วีดีโอ

That's the idea with this conversion - give a regular Courier nearly the power/thrust of the Stallion to allow it do just about anything and MORE.

You will want to call Ken @ TMCX about pricing (509) 432-1442. The turbine conversion of a regular Helio will never be as fast as a Stallion or carry as much cargo/people, but it will have the capability to fly CONSIDERABLY slower than a Stallion making it much more suitable for STOL and back country flying on or off the water while achieving reasonable cruise speed ~140mph for an aircraft of its class.

Thank you for sharing that memory. We are hoping that this powerplant/prop combo will produce enough thrust to literally hover even more often.

205 lbs LESS (diet) so far and a 150 extra shaft horse power but the PT6A-20 probably has 2-3 times the torque of the Lycoming IO-720 so can run a lot more propeller. Without lab testing, double the static thrust would be a good guess.

The wheels on this particular example will be replaced by larger tundra tires for testing - the turbine can easily overcome any additional drag - and then eventually amphibious floats. If a customer were to stay with smaller tires, then a much smaller 4 or 5 blade prop would be the ticket. The Courier does have forward placed main landing gear, so is very difficult to impossible to nose over and becomes airborne on take-offs with the tail only a couple of inches off of the ground.

@@cascadeaircraftconversionsthanks for the reply- such a great aircraft

Thank you for the memory. Like many machine-based endeavors, it's always nice to have more power. It's fantastic to achieve it while lowering weight and increasing reliability.

Despite the forward gear preventing nose over on smooth surfaces, we would agree that the small tires aren't suitable for back country rough runways. These just happen to be the wheels/tires this came in with - it will get larger ones even for testing and this particular aircraft will eventually pick up amphibious floats.

That's what the power lever is for. Can be operated as quiet as a PC12 I bet, and they're all over Europe!!

If noise is a concern, a lot can be accomplished with choice of propeller. On our CAC PT6A-140AG conversion of a Thrush 510G or 510P Ag plane, our installed Avia V508H/108/A three-blade propeller makes that aircraft considerably quieter than the prop from the factory. Also, the comment below about the power lever is quite appropriate. Much of the noise abatement on our AG 140 conversion revolves around a maximum prop speed of 1900 rpm versus the PT6A-34 typical max prop speed of 2200 rpm. That extra 300 rpm makes up the lion's share of excess noise.

That's not a dust storm... it's pesticide from that sprayer. MUCH worse.

Thank you for your comment. You will get to see plenty of upcoming "airshow" after the conversion as well.

Thank you for sharing the memory. We are looking for this aircraft to become competitive in STOL contests.

Us either!

That's what we think too!

This one will eventually go on floats. The beauty of the turbine power is that the aircraft will achieve dramatically better climb and be able to cruise at top speed all day long without breaking a sweat.

This channel is not monetized and receives no $$ from TH-cam. Larry is very skilled and graciously flew many additional unnecessary circuits to allow more video time ultimately for aviation enthusiasts who want another look at this now very rare aircraft. Other than showing off the Helio Stallion, the purpose of his visit was to see our progress of a turbine conversion of a Helio Courier H-800. The progress of that project will be posted on this channel soon.

We try! 😄 Stay tuned for the Helio Courier H-800 Beast Turbine Conversion to be test flying in August! We will follow up with conversions of the Helio Courier H-700 and H-295 models as well.

I particularly was impressed by @thecitizen49 account of taking 12 skydivers quickly up to 13,000'.

TMCX and Helio AK have at least started the revival. Stay tuned for turbine conversions of various Helio Couriers. We have almost completed a conversion on an H-800 model and once flight testing is complete on that aircraft, we will start a turbine conversion on an H-700. All of this conversion activity is in preparation for Helio Alaska's Courier kit plane reproduction to start production in 2025. If those become as popular as we hope, especially with the TMCX turbine firewall forward, then maybe we can revive an even better version of this Stallion workhorse.

@@cascadeaircraftconversions I’d love to get more info on the Courier Kit!

