Hah! They did manage to confuse the enemy!
Obvoiusly, they don’t know what the market needs and propose a bunch of options… Still, I stand my ground and insist on turbines for this aircraft, which really needs them. The smallest PT6 installation will offer twice as much power than the V8 and weight will be 200kg less. This means shorter runways, better hot&high performance, much faster climbout (important when operating from large airports in the cargo business) more payload over short distances (which really is the main business of an unpressurised aeroplane). Turbines!
I can only imagine that the piston they mention is the Thielert-developed 4.0 liter V8
I think the only available option right now would be “a Continental Motors geared”, i.e. the GTSIO 520
Hah! They did manage to confuse the enemy!
PS I did see the Thielert V8 installed on a Belgian-registered C206 – quite impressive it was!
Which piston engines exactly will be available?
As it says in the text, I think the only available option right now would be “a Continental Motors geared”, i.e. the GTSIO 520. The C406 was developed from the C404 which has those engines fitted. I think there is a big market for the F406, but only with turbines. I have flown the 404 for several hundred hours, mostly express cargo, night freight and mail and we had to plan all our flights around the AVGAS refueleing stops, often reducing our payload because of the need for fuel tankering. Also, these big piston engines are quite delicate (no matter if AVGAS or Diesel powered) and not really suitable for the type of operation. We really wished we had a 406 then and even convinced our boss that it would significantly reduce our downtime and maintenance cost, but there were zero available on the market then. He bought us a Metroliner instead which ultimately ruined the company…
Jan,
I can only imagine that the piston they mention is the Thielert-developed 4.0 liter V8. That engine was meant to refurb avgas engines on various twins. Only a few flying today. IIRC a French company uses it on a C206 for para jumping and they are happy.
I didn’t think the venerable Twin Otter is pressurised?
That’s right, but as a rugged STOL aircraft it plays in a different league.
Most strange is that the Chinese state already has a utility twin turboprop on offer, the relatively successful Harbin Y-12. A somewhat dated design, today, but no worse than this F406.
I think if you’re looking to build a commercial aviation industry without much domestic capability, one way is to build those designs that are offered for sale. Governments are not terribly efficient consumers and obviously the Chinese Government would promote Chinese owned suppliers even if that precludes them buying the best that’s commercially available.
They would naturally have thought of adapting the design to Continental engines, or domestic turboprops they’ll build now or in the future.
I am puzzled by the article’s phrase
buyers can choose to equip their F406 with either Pratt & Whitney PT6s or a Continental Motors geared, FADEC and diesel engines.
Which piston engines exactly will be available?
As for
a non-pressuized twin turboprop does not make much sense
I didn’t think the venerable Twin Otter is pressurised?
in places where Avgas is not available (most parts of Asia) and where short-distance commuting is required (island locations) it might find a certain niche.
But you can do the same task at half the cost with a C208. The prohibition of SET air transport is AFAIK an uniquely European thing.
The F406 is turboprop, not piston.
In the unpressurized piston segment, there is the C402, which one of its biggest operators, Cape Air, will supposedly replace with the (to be certfied) new Tecnam twin.
At first glance, a non-pressuized twin turboprop does not make much sense, but in places where Avgas is not available (most parts of Asia) and where short-distance commuting is required (island locations) it might find a certain niche.
