There have been a bunch of these that have had engine failures. I don’t know if they used installations approved by the factory or not. One of them was the father of a friend. He had a total ignition failure. Airplane was busted but he was ok. So often there are mistakes in a custom installation that the factory has no control over.
Total ignition failure? Each cylinder has an individual coil pack with backup ecm. So all eight failed simultaneously? Hard to imagine. I've heard about LS adaptation problems resulting in a failure, but these were all having to do with cooling problems that have been sorted out.
I've been looking into this a little, I can only find engine failure of the Suzuki and Honda engines. And one Mazda engine (and that one might have been pilot error). Not to say the the V8 can't fail, but it seems to be the other engines so far.
We are using the GM LS3 V8 Engine (same engine as the Corvette). The LS3 is rated out of the crate at 430HP. However, with the propeller speed reduction unit and prop turning at the RPM we will fly at, the actual power output is around 315HP.
Torsionional rigidity, harmonic vibration and math is not a mystery or guess. I agree testing is needed, but as a mechanical engineer I can say it's not that mysterious.
I think that Mr. Koleno meant unpredictable rather than mysterious (although is would feel that way if your frustration is high from it not working right). Torsionals are always tough on piston engines, even with fancy pants math like the FFT with a vibration sensor and recorder crankshaft torsionals are still difficult to the point where AI Gaussian kernels are needed. doi.org/10.1155/2018/6024874. The F1 guys know this well during the 2.4 V8's reving to 18K required 14 dampeners to get the engine to last the season.
@MajorLeague WTF? Forensics? Mysterious? No we are talking design which is done by Engineering, marh. I have a masters in mechanical engineering and designed gear boxes. Forensics is used in crime investigation not engineering. You might be thinking of analysis, prototype and component testing, root cause failure analysis. BEFORE making and testing a design, *math*, stress analysis, geometry, metallurgy, fluids (lubrucations) is used. It is not mysterious to engineers, it is a problem to be solved.
@@tumdeax I agree piston engines are difficult with the power pulse. I didn't say it would be easy, but it's definitely not mysterious, difficult yes. The solutions may be complex and extensive for some applications. but no mystery.
@MajorLeague You are changing the subject from gear box dedign to accidents. I have been on 2 NTSB accident investigation as a team member for my airline. Yes math, geometry, data, system's and drawings all played key rolls in the investigation. Your original comment is nonsense, illogical, just wrong.
@MajorLeague *I havent changed subject.* You replied to my post. I was commenting to the video about the PSRU at 3:59, "it's one of those things", "torsional vibrations are very mysterious". I said it was NOT a mystery, and the design of gears and gear trains is well a well understood machine element . This technology is known since the industrial revolution. I have books from my undergraduate studies just on gears and vibrations, strength of materials. It's not rocket science or mystery for those educated, engineers who know marh, metallurgy, manufacturing. This guy is not an engineer, did not design or make the PSRU or engine. He adapted this engine/psru to this airplane as others have. Then you chimed in with your word salad of gibberish which was irrelevant, wrong and dumb. You clearly don't have intellect to comprehend. To you it's "forensics" and irrelevant FAR's. Titan did not design or make the engine or PSRU (prop speed reduction unit). Engine is from a car, Chevy V8 LS3. The PSRU is made by autoflight in New Zealand, straight cut spur gearbox with 1.667 to 1 ratio. *THIS IS EXPERIMENTAL...* no FAR 34.87 endurance certification requirements. PSRU is the weak point in all these automobile conversions I've seen over 30 yrs.. Everyone knows this, comment made at 2:53. The other week point is a high rev car engine stuffed in an airplane it was not designed for. You want to talk engines? GM engineers did analysis when they designed the LS3 crankshaft for 1st, 2nd, 3rd order harmonic vibrations for cars, using *MATH*. The Chevy LS3 engine in an automobile application uses a flex plate, bolted to a torque converter or a clutch pressure plate, coupled to transmission on spline shaft, to drive shaft, to rear end differential, axles, wheels & runber tires. Putting a PSRU with a direct gear drive train to a propeller has very different loads and harmonics. There is a rubber damper thrown in there, but that is a band-aid and failure point. Does it work? To various degrees but it is a compromise. It's a car engine bolted to a PSRU it was not designed for. Most PSRU 's fail to achieve high reliability and low maintenance. *This whole time I have been referring to 14 CFR Part 33.87.