@@mrstinkytit Helio AK is keeping a pretty low profile for now but they do have a website www.helioak.com/ . Ken Meines of TMCX, LLC (509) 432-1442 can at least talk to those guys (why we know the 2025 target), so you might call him for more info if you are serious. Until they start churning out kits, TMCX will converting various certified models to Experimental Exhibition with the turbine conversion.

It's fantastic on floats too (see other videos) for those back country lakes. Also stay tuned for the TMCX turbine conversion of the Helio Courier H-800 - also an amazing bush plane.

@@cascadeaircraftconversions Wow a turbine Courier!

@@paulhowes5094 We will post this project soon on TH-cam, but have quite a few project postings on FB like this one here: facebook.com/share/r/1sLKoj7CkRycyEDX/ . This one is an H-800 conversion, the next one will be an H-700 starting next month and likely an H-295 immediately after that.

Amazing performance - the cruise performance has improved even more with a switch to an MT 98" 4-blade composite propeller - video posted or coming.

That's correct. Any aircraft that gets converted to floats incurs extra weight and drag penalties in exchange for water operations with even some capabilities on open snow fields or emergency landings in dry agricultural fields. Many of the back country areas these planes were designed for feature many more water landing areas than potential landings on unobstructed field. Additionally, this particular footage entailed initial video of the just-installed float configuration and Ken always approaches new testing with conservative caution. This T-Moose can achieve an average best rate of climb of around 1200 feet per minute on floats but 2500 feet per minute or better without the floats. Visit our channel to watch more aggressive climb performance on floats compared to the shallow take offs in this video in addition to videos showing off the T-Moose's outstanding water performance.

Thanks for sharing your experience! Did your unit use the turbine Stallions? I believe some of them were turned into gunships. Or was your unit more involved with recon using the slower-flying but longer endurance Helio Couriers?

Boogie till you puke, Waller, Texas.

Made a couple of jumps from one in Xenia, also in the 80s,...Awesome Aircraft!! The pilot enjoyed pointing out the patched bullet and shrapnel holes from the airplane's time in SE Asia.

Thanks for stopping by. Love your channel's content as well! Keep an eye out for some turbine-converted Murphy Moose float operation footage on this channel in the near future. We'll eventually get some float footage of the turbine-converted Helio Courier H-800 once all of that work has been completed.

We are looking to push performance over the top while maintaining a bit more reasonable fuel consumption with turbine conversion of a Helio Courier H-800 and eventually other Couriers. The gross weight of a Courier is almost 50% less than a Stallion which will greatly enhance the fun factor. That said, the Stallion sure is a neat plane and it was a special treat for it to visit.

Definitely no reasonable way to depart from the general profile of a turbine-powered aircraft. Although lighter per unit of power output, these longer turbines are often dramatically longer than the recip powerplants to be replaced. It can present a W&B challenge for sure when finalizing the conversion design.

@@cascadeaircraftconversions thanks for detail explanations, i do agree with that

That is funny 😀, but the title actually was "For Experimental and Certified Aircraft" - we work on both. The T-Moose and the new Helio Courier experimental projects are examples of the former reference while we have traditionally worked on nearly every model of Thrush and Air Tractor agricultural aircraft. I'll have to talk to our guy who put this vid together to maybe improve the font for better readability.

Good Analogy! Although this Moose can't haul as much as the larger aircraft, it essentially has the same SHP as the larger plane with faster cruise, etc. In the hands of experienced and good pilots, the extra power-to-weight ratio can be considered valuable insurance in difficult unexpected flying conditions.

Good Analogy! Although this Moose can't haul as much as the larger aircraft, it essentially has the same SHP as the larger plane with faster cruise, etc. In the hands of experienced and good pilots, the extra power-to-weight ratio can be considered valuable insurance in difficult unexpected flying conditions.

Can you run off road diesel in the PT6 ok? That would help a bit on the fuel price....

