DEAR SANTA!!!! I've been good All Year!My powered paraglider seems really slow lately, and since I can land at every gas station along my route, I was hoping you and Rudolph could send me one of these. Especailly since I watched your movie where you bolted a turbine to your Sleigh, so you know what I'm Talkin' 'bout....😁🤣👍 Thanks!!!
We've sold complete engines (TS and TP variants) all over the world...USA, France, Belgium, even the Ukraine. While we receive many questions, we don't always receive feedback from each customer....likely because of the sensitive nature of their various projects. But locally, there was a USA built Mini-500 Helicopter with a T62/100TS (TurboShaft). It used a 6-belt drive off the output shaft of the PSRU gearbox with an additional outboard bearing to carry the outside belt load. This Mini-500 was flown at the Florida Sun-N-Fun since summer '02. Not sure where it is today. Another T62/150 has been flying in a Luscombe since 1999 (with a different, planetary type PSRU). To give you a sense of the turbine's reliability, this Luscombe once flew for over 5 minutes right after a normal service maintenance.....with NO OIL. This "maintenance inspection" was performed by a mechanic who forgot to refill the engine with oil. The Luscombe ended up making an emergency landing in a farmer's cornfield because of the planetary PSRU's failure from lack of lubrication. Although this was not our PSRU, it too would likely have been compromised with no oil supply (all PSRU's are highly loaded). The Luscombe's turbine itself survived perfectly intact with only the residual internal oil coating left after drainage during that inspection (turbine bearings only require a light oil mist). Upon complete disassembly and inspection, the turbine reportedly had no damage nor discoloration of the internals (balls, rollers, races, gears or shafts). All parts still looked new. It was re-assembled, filled with oil and flown for quite some time afterward. The Luscombe was recently for sale about a year or so ago. No idea if it sold, or where it is today.
B BelcherCheap? Sorry...not with any turbines we know of (unless they're burnt out cores). And, there is no "Gov approved paperwork". All these engine types are considered exclusively for the Experimental Category. No Standard nor Utility Category aircraft need apply...
With the 152's 19.5 gallon tanks, that would be 40 minutes to tanks empty, or 53 minutes at 75% power. vs about 2-1/2 hours at 75% power for a 150 hp Lycoming. So if you never want to fly more than 40 miles and have an unlimited fuel budget, you'd be fine. Otherwise it would be a pretty useless airplane.
The turboprop was actually the first type of gas turbine engine to be developed. Hungarian physicist Gyorgy Jendrassik started designing his engine back in 1937 and had a working prototype in 1940. It didn't fly until 1944, however.
Dude...... That is bad ass man. Crazy how you did that. I am going to school to get my pilots license and today i saw a single engine plane land that had this engine in it. It was very loud and very fast. I had to look this up to see what it was. A very nice plane by far. Congrats on this man.
I had a JFS-100 that I was going to put in something. It had 0-Zero time since rebuild by the good ole' US national Guard and fully set up for turdoprop use and it was sweet as honey. I ended up selling it and buying a Beechcraft but I sure wish I had it back as the fun just planning my use of that engine in my own homebuilt was grand but one hot start or similar and all that $$$ is down the tubes so its now gone! For once i did the right thing and it turned into my biggest regret ever. To replace that little GEM will now cost 30-40K for say the new Polish turbine or similar. She was such a beauty just to look at and dream but you could not just tear it down to work on it without many special tools and special tranning and I think I "chickened out" not wanting to destroy such a great machine!. Man i miss her!!!!
Well there’s a lot of thrust coming from turboprops it’s basically a jet engine but it usually has the exhaust section pointed downwards but he has it pointed out why I’m not sure of that
@@marco.9900 There's absolutely no way to mount this safely and feed this and make the weight restrictions. Light sport absolutely I'd love to see something like the darkaero with that. Depending on fuel it would be interesting on a kitfox.
@@kade426 You could put this engine on a Cessna 150. Nothing bigger, unless you used two of them, but it could be done. The engine would probably have to be a little bit beefier to handle a tougher propeller. Especially if it's a constant speed propeller. But with some.modifications, this engine could go on a Cessna 150. As for ultralights, it would work on gyrocopters. If those are even considered ultralights. And yeah. Any light sport, it would be perfectly fine
Mark, as to the JFS100, it is a small "twin shaft" free turbine engine made by Garrett AiResearch that has much less HP than the requirements of a Cessna 152 at 1670 pounds gross… and especially at altitude and/or high OAT. That “scratch built” STOL is likely at or under 1000 pounds gross. The JFS100 only produces 90HP at sea level on a standard temp day (69ºF), and does not even come close to producing 500lbs/ft of Torque (see Torque formulas below). The JFS100 power level is generally sufficient for something like a Zenith CH701 at 1100lbs gross, but the JFS100 has many problems preventing "continuous operation" even at that power level. Just one of the problems is its small oil capacity. It was designed as a “Jet Fuel Starter” (hence, the “JFS” moniker), and was NOT designed for continuous operation. It has a very low volume oil system that would need to be substantially increased. Another serious problem is that to produce it's rated 90HP, it must be operated at 1400ºF TOT (Turbine Outlet Temp)… which it is normally limited to for only a few seconds of starter operation. For reliable "continuous operation", the TOT would need to be reduced to at or below 1200ºF (where our Hybrid turbines already operate continuously). At this lower operating temperature, the JFS100 could produce reliable continuous power only if the oil system was increased, but the power output would be reduced to at or below 70HP while at 1200ºF TOT (again, at sea level on a std temp day). Although, there is an even more serious problem. The JFS100 does NOT have a governed "N2" Power Turbine. This would cause the Power Turbine to be very difficult to "throttle" while under load, requiring the pilot / operator to change N1 (Gas Producer) throttle positions far too frequently to be an effective aircraft power plant.....that is IF the operator could even keep up with all the throttle changes. This is because the throttle position would seriously lag behind the power level required at any precise moment...requiring the engine to be CONSTANTLY throttled up and down causing sever PIO (Pilot Induced Oscillation). A "human throttle governor" would never be able to maintain a constant N2 power turbine RPM... and there is no easy and reliable answer to solve the ungoverned "N2" (free turbine) section either. Even if solved with some unknown “add-on” N2 Power Turbine governor, the JFS100's "continuous power level" would still be far too low for use in any Cessna. So, we suggest you avoid the JFS100 for your intended 152 project. The formula for Horsepower = Torque × RPM / 5252 The JFS100 is only rated for 90HP @ 6000RPM, not 100HP If you already know the rated HP @ RPM, total Torque is easily determined by the formula: T(lbs/ft) = 5252 (HP) / RPM Therefore: T = 5252 (90) / 6000 T = 472680 / 6000 T = 78.78 lbs/ft, which is nowhere near 500lbs/ft.
