ByDanJohnson.com

With our friends at the prestigious Flying magazine putting Airbus’ E-Fan on their July 2015 cover, flanked by a major story inside, it seems everyone is following electric propulsion ever more closely. We’ve been doing it for a while as light aircraft are clearly the first place where electric power is best applied. Airbus may be planning an electric airliner but I don’t expect to see that anytime soon. Meanwhile the giant builder of airliners is indeed pushing forward with a two-and four-seat E-Fan.

However, I see another use of electric motors that strikes me as very compelling, and in the very near term. I wrote about a Spanish project earlier and here is another.

Many years ago when I was a young flight instructor, I dreamed up an idea called JERA, the Johnson Emergency Rocket Assist, born out of a small rocket engine that some gearheads were applying to go-carts on steriods. My idea was to offer just a few minutes of thrust to allow a troubled airplane to find a safe emergency landing somewhere nearby. Like so many ideas, I never executed so you never heard of it, but the idea of emergency power remains desirable much like emergency airframe parachutes.

Israel’s Ashot Ashkelon, Italian hybrid propulsion specialist Efesto joined with Italian light airplane manufacturer CFM Air, to develop a new Hybrid Propulsion System (HPS). According to the development team, “The system was designed for several aviation uses [among them] enabling additional flight time to prepare for an emergency landing.”

Reportedly designed as a retrofit kit for the Rotax 9-series engines, HPS incorporates a new gearbox developed by Ashot, a new propeller shaft, a power converter, and controller. Hybrid propulsion elements provided by Efesto also include a high-capacity lithium-polymer battery with power management system for power storage. The whole system adds about 30 kilograms (66 pounds) in net weight, more than an airframe parachute but possibly adding sufficient safety value to justify a reduction in payload.

CFM Air develops and manufactures light planes such as the Dardo seen in the nearby photos. The company’s chief test pilot is astronaut Maurizio Cheli, who trained together with the late Israeli astronaut Ilan Ramon and is also a fighter pilot in the Italian Air Force.

Some of the main benefits of the Hybrid Propulsion System are a significant additional power for launch and climb rate enhancement. Operating both engine and motor simultaneously increases the power available, shortening takeoff run and safely clearing obstacles at the airport.

However, developers seem primarily focused on emergency use of HPS saying it adds, “a significant safety element in case of [primary engine] failure by providing extra flight time using the electric motor, also as a replacement for the Safety Parachute.” Based on many years working with BRS Parachutes, I am certain HPS will not always “replace” the airframe parachute, for example, after a mid-air collision. Nonetheless, using HPS to solve engine failure or fuel starvation would be much less exciting than firing a ballistic parachute.

Safety is good, of course, but other uses can come with electric. For example, the Israeli/Italian team observed, “In addition, there is the thrust reversal mode for propellers using the electric motor, which makes it possible to stop quickly to shorten landing roll and extend the lifespan of the brakes, and the ability to charge the batteries and save energy.”

On landing, they say the electric motor can be operated in counter-rotation mode, providing thrust reversal for shorter landing runs. The electric engine can also be used as an alternator for battery charging and as a starter for the main engine. Electric propulsion can also be used in the air, providing active vibration damping for smoother, low-level flight.

Developers said HPS provides the pilot with six minutes of critical flight time after engine failure, which they believe should be sufficient in which to find an emergency landing site and set down safely operating on electrical power only. HPS is currently offered for the Rotax aircraft engines used by some 200 light aircraft types worldwide.

My JERA might have been lots lighter (if a tad more dangerous with rocket fuel). Yet it never made it to market while the Hybrid Propulsion System is something you can actually consider.

Compress Post ...

Some people, myself included, love soaring flight. As the following article from Dave Unwin explains, to use his words, “Soaring flight exercises a fascination that is both difficult to explain and hard to resist, sometimes called ‘three-dimensional sailing.’ Flying a heavier-than-air machine for several hours and hundreds of miles by using the atmosphere as the fuel possesses an undeniable attraction.” As he further explained in a longer article, the downside is getting airborne for soaring flight. Various alternatives have been explored. Some were reasonable; others were too marginal to be enjoyed. In the following piece Dave tells about a new aircraft that might solve this problem, one that can fit England’s innovative SSDR 300 (kilogram) category. —DJ

Article Updated 6/17/15 — ProAirsport announced, “We have now released a priority price of 39,950 British pounds (about $63,000). More details can be found on our website.” This is an excellent value for a motorglider. The company forecast their first delivery in February 2016. (Update 7/6/21: The company website is no longer functioning.)

