Got a new car this week a TDI Jetta sport wagon, and I love it.
It just makes me wonder why in the hell we ever went with gas to power airplanes when diesel makes so much more sense.

And don't say it is due to weight as the little 2.0 litre is close to what my 360's weight is, and has a turbo, and is way more efficient.

Sent from my HTC Evo using Tapatalk

If it was affordable to convert my plane to one of them diesel's. I would in a heart beat!! I think it's an over $50k mod If it's still available. I have not heard any more buzz about it (forgot the name ) in a while.

BTW...... there has been a discussion on that Diesel engine some time ago here on BCP. Might have to dig it out of the archives.

The 90hp? TDI is heavier than a O-360. Advertized weight doesnt include radiator and fluid and gear reduction drive. The installed weights on auto conversions are heavier than our aircooled aircraft engines. The 150 hp Theilert 4 cyl was heavier than the 320 and the V8 was 200lbs heavier than the IO-520. I really wanted the V8 to work. My buddies TDI Jetta would pull his boat, get 50mpg as a daily driver, use sumped Jet A as fuel.

The Germans made a diesel aircraft engine in WW2 that had two pistons in the same cylinder, that came together to create the high compression in the middle between the pistons. It was heavy for sure. I think they used it on the Heinkel 177 "Grief" bomber.

I think the weight problem includes the idea that they do not build aluminum diesel engines. All those big cast iron blocks weigh a ton.

http://www.deltahawkengines.com/
military drone/balloons are using this already

http://www.dair.co.uk/
Pretty neat

Sent from my HTC Evo using Tapatalk

Mongo wrote:http://www.dair.co.uk/

Wow, that looks rather cool. But still 60lbs heavier than a Rotax 912.

The Theilert is/was all Al block and heads. The compression ignition just requires so much strength to hold it together. Our flimsy aircraft engines wont handle to much detonation. I see a few SMA engines out there but havent researched them.

Using 35% less fuel I could carry 35% less.
That would save 100 lbs and make it a wash on weight
Plus the 2.0 can produce more than 200hp and is rated at 170hp in the UK with emmison controls,so comparable to a 540.
I worked with Audi a little on there LMP car and that engine produces 800 HP and weighs 345 lbs, yes without water and radiators.
My point is it is very attainable.
Sent from my HTC Evo using Tapatalk

One other issue with diesel aircraft engines is the power pulse to the propellor is so strong it causes damadge or everything has to be built stronger again. Gear reduction drives or vibration isolators.

Got one of these puppies sittin' in my hangar (although this is not mine):


http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/showthread.php?t=41495
http://www.enginehistory.org/Diesels/Ch3.pdf

All I need now is my Gullwing Stinson project...

I wonder how the Austro is doing?

http://www.backcountrypilot.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4360

I wonder if I could fit one into a Dream Tundra cowling?

I hope my post have not come across to negatively about diesels. I am trying to convert my 206 to a spark assisted, single stroke, oil burner. Comp ratio and bsfc are much lower but proven reliability.

I guess that is the ultimate oil burning engine, though still not as fuel efficient as the piston version, but takes care of the weight issues.


Sent from my HTC Evo using Tapatalk

RDUStinson wrote:Got one of these puppies sittin' in my hangar (although this is not mine):


http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/showthread.php?t=41495
http://www.enginehistory.org/Diesels/Ch3.pdf

All I need now is my Gullwing Stinson project...

Gotta love round engines

Sent from my HTC Evo using Tapatalk

Mongo wrote:I guess that is the ultimate oil burning engine, though still not as fuel efficient as the piston version, but takes care of the weight issues.


Sent from my HTC Evo using Tapatalk

I want one of these, but not serial #1. Also, I might have to move the battery forward.

Actually this is the ultimate oil burning engine. The best jet engine is 20:1 power to weight ratio. This engine is 40:1.
A diesel radial with 32 pistons following the crank around in one continuous cylinder. That would even out power pulses to the prop.
Please watch all three videos. Here is the first.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPc06A8F ... ature=fvwp

This makes it look like TCM might have unloaded some prehistoric boat anchors on the Chinese.

Here's what the Chinese actually got. President of TCM at Oshkosh talking about the new diesel engines from TCM.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_nUPwSIhy0

The MYT engine seems to good to be true. But I hope it's not

It would be nice to see Lycoming to pick up on this.

Blu wrote:The MYT engine seems to good to be true. But I hope it's not

I'd never heard of that. Looks like a play on the rotary concept but with some other crazy shit. 3000 hp from a 150lb engine????
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/04/new_toroidal_in.html