* That is because you are a petulant pedantic troll who can't read, comprehend and has never designed or built anything in your life. 14 CFR 33.87 and associated Advisory Circular AC33.87 is for engine endurance tests, primarily for turbine engines. This has nothing to do with an experimental piston automobile engine and PSRU in a kit plane. The total hours on this experimental engine and PSRU is very low. There has never been a truly successful automobile engine conversion in airplanes. That is why the Lycoming direct drive air cooled engine are still far more popular and perform better than car engine alternatives, and this is why I have a Lycoming on my RV-7. *haven't talked about NTSB like you have* No but you keep saying *forensic* which is dumb and wrong. It is called TESTING, TEARDOWN and ANALYSIS. Forensics is both a medical term and term for crime investigations. It has nothing to do with designing or testing of aircraft, aircraft engines or FAR's Forensics is on TV's CSI. Why mention NTSB? This is where *forensics* might come in, with aircraft accidents, human remains and if there was a crime, like a terrorist bomber. Stop saying forensics. It makes you sound as clueless as you are. *Where is your calc shit required for products you claim to engineer within context of what we are discussing? Part 33.87 requires endurance testing and forensic overhaul.* First I didn't make claims. However I worked for Boeing starting in 1985. I did stress analysis on structure, certifying the Boeing 767-300, 747-400 and B777. Later worked for Pratt & Whitney on a military engine and lift fan for the F35. After we Engineers design and analyze an aircraft or turbine engine with *MATH not forensics* we test, measure, evaluate data with more *MATH*. The design and MATH comes first. Again this engine is from a car and experimental. Part 33.87 is NOT REQUIRED for car engines in kit experimental planes. *Boy you are ignorant* First I'm not a boy, i'm an adult man you little punk. I've been in the airline industry for 35 years. As a life time EAA member since 1988, I've built two experimental kit aircraft, one winning workmanship award Besides a graduate degree in mechanical engineering, I worked for Boeing and earning my Airline Pilot rating. I've flown for the airlines the last 26 yrs and hold ATP B737/757/767, CFI-Inst-Multi certificates, +17,000 flight hours and counting. When you call people ignorant you project your ignorance. You lost troll. You are done. Run along kid.
I went up to titan last week with a relative and bill showed us around. Such a great guy!
There have been a bunch of these that have had engine failures. I don’t know if they used installations approved by the factory or not. One of them was the father of a friend. He had a total ignition failure. Airplane was busted but he was ok. So often there are mistakes in a custom installation that the factory has no control over.
Total ignition failure?
Each cylinder has an individual coil pack with backup ecm. So all eight failed simultaneously?
Hard to imagine.
I've heard about LS adaptation problems resulting in a failure, but these were all having to do with cooling problems that have been sorted out.
@@johntempest267 some aspect of the 2 systems was common. Power source? I don't know. But it resulted in a forced landing and lots of damage.
I've been looking into this a little, I can only find engine failure of the Suzuki and Honda engines. And one Mazda engine (and that one might have been pilot error). Not to say the the V8 can't fail, but it seems to be the other engines so far.
Hi Bill this air plane is just beautiful great job if there was anyway I could buy one I sure will buy it.Enjoy the video's very much.Roger
was hoping to see the engine install., ie powering the T-51 Mustang... engine???
Me too.
Love flying it. Easy to handle👍
did I miss something? What engine are they using?
We are using the GM LS3 V8 Engine (same engine as the Corvette). The LS3 is rated out of the crate at 430HP. However, with the propeller speed reduction unit and prop turning at the RPM we will fly at, the actual power output is around 315HP.
Bill,what is the top speed with the ls engine?
Top speed should be around 200mph with the GM LS3 V8 Engine.
Torsionional rigidity, harmonic vibration and math is not a mystery or guess. I agree testing is needed, but as a mechanical engineer I can say it's not that mysterious.
I think that Mr. Koleno meant unpredictable rather than mysterious (although is would feel that way if your frustration is high from it not working right).
Torsionals are always tough on piston engines, even with fancy pants math like the FFT with a vibration sensor and recorder crankshaft torsionals are still difficult to the point where AI Gaussian kernels are needed. doi.org/10.1155/2018/6024874.
The F1 guys know this well during the 2.4 V8's reving to 18K required 14 dampeners to get the engine to last the season.
@MajorLeague WTF? Forensics? Mysterious? No we are talking design which is done by Engineering, marh. I have a masters in mechanical engineering and designed gear boxes. Forensics is used in crime investigation not engineering. You might be thinking of analysis, prototype and component testing, root cause failure analysis. BEFORE making and testing a design, *math*, stress analysis, geometry, metallurgy, fluids (lubrucations) is used. It is not mysterious to engineers, it is a problem to be solved.