Very nice.Good video done right and all is well.May I have 3 please.This gave me a great idea for an ass kicker hydro.What do? I suppose it is now to the drafting table(yea i'm over 60 and like pencil and paper).Well done folks.Ya gots to love it when a plan comes together ! HOW MUCH ? I was waiting for it to park in the garage(Not really) Thanks a lot !.I believe I will watch this again.Perfect size and power.Yea-ha!Here we go again! The wife is gonna be pissed again.
I built about 35 of these in various configurations. rustie6 was one of my main customers. I still have the one in the video. but he has the test stand now. I am building an 80% scale T6A Texan II trainer for it. 27' span 2 place tandem 1500 lb gross. The tail is done and the wing framework is done, engine, panels etc. I just finished the main landing gear retract system. Skins are next. When the wing is done i will start on the fuselage. It will look like a real Air Force T6A but is light plane style metal construction since it is slower and lighter. I am old school too. 68 yo. All of the drawings for the engine mod parts and the airplane are pencil and paper. I have gone through a case of mechanical pencil erasers so far.
+Magnús Because of the wheel, you can't see the 3" clearance. Although, the soft grass and lower than usual tire pressure did allow the front of the test stand to drop about 3/4" under heavy load at max power. We have since changed to larger tires which gives a much higher ground clearance margin. Would have made an expensive lawn mower though....
+Magnús The prop would fail and fracture well before the engine would be wrenched out of place. Same with a ground strike while mounted in an airframe. The prop is designed to fail well before the airframe ever would.
+rustie61 but this engine is lighter than aircraft so there is less force to counteract the torque of the motor, so both things could happen, if you propstrike a plane the bulkhead and the airframe often gets twisted and bent, also all the motor has to be inspected, the prop flange could warp and the crankshaft, the main bearing amongst other things on the real airplane
Hello, nice test there! Love the engine and that sweet orange truck too. Which model is it exactly? Looks like a military type of supply truck but in a residential neighborhood. Far better than a golf-cart, for sure. Would be really sweet for my homestead and workshop 👍🏻
The orange vehicle is a restored/modified Thiokol 1402 Imp snow cat. We use it for winter access to our cabin. I had it home for maintenance. You can see it in action on TH-cam.
I should have bought the Blue Canoe, and slapped two of these onto her. Had she been a six seater, and/or had her instruments remaining, I probable would have bought her. Two of these would have been nice on a 310A.
Don't know of any turbine powered "parasol" powered ultralight. Thinking it would be quite the overkill and not really a safe idea to try. A rigid airframe with full control surfaces is recommended.
GOOD JOB !!! So nice.. Where did you get that controllable propeller and hydraulic controller from ? Home made or bought somewhere ? Will you get it air born ? HATS OFF :)
My old JFS-100 , which has in the area of 100 HP but also 500+ flb of torque (typical of turbines) would more that enough for a 152 so similar. See Scott Ehin's scratch built STOL with the JFS pulling it. Very nice but they do burn 18-20 GPH of that "Nectar of the Gods" jet-A. Well worth the effort for the smell, smoothness, power etc of turbine power. The direct HP relationship between gas engines and turbines and especially electric do not hold up. Need to evaluate the toquue curve -vs- RPM to get better idea. Torque spins the prop!
The vehicle is a custom Thiokol 1402 snow cat we use for winter acces to our cabin. it was home for maintenance. The engine is slated for an 80% scale T6A Texan ll trainer that is under construction.
I love that idea. The EZ is superb and that looks like it would fit. I always wanted to build one out of carbon fiber and give it an electric drive system. My thoughts being the carbon fibers light weight could help offset the weight of the batteries.
Good day, I'm currently designing a drone/quadcopter (size of a car). I saw your video and I would like to know if I could buy that. I also wish to know about the max thrust and the fuel consumption rate. Thank you, Srinath
No. Just use a reciprocating engine. The fuel consumption is high as hell, like 19 gallons per hour. And did you see how old this video is? Just use a Rotax 912.
If anyone is reading this and knows a little bit about engines what do you think about putting a turboprop engine into a car, I've been researching it for a couple months now and want other people's opinions on the idea. Its a daunting task but seems really fun since I'm into aviation but also cars. And if I was to do this would there be a specific engine I should use and a specific transmission because I want to have it be manual.
