Will Rotax develop larger & more powerful engines?

D

DMD3.

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
487
Location
Tifton, Ga
Display Name
Display name:
DMD3.
There was an article posted on Kitplanes.com earlier last year about this subject, but do you think Rotax will come out with larger aircraft engines at some point during the future? Would it hurt their sales for the 915/916? An engine that has over 200 hp during takeoff and continuous hp of around 180 up to 15k feet would be phenomenal. I know Edge Performance (the experimental version of Rotax) has an engine that has 180 hp on takeoff and continuous hp of 160, and weighs around the same as the 916is, but with no posted TBO time.


Edit: https://www.kitplanes.com/crystal-balling-what-will-rotax-do-next/
 
They began developing a 300hp engine then shelved it nearly 20 years ago. The market isn't there.

www.aviationconsumer.com

The Big Engine That Didn't - Aviation Consumer

At Lycoming, executives roll their eyes when they hear Lycosaurus used to describe the lack of innovation in aircraft power plants. That suggests that the market hungers for engine innovation, but the reality is something different, as Rotax discovered in 2006.ü
www.aviationconsumer.com www.aviationconsumer.com
 
Have you looked at the DeltaHawk? It is a certified 180HP two-stroke diesel that holds 180HP to 12K feet. (Edit: looked at my notes. 180HP to 6k, drops to 150 @12k.) They are working on certification for the 200HP and 250HP versions.

DHK Jet Fueled Piston Engines - Deltahawk Engines

Our engine’s small, aerodynamic profile allows an elegant cowl design with less drag, further increasing fuel efficiency.
www.deltahawk.com www.deltahawk.com
 
Last edited:
It wouldn’t necessarily have to be a big 6 cyl. engine, just a step up from the 915/916. Perhaps a slightly larger/heavier 4 cyl.
 
Kiddo's Driver said:
"335 lbs.(151kg) - INCLUDES STARTER ALTERNATOR, TURBO, & EXHAUST SYSTEM"
From the linked page.
Click to expand...

Ok thanks, I heard someone say “400”. That puts it around 50 lbs. heavier than a typical Lyc. O-360 (around 280-290 lbs.). The extra weight could very well be worth it if it’s reliable, combined with running on Jet A.
 
DMD3. said:
Ok thanks, I heard someone say “400”. That puts it around 50 lbs. heavier than a typical Lyc. O-360 (around 280-290 lbs.). The extra weight could very well be worth it if it’s reliable, combined with running on Jet A.
Click to expand...
Plus the HP all the way to 12k feet. (Edit: looked at my notes. 180HP to 6k, drops to 150 @12k.)
Hot summer days wouldn’t kill takeoff roll & climb.
 
Last edited:
DMD3. said:
Ok thanks, I heard someone say “400”. That puts it around 50 lbs. heavier than a typical Lyc. O-360 (around 280-290 lbs.). The extra weight could very well be worth it if it’s reliable, combined with running on Jet A.
Click to expand...
Puts it around 80 pounds heavier than an o360. 50 pounds for the io360.

Burns 10.8 gallons per hour at max power with the 180 HP version. I guess I was expecting better.

The problem with these weights is the arm the powerplant is on. Wreaks havoc on cg if going on existing airframe.
 
Racerx said:
Puts it around 80 pounds heavier than an o360. 50 pounds for the io360.

Burns 10.8 gallons per hour at max power with the 180 HP version. I guess I was expecting better.

The problem with these weights is the arm the powerplant is on. Wreaks havoc on cg if going on existing airframe.
Click to expand...
That 10.8 gph is while putting out 180HP. Not 180-HP lost every foot you climb. A NA 180 HP engine is lucky to be pushing 150 HP by 5,000 feet. Yes the fuel flow will be lower, but so is the HP output.
Edit HP @ 5k for NA 180 HP engine.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top