Powershift posted:

https://i.imgur.com/8DdD9iN.mp4

MrYenko posted:

would be converted to a much more mundane (and more powerful) Continental power plant,

MrYenko posted:

Never don’t watch Paul Bertorelli videos. He’s the guy I want to be when I grow up.



Ahhhh the Porsche Mooney. The PFM 3200 was the first FADEC GA engine ever certified in the US, and is widely regarded as an engineering triumph for its time. It had a few minor issues that never got corrected due to lack of investment, but they were absolutely correctable if Porsche had seen a return on their investment.

However, it was a sales flop. A catastrophic flop. Over 6 years of production, Porsche built only 80 engines, and Mooney delivered only 41 airplanes. (The engine was used as one-offs in several other airframes.)

See, this was the late eighties. The meat of the GA market were WWII vets who were just beginning to age out of aviation/retire, and the myriad military pilots that resulted from the Cold War and Vietnam. There was still a thriving GA new-build market, and Mooney was simultaneously delivering hundreds of non-Porsche Mooneys.

This is not a market that is going to take kindly to a new-fangled computer managing their engine.

The PFM3200 was praised for easy starting (because it has actual electronic fuel injection instead of continuous-flow fuel injection) and smooth running (because Porsche realized that people buying a $personal airplane$ actually do care about NVH,) but widely panned for its single lever control.

Yes, they were criticized for removing the mixture and prop controls. The entirety of aviation had learned to fly airplanes where everything is completely manual. Where setting power is a dance of checking the chart, reducing RPM, reducing manifold pressure, leaning the mixture, rechecking the manifold pressure, adjusting all of the above, and doing it all over very time you change altitude or power setting. NOT having to do that gave people fits.

“What if it isn’t exactly the right mixture setting?”
“What if I want to run over square, in case I have to go around?”
“What if I want to run under square at cruise?”
“What if I want to run lean of peak?”
“What if I want to run rich of peak?”

It was endless. It was pointless. You cannot talk sense to people like this. I’d put money on at least one of these Luddite fuckers being on Capitol Hill about a year ago. The fact that they didn’t have to worry about all this trivial nonsense and could just fly the godamned airplane for a change apparently never occurred to any of them.

The aforementioned minor issues (valve-spring wear necessitated a 500hr valve-spring replacement interval, which is not great but also never caused an accident) caused some headaches for owners, who began making a ton of noise at Porsche. Porsche promised that a new valve spring package was in design, and would become available to remove the 500hr service interval. In the end, Porsche ended up punted on the changes, probably hoping the program would pick up some popularity and justify further investment. The owners sued. It was ugly.

So the Porsche Mooney failed. They built 40 in 1988, and a single example in 1989. Porsche closed the engine line in 1991, and surrendered the engine type certificate to the FAA in 2007. No further support is a available. At one point Porsche did organize a partially-subsidized re-engining program with a shop in Punta Gorda, Florida. Using IO-550s, your Porsche Mooney would be converted to a much more mundane (and more powerful) Continental power plant, but at least you wouldn’t lose the use of your airplane. It was the last straw.

In 2004, Hurricane Charley tore through the Florida Keys and southwest Florida, on its way up the middle of the state. The contractor’s hangar was destroyed. 22 Porsche Mooneys in various states of conversion were severely damaged or destroyed. All 39 employees at ModWorks not only lost their jobs, they had also all lost their homes in the storm.

The conversion program was over.

The owners continued to sue Porsche, and as late as 2011, a Florida court ruled that Porsche was still potentially liable for damages caused to plaintiffs by their failure to provide a conversion program, though the court simultaneously refused the plaintiffs claims for strict product liability, stating that at no point had anyone brought evidence of anyone sustaining personal injury due to a defective Porsche engine.

TLDR; Boomers are the loving worst, and they not only sued Porsche out of the aviation industry, they stunted the growth of FADEC in GA.

This is an example of the way certification works actively hindering aviation.

Engines are type certified in a very similar way to airplanes themselves. The manufacturer shows the FAA that when an engine is built via this documented process, with these parts, to these standards, it produces this power at this fuel burn with these reliability numbers. The FAA certifies it, and now you can install it in your certified airplane.

Except now you legally can’t change a single part. The valve seats have to be produced of the same material and with the same process as when the engine was certified in 1953. You can theoretically engineer an STC, but engine STCs (other than MOGAS or 94UL STCs for engines that were originally certified on 80/87 AVGAS anyway) are exceedingly rare, due to the costs associated with FAA approval. (An STC has a process tail very similar to certification, except localized to the parts that you’re modifying.)