When I heard that ProAirsport (not working-0721) was proposing a new type of self-launching SSDR sailplane, powered by a lightweight turbojet my initial reaction was one of skepticism. Having taken a cursory glance at the specifications and weights, I doubted that this thing would have enough thrust to even taxi to the far hedge, let alone fly over it!

Then ProAirsport CEO Roger Hurley revealed that “project GloW” sitting in his computer was a hybrid, and that the wheels would be driven by a powerful electric motor. My skepticism turned to enthusiasm and I made an appointment to meet Roger at his shop. I inspected the fuselage plug and marveled at the small size of the jet engine.

Created to meet the requirements of the new UK Single Seat Deregulated (SSDR) class and the U.S. Light-Sport category GloW has a max takeoff weight of 300 kilograms (660 pounds), empty weight of about 180 kilograms (396 pounds), and can achieve a full fuel payload of 205 pounds.

GloW’s fiberglass and carbon fiber fuselage carries the wing, engine, fuel tank, batteries, and the clever powered undercarriage. The shoulder-mounted wing gently sweeps at the tips with only a small amount of dihedral. Large airbrakes are fitted to the top surface of the wing.

The Titan jet engine is fixed internally behind the cockpit and features an automatic open/close intake scoop. This very neat little turbojet is less 40 centimeters (16 inches) long and weighs an astonishing 3.7 kilograms (8 pounds), yet produces a creditable 88 pounds of thrust. This should be enough to produce reasonable climb rates at around 50 knots, while the 9-gallon fuel tank should last for several further climbs.

As the Titan engine can burn a variety of fuels, from Jet A-1 and JP-4 to diesel, kerosene, and domestic fuel oil, it cannot only be readily refuelled from a variety of sources but is incredibly cheap!

As it is expected that a take-off and climb to 3,000 feet will burn a bit more than two gallons of fuel, the cost of a relatively high go-where-you-want launch will still be less than the average winch launch and much less than an aerotow! In cruise, fuel flow is predicted to be much lower.

The Titan is a standard commercial item which is used successfully in large R/C models and drones. Compared to a piston engine, turbines offer several advantages.

They are light, compact and have only a few moving parts. Vibration levels are low, and they are very reliable. Starting the jet is very simple; select start, the airscoop opens, and it starts. Shutting it down is equally simple. However, while very small jets have been used on self-sustainers for some years, they simply don’t have anywhere near the static thrust required to take off in a reasonable distance.

This brings us to GloW’s most unconventional aspect, the undercarriage, which consists of four wheels of three different sizes mounted along the fuselage centerline: a small steerable pneumatic nosewheel, a tiny solid urethane tailwheel, and dual retractable mainwheels. GloW sits upright with wings level. This is where GloW gets really interesting, as these wheels are driven by a powerful electric motor.

Modern electric motors put out a lot of torque and this can produce incredible rates of acceleration (think: Tesla automobiles). A high-tech motor, controller. and LiFePO4 battery pack, and charging system coordinate to accelerate GloW up to take off speed. Here is the design’s “secret sauce.”

For take-off, GloW can be wings-level taxied, even reversed into position before starting the jet and setting full power. Clever gearing of the wheels easily and quickly accelerates the aircraft to the safe speed above which it will fly and a smooth rotation eases the motorglider into the air so it can climb using the thrust of the jet. As the electric energy required for take-off is tapped only for a few seconds, the acceleration should be outstanding.

The design certainly looked extremely professional. Roger has assembled an impressive team of pilots and engineers. Although the SSDR class is not regulated or subject to mandatory airworthiness approval, ProAirsport decided to follow ASTM standards.

Prices have yet to be announced, but its clear from the design choices made and the manufacturing methods adopted that ProAirsport’s objective could place it at the low end of the self-launch market.

I came away from my visit to ProAirsport completely converted to the idea. Imagine owning a self-launching microlight sailplane, free from regulatory hassle and able to take off from any reasonable field or strip? It could open soaring flight for many pilots.

Trade-offs exist, of course. By definition GloW is very light so although the projected best L/D is expected to be mid-30s, this will be achieved at relatively low speed. However, the same is true for the minimum sink, so GloW should climb very well indeed.