If you want to put a turboprop's turbine in a car, you should get a Solar T62T32, its basically this but an APU that outputs at 6000 rpm rather than about 1900 for turning a prop, then put the engine in the engine bay backwards after making sure the engine bay is big enough, route the intake through two cowls that pull in air from the grill or perhaps hood scoops, run the exhaust into a y-pipe to split it into 3 inch pipes and either route those into two turbocharger exhaust housings with their turbines mated to generators to recover energy that would otherwise have been wasted or just dump the exhaust straight into like 2 mufflers and resonators to make it less deafening. Then you gotta add the other bits that ran the APU into the car and program a throttle control that can ramp the turbine up and down in rpm according to how much you push down the gas pedal, then you gotta be very careful with the clutch when driving it so it doesn't overload the turbine. It would be best to try to put a torque converter in between the output shaft and the clutch housing on the gearbox, perhaps an NV4500 out of a first gen Silverado would do the trick, 5 speed and made to handle more than the 380 ft-lbs of torque from the big L96 engine, and the T62 won't make that much power since it only makes 150hp while the L96 made 360hp and their output shafts rev around the same, so the NV4500's 6.34-to-1 first gear will help any vehicle get going. The T62T32 costs about 11 grand in proper working APU form, and the NV4500 costs about 2 and a half grand from what I can tell, so if you have a bunch of money laying around and are a proper machinehead able and willing to do it, it can be done. Turboprop engines and helicopter engines are really good choices and have been used before to make jet cars, so its possible for sure. An for the exhaust size, the full turbine is about 21 inches in diameter, and according to the size of the exhaust outlet in comparison I'd say the exhaust diameter is around 8.5 inches, that can be pushed down to 4 inches over probably a foot of pipe to let the air accelerate and from there it can be split into two 3 inch pipes through a 4 inch y-pipe and two 4-to-3 inch adapters, and at that point its either to a pair of semi-truck turbo exhaust housings with their turbines driving generators to sap the energy out of the exhaust, or just right into a set of mufflers and resonators. The exhaust velocity of a jet engine is usually nearly mach speed, so 312 meters per second, the exhaust pulses of an internal combustion engine can run up to 125 meters per second, and so since a turboprop's exhaust accounts for maybe 15% of its thrust at the very maximum we can say at 8.5 inches outlet diameter that's around 47 meters per second, since velocity is a function of the cross sectional area, the 56.75 square inches of the 8.5 inch pipe down to the 12.57 of the 4 inch pipe results in 212.2 meters per second exhaust velocity, and that slow down to 119 meters per second after the y-pipe, so the 4 inch is too much of a restriction, so realistically 8.5 inches at the turbine outlet to a 4.5 inch y-pipe down to two 3 inch pipes and then the exhaust velocity is much more reasonable. A turboshaft is a compressor, so it can easily handle a certain amount of exhaust backpressure, so a gradual downsizing of the outlet to a smaller size is easily doable and should be no trouble, and from there two pairs of Apex Xlerator mufflers which would total around 300 bucks for four of them should quiet it right down to bearable levels instead of being so loud you need ear protection. A pair of 3 inch diameter resonators should also take care of some of the pitchy noise that gives you headaches too, but that'd run another 200 bucks for a pair of them, but I'd imagine much of the noise can be taken care of by, believe it or not, the turbocharger generator thingies should you choose to put them in, its one big reason the Chrysler Turbine was so quiet, since its rotary regenerators sapped much of the thermal energy out of the exhaust to preheat the intake for better fuel economy that the exhaust was left much quieter and far cooler. Holy shit I wrote a metric fck-tonne of words XD
This is a single shaft turbine with a PSRU gearbox mounted directly to the main planetary reduction gearbox (which has an approx 10:1 reduction). The main gearbox runs at 6000RPM, and the PSRU (Prop Speed Reduction Unit) reduces that to 2800RPM for more efficient prop speeds (approx 2.14:1). All prop pitch controls run directly through the PSRU to control load from flat pitch (or even Beta) to full pitch/full load/max thrust (RPM remains constant). FYI, "twin shaft" turbines have two separate sections....an N1 Gas Producer, and an N2 Power Turbine (with separate governors in each). In the single shaft turbine, one set of wheels (compressor and turbine) does the job of both N1 and N2, requiring only one FCU (Fuel Control Unit = governor).
rustie61 That's an interesting small motor. What shaft Horse Power does it produce? Is this a commercial motor? - I assume it is. What is the intended target craft? Small light aircraft? Un-manned drones? Nice.
treheth atheaqthqae The T62/150TP in the video produces (as it's name implies) 150HP....and the T62/100TP produces 100HP. In the TP (TurboProp) configuration, it is intended for a wide range of fixed wing aircraft that require that level of power. But, the TP versions can be broken down to TS (TurboShaft) versions that can then power rotorcraft with the same power level requirements, respectively.
It's a radial outflow, centrifugal compressor with compressor guide vanes (diffuser nozzle) that direct the compressed, high flow air (at about 2.1lbs/sec) into a circumferential combustor where fuel is mixed, ignited, and exhausted through more guide vanes (turbine nozzle) and into the radial inflow (centrifugal) turbine wheel. In all, the air path takes about 5 separate 90 degree turns before leaving the turbine wheel (two consecutive 90deg turns could actually be considered a 180). It's pretty much a continuous, "suck-squeeze-burn-blow" through many turns until all this effort is converted into shaft power at the turbine wheel. On a "standard temp day", this particular engine also produces about 80 lbs of exhaust thrust when at 100% power (load)....
Thank you. The accessory gearbox, starter and alternator are custom made. The prop gearbox, prob and and blades were built by me in the hangar in front of the engine. Approximately 35 were built in various configurations. The last one was sold in 2001. This one is going into a 80% scale T6A trainer.