Certification is a good thing, and we shouldn’t get rid of entirely, but it’s LONG overdue for a complete process overhaul. Replacing completely manually-operated updraft-carbureted 7.5:1 lead-burning air cooled engines is well within our technical ability as a species, if only the FAA would admit that certification stopped being about safety fifty years ago, and started being about bureaucratic box-checking.

The FAA punted once again on part 23 certification, and has essentially driven the piston single market underground, with almost all innovation and probably 90% of new airplanes now being “homebuilt” “experimentals.” It’s not a good system, and it’s yet another serious stain on the FAA’s credibility as a regulator that they can’t seem to see the issues with their overbearing process.

loving hell. I need to stay out of this thread.

wesleywillis posted:

Is this the same continental thats been around for like a long rear end time and built industrial Engines for lots of stuff besides just planes?

Just wondering is all. I see lots of old drilling equipment with Continental engines.

MrYenko posted:

Never don’t watch Paul Bertorelli videos. He’s the guy I want to be when I grow up.



Ahhhh the Porsche Mooney. The PFM 3200 was the first FADEC GA engine ever certified in the US, and is widely regarded as an engineering triumph for its time. It had a few minor issues that never got corrected due to lack of investment, but they were absolutely correctable if Porsche had seen a return on their investment.

However, it was a sales flop. A catastrophic flop. Over 6 years of production, Porsche built only 80 engines, and Mooney delivered only 41 airplanes. (The engine was used as one-offs in several other airframes.)

See, this was the late eighties. The meat of the GA market were WWII vets who were just beginning to age out of aviation/retire, and the myriad military pilots that resulted from the Cold War and Vietnam. There was still a thriving GA new-build market, and Mooney was simultaneously delivering hundreds of non-Porsche Mooneys.

This is not a market that is going to take kindly to a new-fangled computer managing their engine.

The PFM3200 was praised for easy starting (because it has actual electronic fuel injection instead of continuous-flow fuel injection) and smooth running (because Porsche realized that people buying a $personal airplane$ actually do care about NVH,) but widely panned for its single lever control.

Yes, they were criticized for removing the mixture and prop controls. The entirety of aviation had learned to fly airplanes where everything is completely manual. Where setting power is a dance of checking the chart, reducing RPM, reducing manifold pressure, leaning the mixture, rechecking the manifold pressure, adjusting all of the above, and doing it all over very time you change altitude or power setting. NOT having to do that gave people fits.

“What if it isn’t exactly the right mixture setting?”
“What if I want to run over square, in case I have to go around?”
“What if I want to run under square at cruise?”
“What if I want to run lean of peak?”
“What if I want to run rich of peak?”

It was endless. It was pointless. You cannot talk sense to people like this. I’d put money on at least one of these Luddite fuckers being on Capitol Hill about a year ago. The fact that they didn’t have to worry about all this trivial nonsense and could just fly the godamned airplane for a change apparently never occurred to any of them.

The aforementioned minor issues (valve-spring wear necessitated a 500hr valve-spring replacement interval, which is not great but also never caused an accident) caused some headaches for owners, who began making a ton of noise at Porsche. Porsche promised that a new valve spring package was in design, and would become available to remove the 500hr service interval. In the end, Porsche ended up punted on the changes, probably hoping the program would pick up some popularity and justify further investment. The owners sued. It was ugly.

So the Porsche Mooney failed. They built 40 in 1988, and a single example in 1989. Porsche closed the engine line in 1991, and surrendered the engine type certificate to the FAA in 2007. No further support is a available. At one point Porsche did organize a partially-subsidized re-engining program with a shop in Punta Gorda, Florida. Using IO-550s, your Porsche Mooney would be converted to a much more mundane (and more powerful) Continental power plant, but at least you wouldn’t lose the use of your airplane. It was the last straw.

In 2004, Hurricane Charley tore through the Florida Keys and southwest Florida, on its way up the middle of the state. The contractor’s hangar was destroyed. 22 Porsche Mooneys in various states of conversion were severely damaged or destroyed. All 39 employees at ModWorks not only lost their jobs, they had also all lost their homes in the storm.

The conversion program was over.

