Author: Scott Luckman <scottrluckman@...> Time: Wed Aug 8, 2001 6:39 pm PDT Link
Jan,
This is in response to the letter below. Richard said
he talk with you about RV builders being bargain
shoppers and not wanting a firewall forward package. I
disagree. I think what drives RV builders to be
bargain shoppers is the fact that a new Lycoming cost
20 grand plus prop,plus accessories,plus.... and the
list goes on and on! By offering a COMPLETE firewall
forward kit you can ensure consistent performance as
well as giving peace of mind installing a (heaven
forbid)non-aircraft engine. It will take some time for
non-believers to see the light of a new age in general
aviation. It is truly a shame that the general
aviation professionals want to choke any new
technology rather than embrace it. Imagine the
possibilities and true steps forward in GA if we all
would just look past the nose on our face.
Blue skies & tailwinds,
Scott R Luckman
LOWER INITIAL COST:
Jan, we had our local EAA meeting last night at my
hangar and we had one of
the largest turnouts for a weekday meeting that I can
remember. There were
probably close to 25 people checking out my engine.
And all the comments were
very positive. Everyone was very impressed with the
engine, how smooth it
ran, and the quietness. I am sending one picture along
with this that shows a
few of the men checking out your engine.
We have several RV builders that wish you had a
firewall forward package for
them. They had their tape measures out last night
checking out the width and
they all felt it would fit just right for them. I know
I talked to you about
this one time and you felt RV builders were bargain
shoppers and would not be
willing to pay for a complete firewall forward
package, but I am not sure
about that. If you consider what even a used Lycoming
engine costs, then all
the time and money spent in looking and buying mounts,
baffling, exhaust,
etc., I think they would consider the package you have
attractive and a
bargain. just like I did.
I would encourage builders to take some time and add
together everything they
need in front of the firewall, all the way out to the
tip of the spinner, for
a Lycoming and also for the Subaru. The real #'s are
scary.
Richard H.
=====
Yours Truly,
Scott Luckman
<scottrluckman@y...>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
Author: smcdaniels@... Time: Wed Aug 8, 2001 9:10 pm PDT Link
--- In RV7and7A@y..., Scott Luckman <scottrluckman@y...> wrote:
> Jan,
> This is in response to the letter below. Richard said
> he talk with you about RV builders being bargain
> shoppers and not wanting a firewall forward package. I
> disagree. I think what drives RV builders to be
> bargain shoppers is the fact that a new Lycoming cost
> 20 grand plus prop,plus accessories,plus.... and the
> list goes on and on! By offering a COMPLETE firewall
> forward kit you can ensure consistent performance as
> well as giving peace of mind installing a (heaven
> forbid)non-aircraft engine. It will take some time for
> non-believers to see the light of a new age in general
> aviation. It is truly a shame that the general
> aviation professionals want to choke any new
> technology rather than embrace it. Imagine the
> possibilities and true steps forward in GA if we all
> would just look past the nose on our face.
>
> Blue skies & tailwinds,
> Scott R Luckman
>
Scott,
I admit that there are some people with the attitude that you
describe but I believe most are looking at the alternative engine
issue from a different angle. My self included.
I don't know of "any" alternative engine supplier that can claim even
5 engine installations (done in a standard way that has been proven
to work), all on the same model of airplane, with a reasonable amount
of trouble free operating time (lets say 500 hrs).
This means that any customer that buys their product is in effect
doing research and flight testing for them, and paying them to do so.
I think the majority of RV builders are interested and are carefully
watching the industry but they can't see the value in saving 3 or 4
thousand dollars and then flight testing the installation in hopes
that it works as claimed by the supplier. Passed history in this
industry has proven that claims made, versus actually experience is
often light years apart.
One undisputable claim that can be made is that if you build an RV
with an antiquated Lycoming you will get the performance claimed by
Van (with the airplane built and proped correctly) and it has
statistical data showing a high level of reliability. True; there
are failures of Lycomings in RV's but if you research the causes, the
majority are caused by something the builder did either out of
ignorance/lack of knowledge, or carelessness and these types of
things can happen with any engine installation.
The thing that I find unfortunate is the unwillingness of many people
experimenting with alternative engines to give all of the facts.
This includes finished weights, cost, performance #'s, etc.
I know of one RV-6 with a popular v6 auto engine which weighs in
about 100 lbs more than it would with a Lyc. and he is currently
flying on his third engine in less than 500 hrs. The airplane does
not perform the same as it would with a Lyc. The owner never tells
anyone these facts when being asked about his airplane.
This is just one of many examples.
The position I take in this whole issue is this.
If you are interested in experimenting and tinkering with your
airplane... go for it. Just under stand that to my knowledge there
are no alternative engine installations/kits that can meet my
personal requirements of...
