This just received in response to my question about the SR460 (this is the IO540 replacement):
From: Thierry Saint Loup [mailto:**********************@smaengine.com]
Sent: 30 August 2017 16:00
To: ‘Sam Rutherford’
Subject: RE: SR460
Mr. Rutherford,
I’m glad you got to enjoy flying behind our SR305 engine.
The second generation of our SR460 will be running on a test bench this fall and a flightworthy configuration will be flying on OEM aircraft in 2018.
To be able to install this engine on a Saratoga, the engine will have to be certified and an STC developed for the aircraft. I don’t foresee this being completed before 2019 at the earliest.
Sincerely,
Thierry SAINT LOUP
Wondering if SMA are going anywhere?
And in reply to an earlier (and very old post) I flew our C182 SMA at full throttle all the time from ‘clear take-off’ until approaching the circuit at the end. Bit weird to start with, but you get used to it! :-)
Refitting a new engine to a SEP is very hard. It should be much easier for MEPs where the nacelles have no other function than carry the engine and prop. A Cessna 421 with this engine would be nice.
I haven’t read about altitude performance but I assume it won’t be very good with this engine.
Apparently Red is working on high altitude applications, in that regard say “to achieve optimal engine configuration for a specific installation, close cooperation with the airframe manufacture is necessary”
The website shows a Predator UAV under applications, and its true that the Army version used a Thielert – which is now a Chinese owned product. The Yak 52 prototype is interesting too, although its a hard to view that as a potential high volume application.
The RED V12 engine looks great for a replica Spitfire
Amazing that Raikhlin took it all the way to certification. I would not have expected that.
That seems to have close to zero retrofit options, due to the form factor.
Any news on the SMA engine, or is this yet another Jet-A1 option that has died?
The years just go by…
I’ve visited the Austro factory a couple of times as well & these guys also openly encourage running the Austros at full power all day long.
Yes, because a) the aircraft they are installed on will otherwise not cruise sufficiently fast for good sales numbers and b) on these diesels, flying full bore will not really ruin the fuel flow (like in a Lyco or Conti).
I still detest that running full power is good for the engines.
They even suggest running at 100% power, with no issues. (Diamond lists 92% as max continuous power in the AFM)
Easy to “suggest” a lot of things.
I saw some of their fancy engine test beds at the factory. I think they’ve been running several Austros flat-out on those until TBO (1500hrs) without any apparent ill effects.
Conti did that, as well. No significant wear. As the old saying goes: constant use doesn’t ruin engines. Disuse does.
A friend of mine runs his Austros at 92% all the time during cruise. Seems to be fine
Seems to be fine, yes. How many hours on these engines?