A reliable engine and easy starting means I could use it to explore gentle wave systems, sea breeze fronts and shearlines, and also to investigate hills and ridges that simply aren’t accessible by pure gliders.

Compress Post ...

A few years back at Aero 2009, Flight Design and Rotax teamed up on a very interesting project. Based on the R-912 engine they added an optional electric motor that could provide additional torque (a characteristic electric motors have in abundance) for takeoff and climb or for emergency power in the event of a failure. The idea more than intrigued me and many others but it quietly disappeared.

Recently a Spanish university announced it had taken this concept to the next step. The team investigating this seemed focused on the emergency factor but opened the door to combined used of electric motor and gasoline engine. In case of a conventional engine failure, while very unlikely, an electric motor can, they said, deliver another 20 kilometers or 12.5 miles of range. That would be a literally saving grace to the pilot and occupants of a troubled aircraft.

Researchers at Universidad Carlos III de Madrid (UC3M) and the Axter Aerospace firm developed an electric propulsion system to install in light aircraft to deliver extra power and range in emergency situations. The group believe their new hybrid system could prevent 600 accidents a year after studying aviation accidents on two continents.

The team was lead by Andrés Barrade assisted by Miguel Ángel Suárez and Daniel Cristobal. They started with a Tecnam P92 and while the changes appear modest, you can discern the results (top photo, circle).

Barrade said, “The basic goal of this project is to improve the safety of light and light-sport aircraft, that is, two- and four-passenger planes weighing a maximum of 750 kilograms” (1,650 pounds, a value that covers all LSA and up to a Cessna 150). “We are trying to saves lives and prevent accidents related to loss of power during flight, when the engine fails or the fuel runs out,” clarified Suárez. He works with Axter Aerospace, the company which collaborated with UC3M to develop this new system.

The idea is to equip the plane with an electric engine mounted aft of the propeller but outside the engine compartment (at least in the test article). Such an installation suggests this could be an add-on to existing aircraft once the company decides to commercialize their work.

“If there is a problem with the main engine, this electric engine will start to function, which will provide an additional range of about 20 kilometers, enough for the pilot to land safely,” said Barrado, head of the UC3M Electric Power Systems group and one of the other promoters of this invention.

The system features an electric engine that is connected to the conventional engine, a high-efficiency lithium battery, and an electronic system that draws energy from the battery and adapts it to the needs of the plane. It also has a battery charger which operates during the flight.

“We maximize the capacity of the battery in generating movement with the electric engine, and we have found that we can also use the system as a hybrid for light aircraft; the pilot can activate it when she wants, adding up to 40 horsepower for takeoff or whatever is needed,” said Daniel Cristobal, now also with Axter Aerospace and an alumnus of the UC3M. “This way, it could be used as if it were an electric turbo to increase the power of the aircraft in certain maneuvers.”

So, while the UC3M/Axter team see safety as the main point, they are pursuing this idea in the same general directions as Flight Design and Rotax did six years back. Note that the Tecnam P92 has a Rotax 912 for its main powerplant.

This system, which is being marketed and patented internationally, can be installed in light aircraft, new or already operating, they said. It might also eventually be applied to other types of aircraft, such as gyroplanes, gliders, drones and other unmanned aerial vehicles. Besides saving lives and reducing financial losses resulting from accidents, the UC3M group said its architecture reduces the airplane’s operating and maintenance costs, lowers fuel consumption and reduces the emission of greenhouse gases and noise pollution.

I wish to give credit to Product Design & Development website, part of Advantage Business Media where I first discovered the work of the UC3M/Axter group.

Compress Post ...

Let’s set the way-back machine to two dates and examine the actions of our good friends at FAA. One date was September 1982. Another date was September 2004.

Date #1 was the time when FAA announced Mike Sacrey and team’s remarkable Part 103. This rule has lasted for 33 years and continues to hold interest (see earlier article on the subject). Date #2 was when FAA announced the SP/LSA rule engineered by Sue Gardner and her team. I continue to applaud their initiative for both simplified rules where they stepped far back and let the market do its magic. Both have increased the freedom of pilots to fly what and how they prefer. Kudos, FAAers!