-Does it have a proven reliabilty record that equals or is even close
to a Lyc.
-Does it provide similar performance #'s
-Does it do that a a lower cost/better value with out greatly adding
complexity to the project.
And most importantly - can you "prove" that it does.
But if you are a builder who's main goal is just to fly there RV
then they should stick with a Lyc. All of the successful Alternative
engine RV's have required huge amounts of time from the builders to
get them to that point.
Just one more thing and I will get off the soap box...
I hate seeing companys show up at major fly-ins with an engine
design/installation (often times that hasn't even flown in any
airplane yet) advertising show special prices and taking
deposits/orders. I think this totally irresponsible.
I saw a number of these at OSH..Airventure this year.
Anyone that becomes a customer of these companys should realize that
they are signing on to do research and developement for them.
The problem is that the way many (not all) of these companys are
doing business the customer is led to believe that they open a box,
install the egine as instructed and go fly until they wear it out and
need to do the $800 overhaul.
Such a product does not yet exist, but believe me I am watching for
it with eyes wide open.
Regardless of what you may now think of me, I am also interested in a
more cost effective alternative to a Lyc. Van's aircraft is also.
With over 7000 kits sold and more than 2650 flying (with most using
Lycomings), how many more new customers do you think their could be
out there if a lower cost alternative engine with proven comparable
performance and reliabilty was available?
I think the numbers would likely boggle the mind.
Now I will sit back, watch, and wait........
Scott McDaniels
Author: eaainc@... Time: Wed Aug 8, 2001 9:42 pm PDT Link
In a message dated 8/9/01 12:12:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
smcdaniels@j... writes:
I don't know of "any" alternative engine supplier that can claim even
5 engine installations (done in a standard way that has been proven
to work), all on the same model of airplane
(end of quote)
We have worked exclusively with the Glastar airplane the last 3 years. 32
Glastars all have the identical engine package, six airplanes have been
completed and are flying all of the time. They are: Charlie Walker on Lopez
Island WA, Bob Warfel in Leesburg FL, Richard Herr in CA, Don Russell in OH
and Juan Necochea CA.
Airplanes scheduled for first flight in September are: Chris Lowery CA,
Steve Jakulsky CA, Owe Sand Norway, Glen Hamilton CA, Fred Haynes CA, Boyd
Blue CA, Heinz Ziorjen NV
Airplanes scheduled to fly this year: Ridge Dickey TX, Greg Allman WI, Stan
Saloff CA, Dave Lima Ontario, John Farra NY, Bradford Haines UT,
Another 6 Glastars will fly this spring.
These engines will not benefit everybody. Some will wait until even this
technology gets old. Lycoming started before us, there is no way for us to
ever have as much flight time on our engines. However, those now flying have
a hard time staying on the ground. That's how much they love flying their
Subaru Glastars.
Jan Eggenfellner
Author: eaainc@... Time: Wed Aug 8, 2001 9:44 pm PDT Link
In a message dated 8/9/01 12:12:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
smcdaniels@j... writes:
This means that any customer that buys their product is in effect
doing research and flight testing for them, and paying them to do so
(end of quote)
Lycoming has been doing this for 40 years and are still using data gathered
from customer airplanes to implement changes. And the customer has to pay
for them as well.
Jan Eggenfellner
Author: smcdaniels@... Time: Thu Aug 9, 2001 4:52 pm PDT Link
--- In RV7and7A@y..., eaainc@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 8/9/01 12:12:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> smcdaniels@j... writes:
> > Statistical data showing a high level of reliability. True;
there
> > are failures of Lycomings in RV's but if you research the causes,
the
> > majority are caused by something the builder did either out of
> > ignorance/lack of knowledge, or carelessness and these types of
> > things can happen with any engine installation.
> It can happen in any installation but people are still getting
killed because
> the engines ice up from carburetor ice, forgetting to enrich the
mixture
> during a descent, hit something in or out of the air because the
engines
> demand constant attention, fall asleep from carbon monoxide
poisoning when
> the heater is used and run out of fuel because the engines use more
fuel than
> the operating manual states.
>
> These accidents happen over and over and over and nothing ever
changes.
>
> All of the work has been removed from the pilot on the Subaru and
more time
> is available to perform the important task of: "Fly the airplane"
>
> Jan Eggenfellner
(And most importantly - can you "prove" that it does.)
Our customers sell the engines for us by standing next to their
airplanes at
air shows across the country. We don't ask them to, we don't pay
them but
they love to talk about the airplane and engine and to give rides.
Jan Eggenfellner
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Didn't mean for your feathers to get so ruffled....
I thought this forum was RV's exclusively and RV-7(A) in particular
so much of what I said was in that context.
Since You pasted out and sent seperate messages for each of you
comments it makes it difficult to respond to each so I will just sort
of wing it.
