08 Dec 2025, 02:46 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: My new airplane  Posted: 25 Sep 2015, 08:58 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
Joined: 08/07/08
Posts: 5639
Post Likes: +4375
Location: Fort Worth, TX (KFTW)
Aircraft: B200, ex 58P
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Holy crap! So yesterday I actually had the opportunity to fly in a -42 powered Evo. It was absolutely incredible! I have never felt an airplane accelerate like that on takeoff and climb. We only used 40% torque for takeoff but it pulled like crazy. Once airborne we pushed the power in and had a 4500 ft/min climb indicating 170kts! By the time we reached our final of 17,500 we were climbing at 3500 ft/min indicating 160kts so needless to say it didn't take us long to get to altitude! At 17,500 we were able to push it to 293 ktas (220 KIAS which is the Vmo). I cannot wait to see what it will do in the flight levels. Ho Lee Crap, is right. Those numbers are just crazy.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: My new airplane Posted: 27 Sep 2015, 10:39 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 1626
Post Likes: +276
Location: Valparaiso, IN
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Holy crap! So yesterday I actually had the opportunity to fly in a -42 powered Evo. It was absolutely incredible! I have never felt an airplane accelerate like that on takeoff and climb. We only used 40% torque for takeoff but it pulled like crazy. Once airborne we pushed the power in and had a 4500 ft/min climb indicating 170KIAS! By the time we reached our final of 17,500 we were climbing at 3500 ft/min indicating 160KIAS so needless to say it didn't take us long to get to altitude! At 17,500 we were able to push it to 293 ktas (220 KIAS which is the Vmo). I cannot wait to see what it will do in the flight levels. Ho Lee Crap, is right. Those numbers are just crazy.
It was! I just noticed that I only listed kts on the climb numbers. It was meant to be KIAS, so that is what we were indicating. Obviously that's faster than just simply 170kts! I tried to go back and correct those numbers but the website will not allow me. I did so in the quoted post above.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: My new airplane Posted: 27 Sep 2015, 20:57 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/22/12
Posts: 2932
Post Likes: +2909
Company: Retired
Location: Lynnwood, WA (KPAE)
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Add two seats and a chute and its the perfect plane for me. Factory says a chute is now an available option and I hear at least one has a 3-across back seat. No sixth seat has been done that I know of but hey, you can be the first -- it's an experimental!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: My new airplane Posted: 28 Sep 2015, 09:03 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 1626
Post Likes: +276
Location: Valparaiso, IN
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
|
|
Username Protected wrote: If I had the cash this is where I would be headed. Thought they looked a bit odd at first but I like them now. Awesome 4-place performance. Saw one at Reno a week ago with the chute installed.
Wish they would figure a way to get a TPE331-10 in there though.
Thanks Gerry for sharing your experience. I'm sure a TPE331-10 could be done. The firewall forward has to be designed but other than that, there is nothing that is stopping you. I will say that when I had conversations with Tim Ong (the lead engineer on the Evo project) he really didn't recommend using that style of engine on a SETP of this type of weight to power ratio. Said there would be strong gyro forces you'd be fighting especially in climb.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: My new airplane Posted: 28 Sep 2015, 09:30 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 1626
Post Likes: +276
Location: Valparaiso, IN
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Add two seats and a chute and its the perfect plane for me. Factory says a chute is now an available option and I hear at least one has a 3-across back seat. No sixth seat has been done that I know of but hey, you can be the first -- it's an experimental!
Yeah you can do a bench seat for the back so you have a 5th seat. You won't fit 3 adults across there but if you have kids it would be perfect.
In regards to the chute this plane isn't needing it IMO. When you take into account the reliability of a PT6 engine AND if you had an engine failure at altitude you have a 20:1 glide ratio. That means you can glide nearly 106 miles! I don't think you'd ever not be able to find a runway to land. Or if you want to look at it like this. If you are only 1,000ft over the ground you would still be able to glide 3.8 miles.
The chute IMO just takes up precious useful load, and it costs a lot of money.
Edit: Corrected the glide numbers from a mistake I made ealier, lol.
Last edited on 28 Sep 2015, 11:11, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: My new airplane Posted: 28 Sep 2015, 10:22 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20806
Post Likes: +26310
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Said there would be strong gyro forces you'd be fighting especially in climb. Interesting. Why does the TPE331 have stronger gyro forces than other TPs? I have two that turn in the same direction, never noticed this effect. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: My new airplane Posted: 28 Sep 2015, 10:27 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 1626
Post Likes: +276
Location: Valparaiso, IN
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Said there would be strong gyro forces you'd be fighting especially in climb. Interesting. Why does the TPE331 have stronger gyro forces than other TPs? I have two that turn in the same direction, never noticed this effect. Mike C.