Part 103 is strictly single seat since the two-seat “103 trainers” were forced into ELSA status. Does a market exist for one-place aircraft? I always cite this survey result from AOPA. After many years of asking, the big member group determined the average occupancy of a GA aircraft was 1.6 persons. Since most of these were four seat airplanes, if the average was only 1.6 they must have been flown solo frequently. I will soon post a guest editorial on the subject of single place flying.

FAA recently came out with Part 107 for drones about which major drone industry businessman Cliff Whitney said, “I was shocked yet extremely pleased about the proposed rule … FAA used common sense.” So the government folks still show creativity. However, the Mike Sacreys and the Sue Gardners of FAA are either gone or working in other areas. Too many I’ve met appear focused on more regulation, more rules, more stuff pilots should put on their aircraft, or generally doing things that impose higher costs on aviation — for very elusive advances in safety. All this seems more likely to shrink aviation than grow it.

So, what’s up with Britain’s CAA and their expansion of SSDR? For those that may not know — after all, why should you track what another country’s government agency is doing? — the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority has been among the very tightest of regulators. Years ago I looked in detail at their ruleset for weight shift trikes, and oh, my goodness, this was a thick book those manufacturers had to meet. It was so daunting that it may have been the beginning of the end for the once-vibrant trike building industry in merry old England.

Aircraft developer Graham Smith wrote, “[Our] CAA announced this initiative by way of a consultation. Nobody knows why they suddenly decided to go down this road. They have the reputation of being the most conservative regulator in the world.”

“I was personally astounded. The consultation was very interesting. The LAA who had supported the old 115 kilogram rule (253 pounds, so almost identical to the U.S. Part 103 weight) suddenly came out against the rule asking for a wing loading restriction to be added. I guess they realized that it was a big threat to their monopoly. Even at the consultation stage &mdash after the proposals had been published &mdash the consensus was that eventually the wing loading restriction would be added. The CAA stood firm and the rule was passed without modification. It required an Act of Parliament to become law but eventually it was done.”

“The main reason the CAA gave for changing the rules was to stimulate innovation and by picking a unique design code it would avoid sucking in a load of imports and motivate the local manufacturers. The question now was how can we best take advantage of the new freedom?” (I will have more on Graham’s answer to this in a later article.)

So, what does the CAA SSDR 300 look like?

The “Dereg” category, to use Graham’s shorthand, is very simple. CAA said, “Any microlight aeroplane [can qualify] that (A) is designed to carry one person; (B) has a maximum take-off mass of no more than 300 kilograms (660 pounds) …” — CAA allows 315 kilograms (693 pounds) when equipped with a mounted airframe parachute or 330 kilograms (726 pounds) for a single seat amphibian or floatplane. The last element is, “(C) … a stall speed or minimum steady flight speed in the landing configuration not exceeding 35 knots (40 mph) calibrated airspeed.” However, CAA cautioned, “… many aircraft with indicated stall speeds below 35 knots have calibrated stall speeds well above that figure.”

How does England’s CAA administrate this SSDR 300? They use a declarative system much like FAA originally specified with the LSA category. CAA stated, “The aircraft owner makes the declaration that their aircraft meets the requirements, i.e., … falls with the maximum take-off mass and maximum stall speed.”

CAA also noted that an existing two seaters can be made into a single seater to qualify so long as it meets the criteria referenced above. No annual inspection is required. Self launching motorgliders are also included but CAA drew the line at rotorcraft, allowing only fixed-wing aircraft, flex-wing (trikes), and powered parachutes. Neither is commercial use allowed.

In my opinion, this is an innovation-inspiring new rule and I commend CAA for talking this bold step. So, FAA … ?

Compress Post ...

Sunward Aviation in China makes this handsome low wing called SA60L.

Crowds were thick at the exhibits of the American delegation, featuring MVP.aero, M-Squared, Aeromarine LSA, Blackhawk Paramotor, and Lancair.

American delegation leader and Aero Sports Association founder, Shu Dong Li (left) poses with the Anyang flight school director. ASFC is Air Sports Federation of China. The Caravan is used for sky diving.

To say anticipation is high regarding the development of a China general aviation market might be the understatement of the century. Having earlier observed the auto market grow exponentially — Mercedes reportedly sells more of their luxury cars in China than America — pioneering aviation marketers are brimming with anticipation. Most readers are well aware of the investments made by wealthy Chinese in American aircraft companies.

The country has been on a three-decade-long infrastructure-building binge to exceed any such development in human history and at the Anyang GA Expo (my shortened name for it), we heard highly-placed government officials make speeches about new airport-building plans.

