proven also, re-engining some airframes can have amazing benifits to pax and your wallet. I can't wait to see the C206 or GA8 Airvan with a twin turbo Desiel
.
Also, some operators of AVGAS/ AVTUR fleets could benefit. One fuel bill? training of crew about fuel safety etc??
) but many producers are moving away from it . the more Desiel engines we get out there the better they will get. especially if there is some competition .Many airframes have been well proven also, re-engining some airframes can have amazing benifits to pax and your wallet. I can't wait to see the C206 or GA8 Airvan with a twin turbo Desiel
.Also, some operators of AVGAS/ AVTUR fleets could benefit. One fuel bill? training of crew about fuel safety etc??
The Skyhawk TD (turbo diesel) will feature a Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) equipped Thielert Centurion 2.0 liter engine. The DOHC (double overhead camshaft) in-line four-cylinder turbocharged engine develops 155 horsepower, is
Will be interesting to see how the C 172 performs with the diesel engine. The Twin Stars are not stellar performers from what I have seen and heard.
The performance figures originally quoted by Thielert for the PA28/C172 conversions were done with smoke and mirrors to get the 135 HP engine to match the 160 HP Lycoming.
Chimbu,
couldn't agree with you more, no one has advertised it at all that 100LL will be on the way out.
But unless you pre-order drum stuck more than MONTHS in advance, try getting AVGAS out in the pacific islands. It can be hard to come by. I have heard of/seen some private guys with their own aircraft (piper malibu) etc, been stuck at some places for days begging for drum stock 100LL
couldn't agree with you more, no one has advertised it at all that 100LL will be on the way out.
But unless you pre-order drum stuck more than MONTHS in advance, try getting AVGAS out in the pacific islands. It can be hard to come by. I have heard of/seen some private guys with their own aircraft (piper malibu) etc, been stuck at some places for days begging for drum stock 100LL
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The bottom of a scotch bottle
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The diesel is all very nice, but why does it have to be FADEC? Why did they make the damn thing so dependent on electrical power? to the point where there are batteries in the tail, so that when the inevitable electrical malfunction occurs, the engine won't quit (immediately anyway). How good are those batteries? what condition will they be a couple of years down the road when the alternator spits the belt off? are you willing to bet your life on them keeping the engine running until you can find a spot to put it down?
I know some guys flying one, and their engine has already quit once (It restarted though, at about 8000ft....just an electrical malfunction - what a surpprise
)
The beauty of aero piston engines is that as long as you feed them fuel and oil they keep on running. these thing want fuel, oil, electrical power, and coolant.
I really can't see them making a huge mark in GA for quite a while yet (if ever). the margins are too small. The old 1970's technology can be maintained with a spanner, for these things you need a laptop and a cable (and someone who knows how to use them).
I know some guys flying one, and their engine has already quit once (It restarted though, at about 8000ft....just an electrical malfunction - what a surpprise
)The beauty of aero piston engines is that as long as you feed them fuel and oil they keep on running. these thing want fuel, oil, electrical power, and coolant.
I really can't see them making a huge mark in GA for quite a while yet (if ever). the margins are too small. The old 1970's technology can be maintained with a spanner, for these things you need a laptop and a cable (and someone who knows how to use them).
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is there a TBO? Don't you just chuck 'em away and get a new one?
How well are they working out in the Diamond DA40? Seem to see a few in the US, but usually with the Lycoming. There must be somehing in it or Cessna, a company not renowned for jumping into new ideas and owned by the same group as Lycoming, would not be doing it!
How well are they working out in the Diamond DA40? Seem to see a few in the US, but usually with the Lycoming. There must be somehing in it or Cessna, a company not renowned for jumping into new ideas and owned by the same group as Lycoming, would not be doing it!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: North Qld
Age: 69
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The facts are that we have used less than 2% of current proven oil reserves in the entire 'oil age', i.e. in the last 120 odd years
The Full Mooney
Proven reserves increase as the cost of a barrel of oil increase because the definition of proven reserve is that it must be cost effective to remove it from the ground and bring it to market. When the price of oil does go down again and it will because the market is being driven by speculation rather than facts, the quantity of proven reserves will fall. In the last four years proven reserves have trebled simply because of the cost increase in a barrel of oil in that time.
