alternative engines, why no Yamaha, Honda, etc.?

B

Brad W

Pattern Altitude
PoA Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2019
Messages
2,230
Location
NE Florida
Display Name
Display name:
BLW2
I was walking the dog and listening to some sun n fun updates. They were talking about the new Rotax engine
it dawned on me
Rotax seems to be very well grounded now in light sport GA
and if my memory serves me it sprouted from snowmobile and watercraft engines.
I wonder, was it first started by scratch build home builders pulling engines out of snowmobiles and modifying them for use in home built aircraft?​
Anyway, my bigger question is why have the seeming larger small engine companies such as Yamaha and Honda made a mark in this market?
 
Brad W said:
Anyway, my bigger question is why have the seeming larger small engine companies such as Yamaha and Honda made a mark in this market?
Click to expand...
The companies themselves probably don't see a business case for going after a niche market with the liability risk associated with aviation. IIRC Viking is using Honda engines, but they're not exactly flooding the market.

ETA: I see you're asking specifically about small engines, so disregard the last sentence above.

Nauga,
and the sound of silence
 
Yamaha and Honda want to sell engines by the millions, not a couple thousand.
 
Rotax and Austro are from Austria and seem reasonably successful at selling non-traditional aircraft engines. Porsche is from Germany and briefly dabbled with powering the Mooney M20L PFM. Yamaha and Honda are from Japan. I wonder if there's a pattern somewhere.
 
I only said small engines because that seems to be the place where Rotax is thriving...and where a lot of experimental stuff is happening...LSA and all.... Same question for larger replacements for Lycoming and Continentals too....
 
Brad W said:
Rotax seems to be very well grounded now in light sport GA
and if my memory serves me it sprouted from snowmobile and watercraft engines.
Click to expand...

I remember rotax engines in snow machines. I also remember the engine came with a page explaining what to do when the engine quits.
 
Zeldman said:
I remember rotax engines in snow machines. I also remember the engine came with a page explaining what to do when the engine quits.
Click to expand...

I never had a Rotax in a snow machine but flew a few in aircraft (2-stroke) and yes they do quit, and without much notice!
 
Zeldman said:
Well, that should bring a little excitement in flying.!!
Click to expand...

Got to put those engine out practices to work. These were in Challenger II training aircraft. Most were in the pattern so I just put it back on the runway. I did have one (in my instructors airplane) when I was instructing a student. I had thought to solo him that day. He had made landing number five and take-off number six when just above the treetops it suddenly got real quiet. I called "my airplane" but we were out of runway and the only option was a hard slip straight ahead into a muddy field before the trees ahead of us. Made the best landing I could but it didn't want to roll in the mud so the left landing gear had to be replaced.

The student got out, looked at the plane and said, "I'll be back to finish my lessons." I reminded him that he was just in a plane crash and he said, "I know, but you just proved that if the engine quits I don't have to die." Sure enough several years later in his own plane he had a Rotax 2-stroke quit on him on take-off as he was turning from cross wind to downwind. He made a landing back on the runway without damage. He called to tell me I had saved his life. I told him, no ... thank the Good Lord that you did exactly as you were trained to do.
 
Rotax got started in the aviation world in the ultralight side. I recall in the early 80s, the field I was instructing at also did ULs. And they were pretty much all Rotax powered.
 
texasclouds said:
LAWYERS and our litigious society.
Click to expand...
Prolly more like the cost of certification, to get into the OEM and STC market. The newest Rotax 916s would replace the Conti O-300s, I think, in earlier 172s. I expect to see that at some time. But certification is expensive, and difficult; the cost to certify a large turbofan engine can exceed two billion dollars. Capital 'B'.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
Prolly more like the cost of certification, to get into the OEM and STC market. The newest Rotax 916s would replace the Conti O-300s, I think, in earlier 172s. I expect to see that at some time. But certification is expensive, and difficult; the cost to certify a large turbofan engine can exceed two billion dollars. Capital 'B'.
Click to expand...
Early 172s don't sell for enough money to justify a $50k engine plus the cost of a new prop, the STC paperwork and the labor to install a 916.
 
aftCG said:
Early 172s don't sell for enough money to justify a $50k engine plus the cost of a new prop, the STC paperwork and the labor to install a 916.
Click to expand...
And there are already STCs to install a Lycoming in those airplanes.
 
Two-stroke engines produce more power for their weight. So they get hot in a hurry when taking off and climbing. If they're not warmed up sufficiently before takeoff, the pistons can expand too fast and seize in the cooler cylinders. Sudden stoppage when reducing throttle when levelling off is common.
 