Apparently it's theoretically possible but there are many challenges and not recommended - The PT6A-20 is ignitor (spark) driven which Jet A is designed for. Diesel has higher oil content and is intended for compression ignition (no spark). Although there was no mention of the modifications applied, I read about an AG operator running a PT6A-34AG on diesel and apparently the quantity of smoke produced was quite intense and there were doubts about the long-term effects on engine integrity. PWC does allow the PT6A-20 to be operated on all grades of avgas for up to 150 hours per overhaul cycle (essentially in an emergency.) I've read about some operators adding lubricant (oil) to avgas to help ensure lower impact on the long-term PT6A maintenance/overhaul program. Being a bush plane, it's good to know you have at least one alternative option in a pinch.@@jimgolden9666

@@cascadeaircraftconversionsGood stuff! Don't laugh too hard, but I'm looking at converting a Duramax with a PSRU with a huge fly wheel to soak up the spikey power pulses and swing a prop. Would like to ground run it for six months before actually building a plane around it. I was looking at something similar to a Helio Courier...which is pretty similar to your Moose but with slats. I've got all the data that Dr. Koppen used in the 40's to design the Helio. Because the engine is heavy, it'd end up looking more short coupled, like a Beaver, but if the power pulses could be tamed down to not destroy a prop (I was thinking two big helical gears, rather than spur gears, to dampen more as well as make the thrust of the gears pull toward the engine to offset the thrust of the prop), I think it could be a pretty neat bush plane that would run on off road diesel, on road diesel, or Jet A. And it should be cheaper than a turbine. All that being said, it's hard to beat a PT-6! You guys did a great job with this!

Thank you for the praise and your project ideas - which are always welcome. For one example of a diesel-powered working aircraft, (if you haven't already) see the twin-turbo V12 diesel on an Air Tractor - th-cam.com/video/8zykwnETUlk/w-d-xo.htmlsi=_cvx0LAH70DP92-M . It's a cool concept and we once even took a casual look at getting involved in similar projects. But with the ever rising cost of that particular "aircraft grade" diesel and the AG industry demand for larger aircraft (needing far more power,) we didn't see a good ROI on navigating FAA time/cost issues for smaller aircraft (c'mon - FAA guys are required to actually go into the office at least once a week ;) Your keep-it-more economical approach is a great idea if it could be pulled off. However, that V12 AG bird doesn't have to perform at any real altitudes, so high-altitude temperature issues are not an issue for the diesel fuel (an issue that has contributed to lack of diesel recip. solutions in the aviation world.) Unfortunately, the AG world (at least in N America) has psychologically forever left the recip. engine world behind - deeming any/all solutions too unreliable for their commercial use. One of your biggest challenges that would likely dramatically increase the realistic cost of the project is the PSRU. We have seen some fantastic working conversion ideas out there that have ultimately experienced reliability issues with "add-on" gear-reduction units. Getting a "aviation-grade" PSRU designed and built for that application might prove challenging to say the least. One of the huge factors for Ken @ TMCX choosing the PT6A-20 was the decades-proven reliability of not only the powerplant itself, but its aviation-designed and produced (built-in) reduction unit. Many don't realize that the gear-reduction section in turbine turbo-props is likely a large portion of the value of the engine. For the experimental market's low-hour usage, the "relative" low cost of heavily-used but still quite reliable -20s, and the uber-dependable turbine - this solution definitely made the most sense despite the somewhat steep fuel costs. I love the idea of diesel power as much as you do - especially the versatility and economy. With the serious advancements in electric-motor driven vehicles like EVs and hybrids, it surprises me that few have explored power with a diesel-electric solution for land or maybe even air. I wish you the best in possibly transforming your ideas into reality. Aircraft conversion work is very rewarding indeed.@@jimgolden9666