That is a highly customized Thiokol 1402 snowcat. We use it for access to our mountain cabin in the winter. It was home for maintenance. Snowcats have to be maintained like airplanes because they can kill you. Just slower. You can see several videos of it on you tube. Search for "1402 IMP snowcat Sn 129" Some of the videos are from the previous owner.
Any aircraft is going to be a series of compromises. I'm positive that there are pilots out there who would think this engine PERFECT for their mission requirements.
It would be really cool if you could run an engine like this off of two propane tanks like a B-B-Q grill then hook it up in the engine bay of a Lamborghini Kit-Car. I have a feeling it would be an experience worthy of the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah. An experience like no other.
Simply Pritam you may do, but the costs of FAA documentations, and "replacement parts" won't reach Solar T62 or the VBS turbines. In fact you may create a turboprop for less than $1000, but this don't mean that it will be fuel efficent or reliable. later, i'll see if i can post some regulamentations about experimentals airplanes and you may also find a RR250-C20B for low as $20.000, but the repair costs will be high, you need to have a real plan for your LSA/ultralight or so... of course a turboprop is nice, but sometimes it's better the good old 2 strokes aeronautical engines!
DEAR SANTA!!!! I've been good All Year!My powered paraglider seems really slow lately, and since I can land at every gas station along my route, I was hoping you and Rudolph could send me one of these. Especailly since I watched your movie where you bolted a turbine to your Sleigh, so you know what I'm Talkin' 'bout....😁🤣👍
Thanks!!!
Hmm. 10 minutes of flight with 2.5 gallons. Seems reasonable to me lol. On the other hand I wouldn't mind my paramotor having 150hp...
Your neighbors must love you.....lol
I wish I had neighbors this cool.
The ones that bought homes at an airport? Yeah probably...;)
Its on an airport. They are used to it.
I bet he's got a cool rake for his yard too.
I thought the exact same thing exactly
Turbo props are awesome.... Having a intake that sucks in AND a proppelor!
Those prop blade tips are approaching supersonic.
The speed of sound is 1100 fps. The blade tips are turning 732 fps. About right.
Nice work!
Very smooth movement.
Great.
I soooo want one of these !! So cool and smooth. Thrust was awesome !!
We've sold complete engines (TS and TP variants) all over the world...USA, France, Belgium, even the Ukraine. While we receive many questions, we don't always receive feedback from each customer....likely because of the sensitive nature of their various projects. But locally, there was a USA built Mini-500 Helicopter with a T62/100TS (TurboShaft). It used a 6-belt drive off the output shaft of the PSRU gearbox with an additional outboard bearing to carry the outside belt load. This Mini-500 was flown at the Florida Sun-N-Fun since summer '02. Not sure where it is today.
Another T62/150 has been flying in a Luscombe since 1999 (with a different, planetary type PSRU). To give you a sense of the turbine's reliability, this Luscombe once flew for over 5 minutes right after a normal service maintenance.....with NO OIL. This "maintenance inspection" was performed by a mechanic who forgot to refill the engine with oil. The Luscombe ended up making an emergency landing in a farmer's cornfield because of the planetary PSRU's failure from lack of lubrication. Although this was not our PSRU, it too would likely have been compromised with no oil supply (all PSRU's are highly loaded).
The Luscombe's turbine itself survived perfectly intact with only the residual internal oil coating left after drainage during that inspection (turbine bearings only require a light oil mist). Upon complete disassembly and inspection, the turbine reportedly had no damage nor discoloration of the internals (balls, rollers, races, gears or shafts). All parts still looked new. It was re-assembled, filled with oil and flown for quite some time afterward. The Luscombe was recently for sale about a year or so ago. No idea if it sold, or where it is today.
Hey I'm looking for something Cheap. Damn the Gov. approved paperwork etc.etc. something for Experimental Aircraft. Price?
B BelcherCheap? Sorry...not with any turbines we know of (unless they're burnt out cores). And, there is no "Gov approved paperwork". All these engine types are considered exclusively for the Experimental Category. No Standard nor Utility Category aircraft need apply...
+rustie61 Do you know what the Belgian buyer needed it for? I live in Belgium and would love to see this
+bayenne5b Me too ;)
I live in Belgium as well. I was in ultralights till 6-7 yrs ago. Would appreciate to know who bought this turbine.
So I'm thinking Cessna 152 Texas Taildragger with one of these...
150 150, if they say it's a 150SHP
With the 152's 19.5 gallon tanks, that would be 40 minutes to tanks empty, or 53 minutes at 75% power. vs about 2-1/2 hours at 75% power for a 150 hp Lycoming. So if you never want to fly more than 40 miles and have an unlimited fuel budget, you'd be fine. Otherwise it would be a pretty useless airplane.
on a vl3 evolution and with 5 small blades
@@gravfielddrive It's only a 150 hp engine. There are already 150 hp Cessna 150 conversions. They don't fly straight up.
@@andrewalexander9492 a cri cri with 2 of these would be fun to see
Now if you just let off the cart brakes a little you'll have a really high powered lawn mower!
I could see a pair of these in a plane similar to the old Ta-154 and scooting through the skies like a mad man.
How much thrust do you think you get with this configuration? Would this actually work well for fixed wing like an RV-7 or Lancair or something?
This engine is very tiny for 100 hp., so it looks ideal for a STOL cub or something. Haven't flown in years and that was in a Cessna 150. Wow.
2:20 almost sounds like a Rolls Royce dart spooling down :) love it!
The turboprop was actually the first type of gas turbine engine to be developed. Hungarian physicist Gyorgy Jendrassik started designing his engine back in 1937 and had a working prototype in 1940. It didn't fly until 1944, however.
Whipple may have something to say about that.