Like many aviators initially contemplating this country — I just completed my first visit — I can sense the boundless enthusiasm. A middle class that might afford light aircraft is said to be larger than the entire U.S. population. Securing even a small sliver of such an untapped potential could foster an entire industry.

That’s the dream. What’s the reality?

I was a guest of the city as part of a delegation assembled by the Aero Sports Association. Anyang is roughly 500 kilometers (about 300 miles) south of Beijing. The city is ancient with 3,300 years of history but a few years ago declared itself the “Airsports Capital,” a good omen for the beginning of building a market for recreational aviation.

Director Qin Jianhua explained — reinforced by Mayor Ding Wei and Vice Mayor Zwang Manru along with other officials — that the city government was granted from the military a 4,420 square kilometer chunk of airspace up to 3,000 meters (about 10,000 feet) to use for flight training and recreational aviation … the largest such in the country. That much area can allow an outbound cross country flight of perhaps 60 miles, although all landings must return to the city airport as no other airstrips yet exist in the airspace. While true cross country flights around China may still be years in the future, Anyang’s volume is a good start to stimulate recreational flying.

Business travel to another city in a general aviation airplane is still very restricted but several Chinese enthusiasts to whom I spoke report being able to fly sport aircraft with greater freedom because their actions are consistent with the national government’s gradual opening of airspace. In another example, we traveled an hour west of Anyang to a beautiful mountainous region where a paragliding championship was held. Communist Party member Zwang lead opening ceremonies, giving the event and activity official sanction.

These observations lead me to speculate that it is sport aviation that may benefit first from national government approval. This is an exciting enticement for producers of Part 103 aircraft and LSA manufacturers to explore the opportunities.

That’s what my new friend Shu Dong Li sees for his Aero Sports Association. Shu Dong is working to connect American aircraft manufacturers with Anyang to allow sales and use of their aircraft in the China city’s large piece of airspace. Shu Dong is based in the San Francisco area and has deep connections with Anyang government leaders so he is providing a bridge for U.S. builders that otherwise would face a big struggle to penetrate the China market. He expects that once his business model shows success in Anyang, he can replicate this in other cities. To that end we met with government leaders from Wuhan, China who also spoke of ambitious plans to embrace aviation.

Although only a tiny aviation market presently operates, government goals may be highly stimulative. An earlier gold rush brought in hundreds of foreign aircraft companies, many of whom collapsed for various reasons, one of which was the government’s halting pace in opening the airspace for non-airline, non-military use. The Chinese Air Force has been slow to give up their lock on the airspace but based on the official speeches, that appears to be changing.

Why should American manufacturers care about what is happening in the China aviation market? If you are a producer, I should think it is obvious: more customers, eventually anyway. Why should individual pilots and aviation consumers see this as valuable?

It may not seem relevant to U.S. aviation enthusiasts but I think you should care that the maker of your favorite airplane can find more customers to help them prosper. Success allows them to provide you with better service and allows development of new airplanes or to upgrade existing designs.

Taking a broader view, trading with neighbors around the world can reduce potential conflicts. I learned a lot about China that I didn’t know and it will transform me. I will never look at newspaper articles about China the same way now that I have basic level of understanding.

I also clearly saw the interest from ordinary Chinese people about learning to fly and that interest charges me while also reminding me just how good I have it as an American. I can choose to take my airplane and fly thousands of miles without special permission. I imagine Chinese dreaming of such a thing, too, even if most flying is done closer to the home field. Aero Sports Association is working to make our world a little smaller and that seems a worthy goal to me.

Compress Post ...

Superior’s Scott Hayes pointing out the intake ports on the Gemini Diesel’s cylinder sleeve (exhaust ports are to the left as you view the part between Scott’s index and middle fingers).

“So, it looks like Rotax has finally got some worthy competition,” was a comment I received as I walked into the Sun ‘n Fun press headquarters work room. The observation came from a fellow journalist at one of the big aviation magazines. He is aware Rotax dominates the light aircraft market with an estimated 75-80% of all engine installations, even higher overseas. Who is going to give the big Austrian engine manufacturer some competition?