Similar idea for sure - Murphy Moose aircraft had been upgraded to turbine power long before Draco was born - but only very few. While Draco was awesome for pushing the absolute envelope of performance, the concept behind the TMCX T-Moose is of a more practical nature: Upgrade the capable airframe with a lower-cost used PT6A-20 and create a process that remains quickly duplicatable while maintaining maximum affordability. To address the likely operating conditions of a typical Murphy Moose, TMCX and Cascade Aircraft Conversions designed an engine mount, composites and panels with proper air filtration specifically for this aircraft rather than cobbling something together with an existing King Air mount. With emphasis on strength, safety and durability of the design rather than compromising for the sake of squeezing another drop of performance, this transformation allows a wide-range flexibility in T-Moose versatility to include general, back-country and float operations. The way we see it, the TMCX T-Moose maximizes the potential of the original designer's vision for this aircraft.

You can be fairly certain that it will be along with many other shows.

would love to see side by side comparison cost vs performance/fuel LS3 moose vs PT6 . Both planes are amazing .

@@user-ju3ns2cz1u Indeed both versions are fantastic. Data and real-world info is still being gathered to possibly attempt a direct comparison. For a macroscopic comparison at this point, it is probably safe to say that the LS3 Bull Moose is probably a bit more economical to put together and easier on the fuel when flying with the ability to use pump gas. Although ultimate power output of the two power plants is close, the aviation-specific PT6A-20 turbine can deliver more usable torque more of the time and it shows in ultimate performance figures with a gross takeoff roll of less than 320 feet and observed maximum climb rates as high as 3500 fpm. The -20 can also propel the T-Moose at maximum cruise all day long (smooth air permitting) while operating at dramatically less than maximum performance (i.e. not working very hard.) Once an operator has made a turbine investment, the rear-world maintenance costs and time-spent are very low. The T-Moose will likely cost a bit more to initially invest in and does burn more gal/hr of Jet A (albeit at a competitive cost per gallon) in all phases of operation. And although LS3 powerplants have good reliability history, the complete PT6A turboprop power solution has proven to historically offer the best dependability and reliability overall.

Thanks for the reply . So you think the ls3 rate of climb for example won’t compare? Just curiousness. Love both these options. For different reasons. So cool. Thank again

@@user-ju3ns2cz1u Although the LS3 is a fantastic package with amazing performance and is all around a bit more economical, YES - observed data from the turbine T-Moose shows higher performance in every power-related category. The key to better performance is related to the size of propeller that the PT6A-20 can swing (this particular version mostly pulled with an Avia 93" 3-blade) versus what the Bull Moose is actually running (a Hartzell 83" 3-blade.) Many future T-Moose aircraft will use a similar Avia 99" 3-blade propeller for even more pull. The ability to swing the larger propeller with dramatically more static thrust and climb performance is due to the available, usable "real-world" torque of the PT6A-20 turbine. This particular (non-float) T-Moose has successfully tested with an aluminum Hartzell 104" 3-blade propeller as well. With any of these aircraft, you do reach a limit on propeller clearance depending on tire size or floats, so then you switch to more moderate diameters with 4 or even 5 blades. The current TMCX, LLC T-Moose operating on floats is happily pulling with the Avia 99" 3-blade prop.

See the detailed reply to @user-ju3ns2cz1u - different set of pros and cons for each solution - both solutions appear to offer more pros than cons compared to standard M14 power.

It won’t be inspiring for your wallet lol

Also not inspiring to the wallet: $20K - $30K to go retrieve the Murphy Moose with the M-14 that decided to consume over 6.5 quarts of oil within 30 minutes of take-off and begin a spiraling climbing temperature to overheat even with power cut and descending. The extra adrenaline and heart rate while eventually emergency landing on a gravel road in SE Montana just as the chip detector light comes on - Priceless (like the Visa commercial.)

Yes - we will soon perform testing with an Avia 99" 3-blade propeller on floats, although we will also test the performance of the 93" as well. We have already performed some testing with 104" propeller setups with excellent results, and some owners may choose to go that route.

Check out the latest T-Moose "Beast" Conversion on floats here - th-cam.com/video/JqwAzcgdwTs/w-d-xo.htmlsi=jziD9j7ZBvhntfNb