As for those that think that the oil companies are about to stop production of avgas, think again. They are required by law in most countries to produce it while a market exists for it.
Proven reserves increase as the cost of a barrel of oil increase because the definition of proven reserve is that it must be cost effective to remove it from the ground and bring it to market. When the price of oil does go down again and it will because the market is being driven by speculation rather than facts, the quantity of proven reserves will fall. In the last four years proven reserves have trebled simply because of the cost increase in a barrel of oil in that time.
As for those that think that the oil companies are about to stop production of avgas, think again. They are required by law in most countries to produce it while a market exists for it.
Ze Chemans did alright with some diesel powered aircraft in the immidiate pre WWII years, namely Junkers' creations.
Grandpa Aerotart
It is from a book called 'The Skeptical Environmentalist' by Bjorn Lomborg which came out in 2001. I no longer have the book but it was referenced and I checked it at the time...his graph showed current proven reserves (as at time of writing...lots more oil has been discovered since) up the Y axis and oil used on the X axis. I cannot remember the exact numbers now but at the usage rates at the time of writing it was something like 3000-5000yrs of 'oil' left in the ground...if memory serves the higher figure was including oil shale/tar sand 'oil equivalent' that, again as at 2001, could be profitably extracted at US$30/bbl...and is actually flowing from Canada to the US as we speak...very fecking profitably.
I highly recommend the book...it covers many other areas besides energy in a factual, detailed, referenced manner...as opposed to the emotional crap put out by the far left of the environmental movement.
Current high oil prices are not a result of scarcity per se but of demand outstripping supply caused by oil companies lack of infrastructure spending. This artificial suppy constraint is good for probably US$45/bbl which corrected for inflation is not a lot more than oil was worth in the 50s/60s etc...the rest is security 'concerns'...i.e. 'the market' speculating the price up and down for their own ends.
To suggest this situation will not correct itself in time is to deny history and how a market functions. They are building more infrastructure and they are finding more oil as the current high prices spur companies to look for it which they were not doing when it was $20/bbl. The current high prices ARE pushing the world towards recession...despite the protestations to the contrary by fecking politicians.
The biggest worry oil producers currently have is to 'manage' things so the price doesn't fall off a cliff but instead is 'massaged' lower to maintain their profits on the one hand while not driving the world into recession on the other...or force to much research into alternatives.
To touch on the TEL thing for a minute. Yes it is expensive and yes only one company still makes it and yes it isn't very nice stuff.
But there is so little of it in a liter of avgas it only contributes about 3 cents/liter to the cost. That one company in the UK has no thoughts about stopping production and if the environmental movement in the EU/UK causes to much grief I am sure they'd simply move production somewhere else...and finally the **** they put in UL fuel to raise the octane up to useabe figures, even for cars, is MUCH nastier stuff than TEL.
The real reason the EPA banned TEL in 1974 in The Clean Air Act was because it ruins catalitc converters that were required to fix the smog issues caused by cars burning fuel made by refiners that wanted to do the minimum amount of refining they could get away with to produce the petrol. They could have refined it more, at a cost of course, but didn't want to because they feared the higher cost would constrain demand so they passed the problem onto the consumer in a different way...one that didn't make them look like the 'bad guy'.
After they banned it from car fuel the EPA essentially lost interest and passed the responsibility for the issue of avgas onto the FAA..within the US context the FAA decides whether it is a problem...and so far they have not showed any signs of doing so.
I highly recommend the book...it covers many other areas besides energy in a factual, detailed, referenced manner...as opposed to the emotional crap put out by the far left of the environmental movement.
Current high oil prices are not a result of scarcity per se but of demand outstripping supply caused by oil companies lack of infrastructure spending. This artificial suppy constraint is good for probably US$45/bbl which corrected for inflation is not a lot more than oil was worth in the 50s/60s etc...the rest is security 'concerns'...i.e. 'the market' speculating the price up and down for their own ends.