The owners continued to sue Porsche, and as late as 2011, a Florida court ruled that Porsche was still potentially liable for damages caused to plaintiffs by their failure to provide a conversion program, though the court simultaneously refused the plaintiffs claims for strict product liability, stating that at no point had anyone brought evidence of anyone sustaining personal injury due to a defective Porsche engine.

TLDR; Boomers are the loving worst, and they not only sued Porsche out of the aviation industry, they stunted the growth of FADEC in GA.

This is an example of the way certification works actively hindering aviation.

Engines are type certified in a very similar way to airplanes themselves. The manufacturer shows the FAA that when an engine is built via this documented process, with these parts, to these standards, it produces this power at this fuel burn with these reliability numbers. The FAA certifies it, and now you can install it in your certified airplane.

Except now you legally can’t change a single part. The valve seats have to be produced of the same material and with the same process as when the engine was certified in 1953. You can theoretically engineer an STC, but engine STCs (other than MOGAS or 94UL STCs for engines that were originally certified on 80/87 AVGAS anyway) are exceedingly rare, due to the costs associated with FAA approval. (An STC has a process tail very similar to certification, except localized to the parts that you’re modifying.)

Certification is a good thing, and we shouldn’t get rid of entirely, but it’s LONG overdue for a complete process overhaul. Replacing completely manually-operated updraft-carbureted 7.5:1 lead-burning air cooled engines is well within our technical ability as a species, if only the FAA would admit that certification stopped being about safety fifty years ago, and started being about bureaucratic box-checking.

The FAA punted once again on part 23 certification, and has essentially driven the piston single market underground, with almost all innovation and probably 90% of new airplanes now being “homebuilt” “experimentals.” It’s not a good system, and it’s yet another serious stain on the FAA’s credibility as a regulator that they can’t seem to see the issues with their overbearing process.

loving hell. I need to stay out of this thread.

unbuttonedclone posted:

New runflat technology seen at the gas station.

Pretzellogic posted:

Powershift posted:

https://i.imgur.com/8DdD9iN.mp4

stealie72 posted:

We all knew they were going to rip the rear axle off, but then we got a little treat.

Pretzellogic posted:

Darchangel posted:

Huh. Someone actually tried the Mad Max fury Road tires. (Look at pictures of the Interceptor before it crashes, specifically the right rear tire.)

Powershift posted:

https://i.imgur.com/8DdD9iN.mp4

Cojawfee posted:

I didn't shoot down 8 Jerries over France just to put their engine in my plane.

Arson Daily posted:

*drives off in a prius*

Powershift posted:

https://i.imgur.com/8DdD9iN.mp4

buttcrackmenace posted:

at least he got his CDs back

sharkytm posted:

And the Creedence.

sharkytm posted:

And the Creedence.

IOwnCalculus posted:

Now that's a money shift.

Boaz MacPhereson posted:

Womp womp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtd1UVcF5f4

MrYenko posted:

Never don’t watch Paul Bertorelli videos. He’s the guy I want to be when I grow up.



Ahhhh the Porsche Mooney. The PFM 3200 was the first FADEC GA engine ever certified in the US, and is widely regarded as an engineering triumph for its time. It had a few minor issues that never got corrected due to lack of investment, but they were absolutely correctable if Porsche had seen a return on their investment.

However, it was a sales flop. A catastrophic flop. Over 6 years of production, Porsche built only 80 engines, and Mooney delivered only 41 airplanes. (The engine was used as one-offs in several other airframes.)

See, this was the late eighties. The meat of the GA market were WWII vets who were just beginning to age out of aviation/retire, and the myriad military pilots that resulted from the Cold War and Vietnam. There was still a thriving GA new-build market, and Mooney was simultaneously delivering hundreds of non-Porsche Mooneys.

This is not a market that is going to take kindly to a new-fangled computer managing their engine.

The PFM3200 was praised for easy starting (because it has actual electronic fuel injection instead of continuous-flow fuel injection) and smooth running (because Porsche realized that people buying a $personal airplane$ actually do care about NVH,) but widely panned for its single lever control.

Yes, they were criticized for removing the mixture and prop controls. The entirety of aviation had learned to fly airplanes where everything is completely manual. Where setting power is a dance of checking the chart, reducing RPM, reducing manifold pressure, leaning the mixture, rechecking the manifold pressure, adjusting all of the above, and doing it all over very time you change altitude or power setting. NOT having to do that gave people fits.