@@theprojectproject01I believe you're talking about Frank Whittle.😅
Dude...... That is bad ass man. Crazy how you did that. I am going to school to get my pilots license and today i saw a single engine plane land that had this engine in it. It was very loud and very fast. I had to look this up to see what it was. A very nice plane by far. Congrats on this man.
This engine and prop combo is a one of. What you saw was more likely a pt6 or Allison 250 powered aircraft.
Using this engine in a car is not a bad idea.
It brings that demon out 😈
That's quite the power plant there.
Terrifying 😲 Definitely needs a prop guard at that venue.
That said... IT WAS FRICKING AWESOME
👍😎
If he was my neighbor I'd be hanging around him all of the time because he's cool. That's before the restraining order.
Should rent that out for hurricane shots in movies! Prop looks mighty close to the ground, though....
Wow, it runs so smooth :-)
What sad people gave the thumbs down 👎🏼⁉️ Can you think of a better sound to wake you in the morning? 🤣
I had a JFS-100 that I was going to put in something. It had 0-Zero time since rebuild by the good ole' US national Guard and fully set up for turdoprop use and it was sweet as honey. I ended up selling it and buying a Beechcraft but I sure wish I had it back as the fun just planning my use of that engine in my own homebuilt was grand but one hot start or similar and all that $$$ is down the tubes so its now gone! For once i did the right thing and it turned into my biggest regret ever. To replace that little GEM will now cost 30-40K for say the new Polish turbine or similar. She was such a beauty just to look at and dream but you could not just tear it down to work on it without many special tools and special tranning and I think I "chickened out" not wanting to destroy such a great machine!. Man i miss her!!!!
such a great sound for a morning alarm
“Honey the neighbor is running his fucking jet fan again”
Go ahead and call the cops. Its on an airport.
Awesome engine and sound. What would be better for this engine Cessna or carefully designed ultralight??
Shawn Dubay neither. This guy puts out some serious power and consumes 14 gallons per hour. You'd want a bigger plane than that
No it doesnt, 150HP. A designed experimental would be best. Then you could have larger fuel tanks to compensate for the burn rate.
thats one small engine to be on an ultralight maybe?
Well there’s a lot of thrust coming from turboprops it’s basically a jet engine but it usually has the exhaust section pointed downwards but he has it pointed out why I’m not sure of that
@@gravfielddrive Maybe a specially designed ultralight? I want to see that on a Hummel Ultracruiser.
Edit: The 5 gallon fuel limit kind of ruins it.
Love to see it on a cessna 150 or pipper tomahawk
@@marco.9900 There's absolutely no way to mount this safely and feed this and make the weight restrictions. Light sport absolutely I'd love to see something like the darkaero with that. Depending on fuel it would be interesting on a kitfox.
@@kade426 You could put this engine on a Cessna 150. Nothing bigger, unless you used two of them, but it could be done.
The engine would probably have to be a little bit beefier to handle a tougher propeller. Especially if it's a constant speed propeller.
But with some.modifications, this engine could go on a Cessna 150.
As for ultralights, it would work on gyrocopters. If those are even considered ultralights.
And yeah. Any light sport, it would be perfectly fine
your neighbors must love you
They are used to it. We live on an airport. The test is taking place on the end of a taxiway.
It's smart that you've got it tied down!!!! I'm flying a Solar T62 turbine.
In what type of aircraft? Dreaming of a turboprop myself 😊
@@AdalaAkeri Check my channel. See the walk around video. 👍
Its going to make the coolest LSA out there
Mark, as to the JFS100, it is a small "twin shaft" free turbine engine made by Garrett AiResearch that has much less HP than the requirements of a Cessna 152 at 1670 pounds gross… and especially at altitude and/or high OAT. That “scratch built” STOL is likely at or under 1000 pounds gross.
The JFS100 only produces 90HP at sea level on a standard temp day (69ºF), and does not even come close to producing 500lbs/ft of Torque (see Torque formulas below). The JFS100 power level is generally sufficient for something like a Zenith CH701 at 1100lbs gross, but the JFS100 has many problems preventing "continuous operation" even at that power level.
Just one of the problems is its small oil capacity. It was designed as a “Jet Fuel Starter” (hence, the “JFS” moniker), and was NOT designed for continuous operation. It has a very low volume oil system that would need to be substantially increased.
Another serious problem is that to produce it's rated 90HP, it must be operated at 1400ºF TOT (Turbine Outlet Temp)… which it is normally limited to for only a few seconds of starter operation. For reliable "continuous operation", the TOT would need to be reduced to at or below 1200ºF (where our Hybrid turbines already operate continuously). At this lower operating temperature, the JFS100 could produce reliable continuous power only if the oil system was increased, but the power output would be reduced to at or below 70HP while at 1200ºF TOT (again, at sea level on a std temp day).
Although, there is an even more serious problem. The JFS100 does NOT have a governed "N2" Power Turbine. This would cause the Power Turbine to be very difficult to "throttle" while under load, requiring the pilot / operator to change N1 (Gas Producer) throttle positions far too frequently to be an effective aircraft power plant.....that is IF the operator could even keep up with all the throttle changes.
This is because the throttle position would seriously lag behind the power level required at any precise moment...requiring the engine to be CONSTANTLY throttled up and down causing sever PIO (Pilot Induced Oscillation). A "human throttle governor" would never be able to maintain a constant N2 power turbine RPM... and there is no easy and reliable answer to solve the ungoverned "N2" (free turbine) section either. Even if solved with some unknown “add-on” N2 Power Turbine governor, the JFS100's "continuous power level" would still be far too low for use in any Cessna. So, we suggest you avoid the JFS100 for your intended 152 project.
