I think getting useful engine life and 300hp continuous out of a 240hp rated automotive engine is likely fantasy. At least until someone demonstrates it.

I am amazed that is is still trying to do each little fixes that was requested by the test pilots.
More than likely, as soon as he has finished this list... another critical list will be brought up by the same team.
There is no way any sensible pilot would take a flight with this bird... Super heavy, built in a garage. No way out once he is airborne...
The only way a test pilot would attempt this flight would be over a very large dry lake. I would not even dream in a regular environment... no way out.

Possibly.

My Audi 2.7T Twin Turbo engine went to 241k before it gave up the ghost after putting clipped K04 turbos on it and increasing the boost 30%. I was running close to 400+ AWHP in a car originally rated at 325 HP and dogging the crap out of it periodically for fun.

He's running that engine at much lower power settings than full rated RPM. I would expect the engine core itself to go a long, long time. Running 3,000 RPM in an engine that red lines close to 6k, even with continuous boost on it, isn't going to stress the engine's rotating assembly.

The turbochargers, however, I would expect to be rebuilding every 200-250 hours. They're running continuous duty at maximum output. I'd probably swap the factory lines to over-bore stainless steel mesh for better oil flow.

That said, I can re-bearing an Audi turbocharger for about $125 bucks in parts and a day in labor or pay the guy who does it for a living to do it with dynamic wheel balance for $500 each.

I'm not sure why everyone gets hung up on the need for dual FADEC. When's the last time you saw a "computer" failure in a car engine? The ECUs last many multiples of the life of the mechanical parts of the engine. There are many parts of any engine that are not redundant. If you want power plant redundancy get a twin (which you have). The reason for dual mag ignition on legacy airplane engines is the inherent unreliability of magentos. ECUs don't have that problem. It makes the engine overly complicated for something that isn't likely to happen before the heat death of the universe (ECU failure).

It doesn't meet the numbers he used to sell it, those were a fantasy. A new gearbox and FADEC will add weight and cost, putting the reality even farther away from the fantasy. And we don't yet know the reliability, which has been the weak point of auto engine conversions. The best available data indicate auto-engine conversions fail and cause accidents 23% more often than traditional aero engines. https://www.kitplanes.com/safety-is-no-accident-5/
Besides the obvious impact on safety, reliability is also related to longevity and cost. A drastically lower TBO can make even a cheap-to-buy engine more expensive per hour than a traditional aero engine.

There have been several auto engines made into certified aero engines. Every one cost more than an equivalent traditional aero engine.

There have been several certified diesel aero engines. Every one cost more than an equivalent traditional aero engine.

Raptor's promised numbers depended on an engine that provided a combination of power, weight, longevity and cost that have never before been demonstrated, and won't be this time either. A fantasy.

A few years ago, to me. Idling at a light, it abruptly quit and wouldn't restart. ECU failure, no prior symptoms. And that was significantly before "the heat death of the universe".

I'm not sure why everyone gets hung up on the need for dual FADEC. When's the last time you saw a "computer" failure in a car engine?

It doesn't meet the numbers he used to sell it, those were a fantasy. A new gearbox and FADEC will add weight and cost, putting the reality even farther away from the fantasy. And we don't yet know the reliability, which has been the weak point of auto engine conversions. The best available data indicate auto-engine conversions fail and cause accidents 23% more often than traditional aero engines. https://www.kitplanes.com/safety-is-no-accident-5/
Besides the obvious impact on safety, reliability is also related to longevity and cost. A drastically lower TBO can make even a cheap-to-buy engine more expensive per hour than a traditional aero engine.

There have been several auto engines made into certified aero engines. Every one cost more than an equivalent traditional aero engine.

There have been several certified diesel aero engines. Every one cost more than an equivalent traditional aero engine.

Raptor's promised numbers depended on an engine that provided a combination of power, weight, longevity and cost that have never before been demonstrated, and won't be this time either. A fantasy.

I'm not sure why everyone gets hung up on the need for dual FADEC. When's the last time you saw a "computer" failure in a car engine?

Check out the statistics on homebuilts with certified (or at least designed for aircraft) engines vs automotive conversions. IIRC the chances of propulsion failure in the latter is several times higher than the former. I'm not saying it can't be done, just that it's very, very far from simple to convert an automobile engine to an efficient, reliable, and affordable aircraft engine. Doing so with a diesel is even more of a challenge due to restarting issues and the higher torque peaks that excite propeller stresses.


I'm with you on that one although the ECU might not be any more likely to fail than any critical component of an IO520, it's just hard to have that kind of faith in electronics given that ECUs virtually never give advanced warning of failure. IOW there's not much point in doing oil analysis on an ECU.


Yeah a pair of diesels on a Baron sounds attractive as well, just like several other pipe dreams.

Oh I have ultimate faith in a pair of Red A04's on a Duke. It's been in service since 2010 without any issues on various aircraft and has both FAA and JAA certification.

I just don't have the pockets for it.

Oh I have ultimate faith in a pair of Red A04's on a Duke. It's been in service since 2010 without any issues on various aircraft and has both FAA and JAA certification.

I just don't have the pockets for it.

Wow that’s great news for the raptor program. If he’s taxied 20 miles in his demo vids to date, we can look forward to years of taxi testing.

I have found my antidote for Raptor/Peter videos ... Scrappy/Patey is the antidote.