To suggest this situation will not correct itself in time is to deny history and how a market functions. They are building more infrastructure and they are finding more oil as the current high prices spur companies to look for it which they were not doing when it was $20/bbl. The current high prices ARE pushing the world towards recession...despite the protestations to the contrary by fecking politicians.
The biggest worry oil producers currently have is to 'manage' things so the price doesn't fall off a cliff but instead is 'massaged' lower to maintain their profits on the one hand while not driving the world into recession on the other...or force to much research into alternatives.
To touch on the TEL thing for a minute. Yes it is expensive and yes only one company still makes it and yes it isn't very nice stuff.
But there is so little of it in a liter of avgas it only contributes about 3 cents/liter to the cost. That one company in the UK has no thoughts about stopping production and if the environmental movement in the EU/UK causes to much grief I am sure they'd simply move production somewhere else...and finally the **** they put in UL fuel to raise the octane up to useabe figures, even for cars, is MUCH nastier stuff than TEL.
The real reason the EPA banned TEL in 1974 in The Clean Air Act was because it ruins catalitc converters that were required to fix the smog issues caused by cars burning fuel made by refiners that wanted to do the minimum amount of refining they could get away with to produce the petrol. They could have refined it more, at a cost of course, but didn't want to because they feared the higher cost would constrain demand so they passed the problem onto the consumer in a different way...one that didn't make them look like the 'bad guy'.
After they banned it from car fuel the EPA essentially lost interest and passed the responsibility for the issue of avgas onto the FAA..within the US context the FAA decides whether it is a problem...and so far they have not showed any signs of doing so.
Grandpa Aerotart
To add to my last without the agro of editing...the really nasty stuff they put in UL fuel is also in 100LL...that is how they made it LL instead of the old 100/130 stuff we used when I was first a student pilot.
I read the book in the last year or so...it is still widely available...the figures for proven reserves were based on the price/bbl when he research the book (late 90s presumably)...as 404 states the current 'proven reserves' outstrip the figures used in the book dramatically...as of course does current demand...but with several thousand years left who cares.
As one of the Saudi oil sheiks who founded OPEC stated...The stone age didn't end because we ran out of stones and the oil age won't end for a lack of oil..technology will just give us something better?
Think about the technology advances in the last 100 years and tell me we will still be using oil the way we do now in 1000 yrs.
One day in the far off future oil will be very cheap indeed...because we have discovered something better.
I read the book in the last year or so...it is still widely available...the figures for proven reserves were based on the price/bbl when he research the book (late 90s presumably)...as 404 states the current 'proven reserves' outstrip the figures used in the book dramatically...as of course does current demand...but with several thousand years left who cares.
As one of the Saudi oil sheiks who founded OPEC stated...The stone age didn't end because we ran out of stones and the oil age won't end for a lack of oil..technology will just give us something better?
Think about the technology advances in the last 100 years and tell me we will still be using oil the way we do now in 1000 yrs.
One day in the far off future oil will be very cheap indeed...because we have discovered something better.
There must be somehing in it or Cessna, a company not renowned for jumping into new ideas and owned by the same group as Lycoming, would not be doing it!
The story I heard, and it came from someone in the US, who was buying second hand C172s for flying school use in areas where avgas is unavailable and replacing the Lycoming engine with the Thierlert.
One of Cessna's dealers was buying brand new C 172's and doing the same thing. Cessna told them to stop doing it. The dealer, apparently Cessna's biggest distributer by a substantial margin, told Cessna where to get off. Cessna couldn't afford to loose this distributer and as a result have decided to fit the Thielert at the factory.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Under the wing, asleep.
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't give as stuff about the economics or otherwise of a Diesel!
Until they can make a Diesel that growls like an IO-520, grumbles like an R-anything or even barks like the good ol' Gypsy as the taps open up I'm not interested.
Come on, make a Diesel sound like THIS!!!
http://www.youtube.com/v/52IqDlCikrQ
Until they can make a Diesel that growls like an IO-520, grumbles like an R-anything or even barks like the good ol' Gypsy as the taps open up I'm not interested.
Come on, make a Diesel sound like THIS!!!
http://www.youtube.com/v/52IqDlCikrQ