The formula for Horsepower = Torque × RPM / 5252
The JFS100 is only rated for 90HP @ 6000RPM, not 100HP
If you already know the rated HP @ RPM, total Torque is easily determined by the formula: T(lbs/ft) = 5252 (HP) / RPM
Therefore:
T = 5252 (90) / 6000
T = 472680 / 6000
T = 78.78 lbs/ft, which is nowhere near 500lbs/ft.
Love this video!
Very nice.Good video done right and all is well.May I have 3 please.This gave me a great idea for an ass kicker hydro.What do? I suppose it is now to the drafting table(yea i'm over 60 and like pencil and paper).Well done folks.Ya gots to love it when a plan comes together ! HOW MUCH ? I was waiting for it to park in the garage(Not really) Thanks a lot !.I believe I will watch this again.Perfect size and power.Yea-ha!Here we go again! The wife is gonna be pissed again.
I built about 35 of these in various configurations. rustie6 was one of my main customers. I still have the one in the video. but he has the test stand now. I am building an 80% scale T6A Texan II trainer for it. 27' span 2 place tandem 1500 lb gross. The tail is done and the wing framework is done, engine, panels etc. I just finished the main landing gear retract system. Skins are next. When the wing is done i will start on the fuselage. It will look like a real Air Force T6A but is light plane style metal construction since it is slower and lighter.
I am old school too. 68 yo. All of the drawings for the engine mod parts and the airplane are pencil and paper. I have gone through a case of mechanical pencil erasers so far.
@@turbinator4532 How great to be doing a love like this. Congrats. I sub'd you bud. Second watch was as great as the first !
That, is, impressive 😮😀! Small engine but big prop😃!
The engine is pretty close to a propstrike
+Magnús Because of the wheel, you can't see the 3" clearance. Although, the soft grass and lower than usual tire pressure did allow the front of the test stand to drop about 3/4" under heavy load at max power. We have since changed to larger tires which gives a much higher ground clearance margin. Would have made an expensive lawn mower though....
+rustie61 expensive single use lawn mower haha, the torque would rip the motor apart, or throw it away
+Magnús The prop would fail and fracture well before the engine would be wrenched out of place. Same with a ground strike while mounted in an airframe. The prop is designed to fail well before the airframe ever would.
+rustie61 but this engine is lighter than aircraft so there is less force to counteract the torque of the motor, so both things could happen, if you propstrike a plane the bulkhead and the airframe often gets twisted and bent, also all the motor has to be inspected, the prop flange could warp and the crankshaft, the main bearing amongst other things on the real airplane
Just look at that manicured lawn.
Hello, nice test there! Love the engine and that sweet orange truck too. Which model is it exactly? Looks like a military type of supply truck but in a residential neighborhood. Far better than a golf-cart, for sure. Would be really sweet for my homestead and workshop 👍🏻
The orange vehicle is a restored/modified Thiokol 1402 Imp snow cat. We use it for winter access to our cabin. I had it home for maintenance. You can see it in action on TH-cam.
I need a couple of these to retrofit to my old Dornier.
Love how there’s just a kids playground in the background. Makes it look like you’re in a neighborhood lol
Its a residential airport. I am part owner.
I should have bought the Blue Canoe, and slapped two of these onto her. Had she been a six seater, and/or had her instruments remaining, I probable would have bought her. Two of these would have been nice on a 310A.
Or a pair of Allison B17's...
Don't know of any turbine powered "parasol" powered ultralight. Thinking it would be quite the overkill and not really a safe idea to try. A rigid airframe with full control surfaces is recommended.
So smooth , very nice.
😆I did not notice the holding down rope at first!!
Nice any more developments to date?
This belongs in a Super Cub...
how heavy is the engine,,power to weight ratio must be considered when it comes to ultralight
It's all written in the description.
Would you use this on a sport light and how much thrust will you get with the three blade prop
thats pretty cool keep doing it
GOOD JOB !!! So nice.. Where did you get that controllable propeller and hydraulic controller from ? Home made or bought somewhere ? Will you get it air born ? HATS OFF :)
Everything but the core engine was designed and built by me in the hangar in front of the engine.
I'm curious to know, how many of these do you have flying currently, what types of aircraft and what has the reliability record been so far?
I had one on a small helicopter in South Africa that was used for spotting wildlife for years.
You're probably the most popular guy on the block...in a bad way
We live on an airport. Its normal.
where can i get one. want to put it in my stinson.
Awesome Idea to have this on a Paramotor Trike with Two seats or a Gyrocopter
My old JFS-100 , which has in the area of 100 HP but also 500+ flb of torque (typical of turbines) would more that enough for a 152 so similar. See Scott Ehin's scratch built STOL with the JFS pulling it. Very nice but they do burn 18-20 GPH of that "Nectar of the Gods" jet-A. Well worth the effort for the smell, smoothness, power etc of turbine power. The direct HP relationship between gas engines and turbines and especially electric do not hold up. Need to evaluate the toquue curve -vs- RPM to get better idea. Torque spins the prop!
You have some cool toys! The orange vehicle in view is unique. What are your plans for this engine?
The vehicle is a custom Thiokol 1402 snow cat we use for winter acces to our cabin. it was home for maintenance. The engine is slated for an 80% scale T6A Texan ll trainer that is under construction.
That would be great for a 1/5 scale R/C Aircraft!
Put four on a 1/5th-scale C-133 Cargomaster!? :)
I would use that engine for all kinds of giant scaled rc projects. How much for that engine?
If you could turn this into a pusher prop, I believe it would be perfect for the LongEZ.
I love that idea. The EZ is superb and that looks like it would fit. I always wanted to build one out of carbon fiber and give it an electric drive system. My thoughts being the carbon fibers light weight could help offset the weight of the batteries.
