FixedWing
Registered User
Mars
I want to say hello. I?ve been monitoring SuperCub.Org for quite a while now and have quite enjoyed it. I especially love all of the great photos in the photos section!
I?m posting now because I?ve decided to build a Super Cub in the Experimental category. The goal will be maximum STOL performance which will mean light weight, good power and a high performance wing. I am also looking for maximum utility so multiple landing gears (tundra tyres, skis and floats). I?m leaning towards VFR but also want to look at whether IFR can be done today without too much of a weight penalty.
So here is my immediate question: I?ve read about the upcoming ATP Turbine engine:
http://www.atpcoinc.com/
And I read the discussion of it here:
http://www.supercub.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3850
At first blush this seems an ideal engine for an experimental Super Cub (light, powerful, cheap, reliable). But the more I think about it the more I see some big problems:
1) When you fly a Super Cub you often need very quick applications of power. For example, to arrest the sink rate when coming in for a landing over an obstacle at minimum controllable airspeed. I really have my doubts whether a turbine engine can ever provide this quick goosing of power.
2) Turbine engines need careful monitoring. You really need to pay attention to the power settings to avoid overpowering the engine. There isn?t the obvious feedback you get on a reciprocating engine. With a reciprocating engine, you can basically just shove in the power and go. A turbine will just give more and more power until it destroys itself. I?m not sure a short field takeoff over an obstacle in a single-pilot aircraft is exactly the right situation for this sort of careful monitoring of the power setting.
I can imagine that technology could take care of the second problem but what about the first? Is the power availability quick enough on these engines to do the job? Or possibly are the weight savings and performance advantages enough with a turbine engine to justify putting up with these problems?
Curious what others think???
Stephen
I?m posting now because I?ve decided to build a Super Cub in the Experimental category. The goal will be maximum STOL performance which will mean light weight, good power and a high performance wing. I am also looking for maximum utility so multiple landing gears (tundra tyres, skis and floats). I?m leaning towards VFR but also want to look at whether IFR can be done today without too much of a weight penalty.
So here is my immediate question: I?ve read about the upcoming ATP Turbine engine:
http://www.atpcoinc.com/
And I read the discussion of it here:
http://www.supercub.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3850
At first blush this seems an ideal engine for an experimental Super Cub (light, powerful, cheap, reliable). But the more I think about it the more I see some big problems:
1) When you fly a Super Cub you often need very quick applications of power. For example, to arrest the sink rate when coming in for a landing over an obstacle at minimum controllable airspeed. I really have my doubts whether a turbine engine can ever provide this quick goosing of power.
2) Turbine engines need careful monitoring. You really need to pay attention to the power settings to avoid overpowering the engine. There isn?t the obvious feedback you get on a reciprocating engine. With a reciprocating engine, you can basically just shove in the power and go. A turbine will just give more and more power until it destroys itself. I?m not sure a short field takeoff over an obstacle in a single-pilot aircraft is exactly the right situation for this sort of careful monitoring of the power setting.
I can imagine that technology could take care of the second problem but what about the first? Is the power availability quick enough on these engines to do the job? Or possibly are the weight savings and performance advantages enough with a turbine engine to justify putting up with these problems?
Curious what others think???
Stephen