Well, I may be getting my engines mixed up but the TPE331's have a connected prop shaft correct? Where as the PT6 has a separate prop turbine wheel that spins on compressed air. The reason why this is significant on a single with a TPE is that all of the rotating forces are going in one direction where as the prop on a PT6 spins in the opposite direction as the power section thus cancelling one another out. From what I understand this effect is extremely diminished on a twin plane with TPE331's. On a single engine with a TPE this gyro effect would be greatly increased in climb because of the extra bite of the prop at that angle.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: My new airplane Posted: 28 Sep 2015, 10:49 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Joined: 10/05/11
Posts: 10304
Post Likes: +7376
Company: Hausch LLC, rep. Power/mation
Location: Milwaukee, WI (KMKE)
Aircraft: 1963 Debonair B33
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Said there would be strong gyro forces you'd be fighting especially in climb. Interesting. Why does the TPE331 have stronger gyro forces than other TPs? I have two that turn in the same direction, never noticed this effect. Mike C.
The props on an MU-2 are not counter rotating? I did not know that. Interesting.
_________________
Be Nice
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: My new airplane Posted: 28 Sep 2015, 10:57 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/14/12
Posts: 2001
Post Likes: +1494
Location: Hampton, VA
Aircraft: AEST
|
|
Username Protected wrote: In regards to the chute this plane isn't needing it IMO. When you take into account the reliability of a PT6 engine AND if you had an engine failure at altitude you have a 20:1 glide ratio. That means you can glide nearly 200 miles! I don't think you'd ever not be able to find a runway to land. Or if you want to look at it like this. If you are only 1,000ft over the ground you would still be able to glide 7.5 miles.
Gerry, You may want to check your math. A 20-1 glide ratio isn't going to get you 7.5 miles. 1,000' AGL yields 20,000' or 3.78 miles. 200 miles would require an altitude of 52,800' when the engine failed. Definitely something to consider before you head out over terrain where an off airport landing is likely to be ugly, and there isn't an airport within gliding distance. 
_________________
Forrest
'---x-O-x---'
Last edited on 28 Sep 2015, 11:02, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: My new airplane Posted: 28 Sep 2015, 10:58 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20806
Post Likes: +26310
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Well, I may be getting my engines mixed up but the TPE331's have a connected prop shaft correct? The TPE331 has one high speed rotating group, all compressors and turbine wheels on one shaft, prop geared from that directly. PT6 has separate gas generator section and separate power turbine. There is still a prop shaft and gearing, of course. Quote: The reason why this is significant on a single with a TPE is that all of the rotating forces are going in one direction where as the prop on a PT6 spins in the opposite direction as the power section thus cancelling one another out. I didn't know the prop turbine spins the opposite direction of the output turbine. Makes sense as that helps take energy from the rotation of the gases. Quote: On a single engine with a TPE this gyro effect would be greatly increased in climb because of the extra bite of the prop at that angle. In steady flight, like in an established climb, there is no gyro effect, it can only occur on change in attitude and is in direct proportion to the rate of attitude change. What you are describing is P factor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-factorThis has nothing to do with gyro effects. P factor is all about angle of attack, which is related to speed and weight, not whether you are climbing or not. Cruising at 150 knots in level flight and climbing at 150 knots results in the same angle of attack, same P factor. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: My new airplane Posted: 28 Sep 2015, 11:06 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/17/10
Posts: 1626
Post Likes: +276
Location: Valparaiso, IN
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
|
|
Username Protected wrote: In regards to the chute this plane isn't needing it IMO. When you take into account the reliability of a PT6 engine AND if you had an engine failure at altitude you have a 20:1 glide ratio. That means you can glide nearly 200 miles! I don't think you'd ever not be able to find a runway to land. Or if you want to look at it like this. If you are only 1,000ft over the ground you would still be able to glide 7.5 miles.
Gerry, You may want to check your math. A 20-1 glide ratio isn't going to get you 7.5 miles. 1,000' AGL yields 20,000' or 3.78 miles. 200 miles would require an altitude of 52,800' when the engine failed. Definitely something to consider before you head out over terrain where an off airport landing is likely to be ugly, and there isn't an airport within gliding distance.
Yes you are right, I transposed my numbers, lol. I was using 2580 vs 5280 lol. My apologies, lol.
So at 28,000 ft you'd have a glide of 106 miles. Still a long ways.
Last edited on 28 Sep 2015, 11:09, edited 2 times in total.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: OT: My new airplane Posted: 28 Sep 2015, 11:06 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20806
Post Likes: +26310
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The props on an MU-2 are not counter rotating? I did not know that. Interesting. Nope. The only TPE331 twin that I know of that has counter rotating props is the Cheyenne 400LS with -14A and -14B engines. They have very slightly different gear ratios such that the -14A engine cores runs 0.1% faster for the same prop RPM. All other TPE331 powered twins I know of have same rotating engines. Mike C.
_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|