That would be perfect in my rv7. Did you ever install it in an aircraft?
Good day,
I'm currently designing a drone/quadcopter (size of a car). I saw your video and I would like to know if I could buy that. I also wish to know about the max thrust and the fuel consumption rate.
Thank you,
Srinath
No. Just use a reciprocating engine. The fuel consumption is high as hell, like 19 gallons per hour. And did you see how old this video is? Just use a Rotax 912.
awesome engine, is it possible to install the engine in road vehicle? how fast the output RPM?
Not really, it's a constant rpm turbine engine, so going 100% rated rpm during operation.
If anyone is reading this and knows a little bit about engines what do you think about putting a turboprop engine into a car, I've been researching it for a couple months now and want other people's opinions on the idea. Its a daunting task but seems really fun since I'm into aviation but also cars. And if I was to do this would there be a specific engine I should use and a specific transmission because I want to have it be manual.
If you want to put a turboprop's turbine in a car, you should get a Solar T62T32, its basically this but an APU that outputs at 6000 rpm rather than about 1900 for turning a prop, then put the engine in the engine bay backwards after making sure the engine bay is big enough, route the intake through two cowls that pull in air from the grill or perhaps hood scoops, run the exhaust into a y-pipe to split it into 3 inch pipes and either route those into two turbocharger exhaust housings with their turbines mated to generators to recover energy that would otherwise have been wasted or just dump the exhaust straight into like 2 mufflers and resonators to make it less deafening. Then you gotta add the other bits that ran the APU into the car and program a throttle control that can ramp the turbine up and down in rpm according to how much you push down the gas pedal, then you gotta be very careful with the clutch when driving it so it doesn't overload the turbine. It would be best to try to put a torque converter in between the output shaft and the clutch housing on the gearbox, perhaps an NV4500 out of a first gen Silverado would do the trick, 5 speed and made to handle more than the 380 ft-lbs of torque from the big L96 engine, and the T62 won't make that much power since it only makes 150hp while the L96 made 360hp and their output shafts rev around the same, so the NV4500's 6.34-to-1 first gear will help any vehicle get going. The T62T32 costs about 11 grand in proper working APU form, and the NV4500 costs about 2 and a half grand from what I can tell, so if you have a bunch of money laying around and are a proper machinehead able and willing to do it, it can be done. Turboprop engines and helicopter engines are really good choices and have been used before to make jet cars, so its possible for sure. An for the exhaust size, the full turbine is about 21 inches in diameter, and according to the size of the exhaust outlet in comparison I'd say the exhaust diameter is around 8.5 inches, that can be pushed down to 4 inches over probably a foot of pipe to let the air accelerate and from there it can be split into two 3 inch pipes through a 4 inch y-pipe and two 4-to-3 inch adapters, and at that point its either to a pair of semi-truck turbo exhaust housings with their turbines driving generators to sap the energy out of the exhaust, or just right into a set of mufflers and resonators. The exhaust velocity of a jet engine is usually nearly mach speed, so 312 meters per second, the exhaust pulses of an internal combustion engine can run up to 125 meters per second, and so since a turboprop's exhaust accounts for maybe 15% of its thrust at the very maximum we can say at 8.5 inches outlet diameter that's around 47 meters per second, since velocity is a function of the cross sectional area, the 56.75 square inches of the 8.5 inch pipe down to the 12.57 of the 4 inch pipe results in 212.2 meters per second exhaust velocity, and that slow down to 119 meters per second after the y-pipe, so the 4 inch is too much of a restriction, so realistically 8.5 inches at the turbine outlet to a 4.5 inch y-pipe down to two 3 inch pipes and then the exhaust velocity is much more reasonable. A turboshaft is a compressor, so it can easily handle a certain amount of exhaust backpressure, so a gradual downsizing of the outlet to a smaller size is easily doable and should be no trouble, and from there two pairs of Apex Xlerator mufflers which would total around 300 bucks for four of them should quiet it right down to bearable levels instead of being so loud you need ear protection. A pair of 3 inch diameter resonators should also take care of some of the pitchy noise that gives you headaches too, but that'd run another 200 bucks for a pair of them, but I'd imagine much of the noise can be taken care of by, believe it or not, the turbocharger generator thingies should you choose to put them in, its one big reason the Chrysler Turbine was so quiet, since its rotary regenerators sapped much of the thermal energy out of the exhaust to preheat the intake for better fuel economy that the exhaust was left much quieter and far cooler.
Holy shit I wrote a metric fck-tonne of words XD
I have 2 apu t-62 availables to make the convertion . Can you help me with any technical info pls
That's one hell of a lawn mower.
very nice what are you going to power with it , did you make the gear reduction and engine mods . I have a t-62-32
Everything except the core engine was built by me. This engine is destined for an 80% scaled T6A Texan II trainer.
Specs? Hp, torque, fuel consumption, weight?
Description gives most of that.
@@quillmaurer6563 missed that, thank you
hey is the a gearbox that comes to be a turboprop t62 how does it work from a helicopter engine turboshaft to a turboprop
Can four of these be used on a scale C-130? 70%-80% scale :-o
dvsmotions no.
dvsmotions yes.
Yes, but it probably won't get off the ground.
how many HP..and can you build 100 of these or sell us the plans on license
No. The supply of military surplus cores has dried up.
Awesome! 👍👍👍👍
So for 120 pounds of weight savings you get double the fuel burn. That is about 2 hours of fuel burn so worth it. Now TBO?
2000 hrs.
Cool stuff.
What make prop are you using it looks like the mechanical in-flight adjustable prop?