Dan Thomas said:
And there are already STCs to install a Lycoming in those airplanes.
Click to expand...
Yes, created a long time ago when getting an STC was easy. The STC for the Lycoming could also point to the factory application of the Lycoming on the same airframe.
For a better comparison look at how successful the STC to put the 912 on the C150
 
Ask Porsche. And they made a damn fine air-cooled horizontally opposed engine already.
 
Not enough return for the investment,legal responsibility. When the boat motor stops you just drop anchor and call for a tow.
 
aftCG said:
Early 172s don't sell for enough money to justify a $50k engine plus the cost of a new prop, the STC paperwork and the labor to install a 916.
Click to expand...

You obviously haven't been watching the market for Skyhawks lately.
 
Motorcycle engines are small, generally lightweight and aircooled.. but gearing becomes an issue

Someone however did create a ducted fan with a bike engine in it:
 
texasclouds said:
Didn't some go into airplanes only to be bought back / keep out of the air?
Click to expand...

Yep. They went into Mooneys. Problem was, the aircraft with those engines had lower performance than their Lycoming powered clones. So sales were poor and Porsche+Mooney did a buyback/conversion program to swap out the Porsche engines for Lycomings so Porsche wouldn't have to support a tiny fleet of engines for decades.
 
kyleb said:
Yep. They went into Mooneys. Problem was, the aircraft with those engines had lower performance than their Lycoming powered clones. So sales were poor and Porsche+Mooney did a buyback/conversion program to swap out the Porsche engines for Lycomings so Porsche wouldn't have to support a tiny fleet of engines for decades.
Click to expand...
Not quite, the engines did what they were promised, but had some teething problems. Porshe wasn't interested in warranty repairs, and eventually solved by the problem by installing (at their expense) Lycoming I0540s. Of note, this did give birth to the long body Mooneys, which are the fastest piston singles, or at least were. Sad thing is the cockpit dimensions didn't grow much in these aircraft, most of the stretch was behind the cockpit to balance the heavy engine.
 
eman1200 said:
yeah, exactly.
Click to expand...
It's sad that this is necessary.

A question was posted as to why Honda and Yamaha haven't entered the aircraft market with an engine. You responded with "Blame DE&I" with no explanation as to what DE&I is.

I searched those initials and came up with "Diversity, Equality and Inclusion" which doesn't seem to have anything to do with manufacturing and marketing an aircraft engine.

So what does "DE&I" mean? What do the initials stand for? How is it relevant to the question?
 
donjohnston said:
It's sad that this is necessary.

A question was posted as to why Honda and Yamaha haven't entered the aircraft market with an engine. You responded with "Blame DE&I" with no explanation as to what DE&I is.

I searched those initials and came up with "Diversity, Equality and Inclusion" which doesn't seem to have anything to do with manufacturing and marketing an aircraft engine.

So what does "DE&I" mean? What do the initials stand for? How is it relevant to the question?
Click to expand...

....if you have to explain it......

that's exactly what de&i is.........I was pointing out how non-inclusive aviation is by not including yamaha and honda engines in its engine lineup. it is clearly lycoming and continental's fault for not empowering yamaha and honda and holding them back from being represented in the aviation market. soon sports teams will be forced to wear the logos of yamaha and honda to show their support. can't believe I actually had to explain this.
 
Someone should send a letter to Harbor Freight. Would be king if we could swing by the local tool barn and get a crate Fontinental or Fycoming for half price. Complete with Flick Mags and Fempest oil filters.
 
texasclouds said:
Someone should send a letter to Harbor Freight. Would be king if we could swing by the local tool barn and get a crate Fontinental or Fycoming for half price. Complete with Flick Mags and Fempest oil filters.
Click to expand...
Predator IO-360, lol
 
eman1200 said:
....if you have to explain it......
Click to expand...
It's not a very coherent point.

eman1200 said:
that's exactly what de&i is.........I was pointing out how non-inclusive aviation is by not including yamaha and honda engines in its engine lineup. it is clearly lycoming and continental's fault for not empowering yamaha and honda and holding them back from being represented in the aviation market. soon sports teams will be forced to wear the logos of yamaha and honda to show their support. can't believe I actually had to explain this.
Click to expand...
Given everything that has happened so far in the last 3 months, it's pretty impressive that that is the most idiotic thing that I've read this year.
 
donjohnston said:
It's not a very coherent point.


Given everything that has happened so far in the last 3 months, it's pretty impressive that that is the most idiotic thing that I've read this year.
Click to expand...

yep, it IS pretty idiotic when it's spelled out for you, isn't it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top