“What if it isn’t exactly the right mixture setting?”
“What if I want to run over square, in case I have to go around?”
“What if I want to run under square at cruise?”
“What if I want to run lean of peak?”
“What if I want to run rich of peak?”

It was endless. It was pointless. You cannot talk sense to people like this. I’d put money on at least one of these Luddite fuckers being on Capitol Hill about a year ago. The fact that they didn’t have to worry about all this trivial nonsense and could just fly the godamned airplane for a change apparently never occurred to any of them.

The aforementioned minor issues (valve-spring wear necessitated a 500hr valve-spring replacement interval, which is not great but also never caused an accident) caused some headaches for owners, who began making a ton of noise at Porsche. Porsche promised that a new valve spring package was in design, and would become available to remove the 500hr service interval. In the end, Porsche ended up punted on the changes, probably hoping the program would pick up some popularity and justify further investment. The owners sued. It was ugly.

So the Porsche Mooney failed. They built 40 in 1988, and a single example in 1989. Porsche closed the engine line in 1991, and surrendered the engine type certificate to the FAA in 2007. No further support is a available. At one point Porsche did organize a partially-subsidized re-engining program with a shop in Punta Gorda, Florida. Using IO-550s, your Porsche Mooney would be converted to a much more mundane (and more powerful) Continental power plant, but at least you wouldn’t lose the use of your airplane. It was the last straw.

In 2004, Hurricane Charley tore through the Florida Keys and southwest Florida, on its way up the middle of the state. The contractor’s hangar was destroyed. 22 Porsche Mooneys in various states of conversion were severely damaged or destroyed. All 39 employees at ModWorks not only lost their jobs, they had also all lost their homes in the storm.

The conversion program was over.

The owners continued to sue Porsche, and as late as 2011, a Florida court ruled that Porsche was still potentially liable for damages caused to plaintiffs by their failure to provide a conversion program, though the court simultaneously refused the plaintiffs claims for strict product liability, stating that at no point had anyone brought evidence of anyone sustaining personal injury due to a defective Porsche engine.

TLDR; Boomers are the loving worst, and they not only sued Porsche out of the aviation industry, they stunted the growth of FADEC in GA.

This is an example of the way certification works actively hindering aviation.

Engines are type certified in a very similar way to airplanes themselves. The manufacturer shows the FAA that when an engine is built via this documented process, with these parts, to these standards, it produces this power at this fuel burn with these reliability numbers. The FAA certifies it, and now you can install it in your certified airplane.

Except now you legally can’t change a single part. The valve seats have to be produced of the same material and with the same process as when the engine was certified in 1953. You can theoretically engineer an STC, but engine STCs (other than MOGAS or 94UL STCs for engines that were originally certified on 80/87 AVGAS anyway) are exceedingly rare, due to the costs associated with FAA approval. (An STC has a process tail very similar to certification, except localized to the parts that you’re modifying.)

Certification is a good thing, and we shouldn’t get rid of entirely, but it’s LONG overdue for a complete process overhaul. Replacing completely manually-operated updraft-carbureted 7.5:1 lead-burning air cooled engines is well within our technical ability as a species, if only the FAA would admit that certification stopped being about safety fifty years ago, and started being about bureaucratic box-checking.

The FAA punted once again on part 23 certification, and has essentially driven the piston single market underground, with almost all innovation and probably 90% of new airplanes now being “homebuilt” “experimentals.” It’s not a good system, and it’s yet another serious stain on the FAA’s credibility as a regulator that they can’t seem to see the issues with their overbearing process.

loving hell. I need to stay out of this thread.

Boaz MacPhereson posted:

Womp womp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtd1UVcF5f4

bonelessdongs posted:

Do you have opinions on Jan Eggenfellner trying and failing to put subaru engines in planes? I remember one of his excuses was EFI just not being up to the task of engine control like carbs and magnetos are

Data Graham posted:

Oh god, I had a roommate who was building an RV-10 in our garage in the 00's and he wouldn't ever stop talking about Eggenfellner. I guess that story didn't end well?

bonelessdongs posted:

I think there were one or two crashes and a few engine failures including one where he said an engine was fine after some serious overheating, and he also gained a reputation for spending more time defending his honor on forums and mailing lists than actually developing an engine and transmission that worked.

http://www.meyette.us/engine.htm has some more info

Edit: I'm re-reading this now and it's so much worse than I remember

welcome 2 Clown Town posted:

Somebody had a bad day.

BraveUlysses posted:

oops