It is a custom design for this engine and gearbox only. Mechanical controls. 60" dia. 2800 rpm at mil power (108%)
Does this have a power turbine to drive the prop? Or a reduction gear from the main shaft? Just interested.
Nice!
This is a single shaft turbine with a PSRU gearbox mounted directly to the main planetary reduction gearbox (which has an approx 10:1 reduction). The main gearbox runs at 6000RPM, and the PSRU (Prop Speed Reduction Unit) reduces that to 2800RPM for more efficient prop speeds (approx 2.14:1). All prop pitch controls run directly through the PSRU to control load from flat pitch (or even Beta) to full pitch/full load/max thrust (RPM remains constant).
FYI, "twin shaft" turbines have two separate sections....an N1 Gas Producer, and an N2 Power Turbine (with separate governors in each). In the single shaft turbine, one set of wheels (compressor and turbine) does the job of both N1 and N2, requiring only one FCU (Fuel Control Unit = governor).
rustie61 WOW! Thanks dude for the reply! Love these things!
Cheers and happy days!
Trev
rustie61 That's an interesting small motor. What shaft Horse Power does it produce?
Is this a commercial motor? - I assume it is.
What is the intended target craft? Small light aircraft? Un-manned drones?
Nice.
treheth atheaqthqae
The T62/150TP in the video produces (as it's name implies) 150HP....and the T62/100TP produces 100HP. In the TP (TurboProp) configuration, it is intended for a wide range of fixed wing aircraft that require that level of power. But, the TP versions can be broken down to TS (TurboShaft) versions that can then power rotorcraft with the same power level requirements, respectively.
'
my favor snowcat with 2 wide tracks...
that cooool propeller fan with jetmotor...
no no need cylinder at all
That looks so dangerous!
Can it lift four 235 lbs men and what a dead weight?
Do you have a web site or pricing on a unit.
Would this work on a 172K model config? 1969
Will be good motorcikle with that engine
Is this ran by an axial compressor. Or a Centrifugal/Axial?
It's a radial outflow, centrifugal compressor with compressor guide vanes (diffuser nozzle) that direct the compressed, high flow air (at about 2.1lbs/sec) into a circumferential combustor where fuel is mixed, ignited, and exhausted through more guide vanes (turbine nozzle) and into the radial inflow (centrifugal) turbine wheel. In all, the air path takes about 5 separate 90 degree turns before leaving the turbine wheel (two consecutive 90deg turns could actually be considered a 180). It's pretty much a continuous, "suck-squeeze-burn-blow" through many turns until all this effort is converted into shaft power at the turbine wheel. On a "standard temp day", this particular engine also produces about 80 lbs of exhaust thrust when at 100% power (load)....
pure art. beautiul engine
Thank you. The accessory gearbox, starter and alternator are custom made. The prop gearbox, prob and and blades were built by me in the hangar in front of the engine. Approximately 35 were built in various configurations. The last one was sold in 2001. This one is going into a 80% scale T6A trainer.
God damn did you build this? If so it is absolutely amazing!
Yep. I built 35 of them. I kept the last one for my own project.
Are you gonna build more? Might want one for a Glasair Glastar, what’s the price?
@@AdalaAkeri This was the last one. It is going in a 80% scale T6A Texan ll project
So is there an intake im not seeing? Prop forces air into the turbine im assuming?
The air intake is halfway between the back of the spinner and the exhaust opening. It sucks air in radially and axially.
Was there ever a build video for this?
This engine was assembled in 2001 before anyone had a smartphone.
Are these gearboxes for sale anywhere?
What is that orange vehicle in the background?
That is a highly customized Thiokol 1402 snowcat. We use it for access to our mountain cabin in the winter. It was home for maintenance. Snowcats have to be maintained like airplanes because they can kill you. Just slower.
You can see several videos of it on you tube. Search for "1402 IMP snowcat Sn 129" Some of the videos are from the previous owner.
Is it a free turbine or is the power taken from the main compresser shaft ?
Direct drive. Compressor/Turbine is geared down from 61,000 to 2800 prop rpm at mil power and 2650 at std.
Any aircraft is going to be a series of compromises. I'm positive that there are pilots out there who would think this engine PERFECT for their mission requirements.
Which plane haves this engine?
Love this thing.
It would be really cool if you could run an engine like this off of two propane tanks like a B-B-Q grill then hook it up in the engine bay of a Lamborghini Kit-Car. I have a feeling it would be an experience worthy of the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah. An experience like no other.
Now you only need to build the airplane to put it in.
It is under construction. I am building an 80% scale T6A Texan ll.
do you think that would fit on an avait husky?
Where can I buy one of these for my STOL airplane?
You would have to build one. The cores have pretty much dried up.
fantastic!
What plane has this been used for?
Bad piggies big metal blade in a nutshell
HOw much one that's in video costs? Plz reply as soon as possible. I'm eager to know price and get one..
the Solar T62-2A1 costs about USD 25.000, this may cost twices of it...
russotragik lol.. i'll better make one with less than $1000..
Simply Pritam That's not going to happen.
Simply Pritam you may do, but the costs of FAA documentations, and "replacement parts" won't reach Solar T62 or the VBS turbines. In fact you may create a turboprop for less than $1000, but this don't mean that it will be fuel efficent or reliable.
later, i'll see if i can post some regulamentations about experimentals airplanes
and you may also find a RR250-C20B for low as $20.000, but the repair costs will be high, you need to have a real plan for your LSA/ultralight or so...
of course a turboprop is nice, but sometimes it's better the good old 2 strokes aeronautical engines!
Simply Pritam lol this isn't automotive, kiddo. this is aviation.
very cool man.....awesome
Where do you find toys like this?
You have to build them yourself.
How much and where can I get one??
That prop is alarming close to the ground