Superior Air Parts got started back in 1967 making components for certified engines such as Lycoming but long ago branched into their own engine line. Companies like Arion Aircraft is using an Experimental Superior XP powerplant for their new EAB speedster similar to but quite a bit faster than their LS-1 Light-Sport model. Like Arion, many already knew of the gasoline engines from this Texas company, but I knew something was up when I was approached at Sebring about a new project. To hear more, I had to promise secrecy but the veil came off at Sun ‘n Fun and that’s why the other media fellow made his comment.

Gemini Diesel employs two horizontally-opposed pistons in a single cylinder using outboard crankshafts driving a common center shaft through a system of front-mounted gears. Gemini appears roughly the same size as the Rotax 912 and, according to representatives, weighs about 200 pounds or 10 percent more than the Rotax. It also costs marginally more than a 912ULS at a projected retail price of $25,000.

At Sebring and again at Sun ‘n Fun, I spoke with (then interviewed for a video; see below) Scott Hayes, Superior’s sales and marketing VP who provided details after the announcement by CEO Tim Archer. “[We] acquired the Gemini Diesel engine and have begun active development of the current engines, as well as planning the introduction of new models,” stated Archer.

Archer added, “Because of its unique, Uniflow design featuring two-opposing-pistons-per-cylinder, the Gemini will be smaller than many current gasoline and diesel piston engines, giving it a significant power-to-weight ratio advantage and making it especially attractive to the experimental and LSA markets initially.”

In late 2014 Superior acquired all rights to the liquid-cooled, two-stroke diesel design originally developed by Britain’s Powerplant Developments. Over the last few months, Superior has been testing prototypes of the Gemini on the bench.

“There are basically two reasons why we chose to offer the Gemini Diesel to the experimental and LSA markets first,” said Scott. “Number one was the fact that the 100-horsepower, Gemini 100 is much further along in its development cycle.” Then he elaborated, “The second is that over the years many of the manufacturers of these kit and LSA aircraft have become dissatisfied with the current engine options and have asked us about developing a new-generation, alternatively-fueled engine that delivers the same innovation, quality, and value that is found in our experimental XP-Series and FAA-certificated Vantage Engines.”

“We have already had preliminary discussions with manufacturers representing a variety of experimental and LSA aircraft,” Archer said. “We are very excited to say that the Gemini 100 is currently running in the test cell. The engine is meeting all of our performance goals and right now we anticipate having preproduction engines within 90 days.” That translates to about Oshkosh time, so it will be interesting to hear how LSA builders are embracing the idea.

I envision the strongest support may come from overseas suppliers who have active businesses delivering aircraft to countries where avgas is virtually unavailable and where auto gas may be questionable for use in an airplane. In addition many airports around the globe do not allow non-aviation fuels on their property so auto gas is not as widely available as in America.

Of course, the million-dollar question is how Rotax may address this development. The company always holds their new development close to the vest and no one I know will say a single word about what may be coming. Yet the Austrian powerhouse (Toronto stock exchange symbol DOO.TO) is not a giant to be casually poked. It may be very interesting to see what Superior’s entry causes in response.

Other players in the LSA ASTM-standards-meeting engine space include Jabiru with 81- and 120-horsepower models and HKS and D-Motor with lower horsepower models. D-motor showed a six-cylinder engine at Aero and Sun ‘n Fun and UL Power is reportedly working on meeting ASTM standards. Plus, the new engine from ICP in Italy is reportedly ready to enter production. However, while I have seen some interesting diesel engine prototypes, Superior has clearly jumped in the lead of proposing to have an engine perhaps in serial production and meeting ASTM standards perhaps in 2015.

Airframe developments in variety of configurations — fixed wing, gyroplane, weight shift, powered parachute, and motorglider — have proven a fascinating watch since the first one was FAA accepted just over ten years ago. Now the engine space looks to be of equal interest. We will work to keep you informed in the fast-changing sector.

Superior’s Bullet Points on the new Gemini Diesel Engine
Jet A is a global fuel with better availability, quality, consistency and pricing
Operators can fly the same range as a standard engine on less fuel
High power-to-weight ratio; provides 100 horsepower
Highly efficient, two-stroke power
Higher engine torque at lower RPM
Projected to have up to 20% lower fuel burn than conventional engines
Mechanically simpler design, with fewer moving parts
Retrofittable with many current piston engine designs
Greener operations with much lower emissions
Uniflow design enables easier engine model expansion
Higher horsepower engine in planning

See more in our recently shot video interview with Superior’s Scott Hayes

Compress Post ...