You seem to have got the wrong idea about me. I am very much in
favor of the work you are doing. Maybe you are the first (of many
who have tried before)to provide a customer with something that does
exactly what you say it will.
Quoting that 5 engines are flying in glastars doesn't say much for
how they compare with a Lycoming in performance and dependabilty
though.
I disagree with your list of causes for accidents using Lyc. engines.
If a search is done in the NTSB files the reasons you Quote are for a
very small # of accidents. Assuming their is some data to back up
some of it, the bottom line is there is virtually zero data to prove
that your or any other companys alternative engine installation wont
have a worse record.
You mention that your customers sell your engines. Great!
The problem is that many people don't always tell the whole story
after the have invested a lot of money.
I think a big part of the problem also is that when a guy finishes
his airplane, he thinks it is the greatest performing airplane he has
ever been in. At least as far as RV's go all of the alternative
engines that I am familiar with have been a compromise in performance.
For many builders that may be exceptable, but for many more they will
think that is just normal performance for an RV.
The normal performance for an RV is the factory published #'s.
They have been verified by they CAFE foundation, and many RV builders
exceed them.
I would like to suggest you do the same.
Get one of your customers to provide his airplane to the CAFE
foundation for evaluation and show all of us sceptics a thing or two.
Top that with some flying hours that proves that your design is more
dependable than the 40 year old Lycoming and I'm sure you become a
very rich man.
Scott McDaniels
Author: "Sam Kurtz" <flyngsamrv7@...> Time: Thu Aug 9, 2001 6:00 pm PDT Link
--- In RV7and7A@y..., "Letourneau, David F SITI-IT-ISAA"
<dfletourneau@s...> wrote:
> Jan
> Relax and continue working on your product. It appears to be a good
> product. Some people are reluctant to experience new technology.
When you
> have some RV customers flying successfully, the noise will die down.
>
> I am looking forward to your turbo charged Subaru being installed
in an RV9a
> or RV7 and flown. Would like to see the numbers on that
installation,
> particularly final engine weight, flight duration and range.
> David F. LeTourneau
> -----Original Message-----
> From: eaainc@a... [mailto:eaainc@a...]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 11:42 PM
> To: RV7and7A@y...
> Subject: Re: [RV7and7A] Re: Alternate engines
> In a message dated 8/9/01 12:12:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> smcdaniels@j... writes:
> I don't know of "any" alternative engine supplier that can claim
even
> 5 engine installations (done in a standard way that has been proven
> to work), all on the same model of airplane
> We have worked exclusively with the Glastar airplane the last 3
years. 32
> Glastars all have the identical engine package, six airplanes have
been
> completed and are flying all of the time. They are: Charlie Walker
on Lopez
>
> Island WA, Bob Warfel in Leesburg FL, Richard Herr in CA, Don
Russell in OH
> and Juan Necochea CA.
>
> Airplanes scheduled for first flight in September are: Chris
Lowery CA,
> Steve Jakulsky CA, Owe Sand Norway, Glen Hamilton CA, Fred Haynes
CA, Boyd
> Blue CA, Heinz Ziorjen NV
>
> Airplanes scheduled to fly this year: Ridge Dickey TX, Greg Allman
WI, Stan
>
> Saloff CA, Dave Lima Ontario, John Farra NY, Bradford Haines UT,
>
> Another 6 Glastars will fly this spring.
>
> These engines will not benefit everybody. Some will wait until
even this
> technology gets old. Lycoming started before us, there is no way
for us to
> ever have as much flight time on our engines. However, those now
flying
> have
> a hard time staying on the ground. That's how much they love
flying their
> Subaru Glastars.
>
> Jan Eggenfellner
> Van's Air Force - World Wide Wing
> www.vansaircraft.net
>
> Amen to Davids comment / I'm sure there are many of you builders in
my situation , enjoying this engine debate-but being aware of the
greater agenda, namely - selling a product to keep a business afloat-
And protecting things that are near and dear to my heart, my life and
the dollars that make it possible to enjoy this greatest of past-
times FLYING !!! Jan, my hand keeps moving to my wallet but, then my
head says hang in there, wait until he has his RV7 flying. Keep
Working on your plane. WE ARE WAITING!
Sam Kurtz>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Service.
Author: eaainc@... Time: Thu Aug 9, 2001 6:39 pm PDT Link
In a message dated 8/9/01 7:56:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
smcdaniels@j... writes:
You seem to have got the wrong idea about me. I am very much in
favor of the work you are doing. Maybe you are the first (of many
who have tried before)to provide a customer with something that does
exactly what you say it will.
(end of quote)
Part of the problem is that you are right about people having promised much
and delivered little in this area before. We are only promising what we have
been delivering for three years now.
Thank you for the important questions
Jan Eggenfellner