Interviewing Brian Boucher and his Edra Aeronautica Super Petrel LS Light-Sport amphibian.

We keep up with fascinating development projects by interviewing people like Darrell Lynds. photo by Steve Pugh of MVP.aero

Getting the latest update on Ekolot‘s handsome Topaz from Kris Siuba.

Update 4/30/15 — On the unlikely chance that you don’t get enough of watching me on YouTube, Florida Aviation Network uploaded an interview from Sun ‘n Fun 2015. In this exchange I give some update on the industry over the last year and the state of LSA, as it were. See at the end of the article.

Whew! It was another full-to-capacity tour of Sun ‘n Fun where we scoured the grounds seeking interesting aircraft to report. I’m happy to tell you that we again spoke with dozens of designers about their creations and we think we do a thorough job in the light aircraft sector. In 2015, more than Light-Sport Aircraft, light kit aircraft, and ultralights, we are adding light general aviation airplanes or Light GA and drones (also known as UAVs, UASs, RPVs, RPAs … they go by several names, so new is the category).

While realizing that videos are enormously popular content on ByDanJohnson.com and Google YouTube, I’d like for you to understand how it is they occur. I mention this as one company we proposed to cover asked somewhat defensively how much shooting the video was going to cost them. Commonly, video shooting and editing runs about $1,000 per minute and can go much higher from a professional video organization. We charge the aircraft company nothing, zero, nada. In fact, this is significantly a labor of love done without compensation in mind. We tease about how it is our “volunteer job” in aviation. Click to see hundreds of free videos including a Video Pilot Report or VPR of Van’s Aircraft’s RV-12 in two segments (Part 1 & Part 2).

The process begins with my videographer partner, Dave, in this effort making the rounds seeking airplanes and people whose stories might be of interest. He’s become quite familiar to many in aviation who commonly see him approach on his “gimpster” as he likes to call it. He must use this as getting around is not easy with cameras, tripods, batteries, and all the accouterments of videography. Honestly, though it was not his choice to be dependent on his scooter, video man Dave soldiers on without complaining and has become highly effective at the process.

You don’t simply go around and find shiny aircraft at which to point a video camera. It is also necessary to know if an aircraft has new or unique qualities and to consider how it fits in the light aircraft segment. A script plays out in his mind and only after these steps does the shooting begin.

After Dave’s review — a multi-day process at big events like Sun ‘n Fun — he makes a list of the aircraft, engines, other products, or interesting people and we discuss how to approach them in the goal of getting a story you viewers will enjoy. As the subjects are scattered all over the grounds, it takes planning to do several videos per day and more time to find the right individual to interview. Personnel availability is challenging at busy events so we often have to wait our turn; it’s not diplomatic to interrupt a sales conversation to shoot a video.

My part of the job is often to pull the right person to their aircraft, to brief them on how the video recording will go, tell them how to position themselves so we show them and their aircraft in good light. We will often discuss what I will ask them — usually the same questions you viewers would ask had you the opportunity. Finally, we launch into it, trying to make as few takes as possible to minimize the post-production effort. Usually we do quite well but people get nervous with a camera watching them causing them to stumble. Not unusually a military jet roars overhead and we have to interrupt the process.

At the conclusion of the video recording, we ask permission to use additional video footage the company may have shot, capture still images, verify contact info and name spellings, after which Dave finishes the scripting and sends it off to get produced and published on YouTube.

The exercise demands more effort than may appear and is greatly aided by two of us who know this industry very intimately allowing us to efficiently gather compelling footage. We do this without direct payment from any company so you can depend on our objectivity.

I am pleased to report that I heard from many viewers at Sun ‘n Fun who said they watch lots of our videos and enjoy them. One man approached me and said, “I recognized you and wanted to meet you. I’m a boat captain working out of Dubai; I spend a lot of time watching you.” That’s satisfying to hear but without my great collaborator Dave, these videos would not be as good as they are. We are happy you enjoy them. We plan to keep making videos and we hope you’ll keep watching.

A Note of Interest — During Sun ‘n Fun 2015, YouTube turned 10 years old. In one decade Google’s video service has grown so much that every minute of the day, 24 hours a day, seven days a week … 300 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube.

Here is the Florida Aviation Network interview by FAN host Diego Alfonso with Dan Johnson:

Compress Post ...