@@tumdeax I agree piston engines are difficult with the power pulse. I didn't say it would be easy, but it's definitely not mysterious, difficult yes. The solutions may be complex and extensive for some applications. but no mystery.
@MajorLeague You are changing the subject from gear box dedign to accidents. I have been on 2 NTSB accident investigation as a team member for my airline. Yes math, geometry, data, system's and drawings all played key rolls in the investigation. Your original comment is nonsense, illogical, just wrong.
@MajorLeague
*I havent changed subject.*
You replied to my post. I was commenting to the video about the PSRU at 3:59, "it's one of those things", "torsional vibrations are very mysterious". I said it was NOT a mystery, and the design of gears and gear trains is well a well understood machine element . This technology is known since the industrial revolution. I have books from my undergraduate studies just on gears and vibrations, strength of materials. It's not rocket science or mystery for those educated, engineers who know marh, metallurgy, manufacturing. This guy is not an engineer, did not design or make the PSRU or engine. He adapted this engine/psru to this airplane as others have.
Then you chimed in with your word salad of gibberish which was irrelevant, wrong and dumb. You clearly don't have intellect to comprehend. To you it's "forensics" and irrelevant FAR's.
Titan did not design or make the engine or PSRU (prop speed reduction unit). Engine is from a car, Chevy V8 LS3. The PSRU is made by autoflight in New Zealand, straight cut spur gearbox with 1.667 to 1 ratio. *THIS IS EXPERIMENTAL...* no FAR 34.87 endurance certification requirements. PSRU is the weak point in all these automobile conversions I've seen over 30 yrs.. Everyone knows this, comment made at 2:53. The other week point is a high rev car engine stuffed in an airplane it was not designed for.
You want to talk engines? GM engineers did analysis when they designed the LS3 crankshaft for 1st, 2nd, 3rd order harmonic vibrations for cars, using *MATH*. The Chevy LS3 engine in an automobile application uses a flex plate, bolted to a torque converter or a clutch pressure plate, coupled to transmission on spline shaft, to drive shaft, to rear end differential, axles, wheels & runber tires. Putting a PSRU with a direct gear drive train to a propeller has very different loads and harmonics. There is a rubber damper thrown in there, but that is a band-aid and failure point. Does it work? To various degrees but it is a compromise. It's a car engine bolted to a PSRU it was not designed for. Most PSRU 's fail to achieve high reliability and low maintenance.
*This whole time I have been referring to 14 CFR Part 33.87.*
That is because you are a petulant pedantic troll who can't read, comprehend and has never designed or built anything in your life. 14 CFR 33.87 and associated Advisory Circular AC33.87 is for engine endurance tests, primarily for turbine engines. This has nothing to do with an experimental piston automobile engine and PSRU in a kit plane. The total hours on this experimental engine and PSRU is very low. There has never been a truly successful automobile engine conversion in airplanes. That is why the Lycoming direct drive air cooled engine are still far more popular and perform better than car engine alternatives, and this is why I have a Lycoming on my RV-7.
*haven't talked about NTSB like you have*
No but you keep saying *forensic* which is dumb and wrong. It is called TESTING, TEARDOWN and ANALYSIS. Forensics is both a medical term and term for crime investigations. It has nothing to do with designing or testing of aircraft, aircraft engines or FAR's Forensics is on TV's CSI. Why mention NTSB? This is where *forensics* might come in, with aircraft accidents, human remains and if there was a crime, like a terrorist bomber. Stop saying forensics. It makes you sound as clueless as you are.
*Where is your calc shit required for products you claim to engineer within context of what we are discussing? Part 33.87 requires endurance testing and forensic overhaul.*
First I didn't make claims. However I worked for Boeing starting in 1985. I did stress analysis on structure, certifying the Boeing 767-300, 747-400 and B777. Later worked for Pratt & Whitney on a military engine and lift fan for the F35. After we Engineers design and analyze an aircraft or turbine engine with *MATH not forensics* we test, measure, evaluate data with more *MATH*. The design and MATH comes first. Again this engine is from a car and experimental. Part 33.87 is NOT REQUIRED for car engines in kit experimental planes.
*Boy you are ignorant*
First I'm not a boy, i'm an adult man you little punk. I've been in the airline industry for 35 years. As a life time EAA member since 1988, I've built two experimental kit aircraft, one winning workmanship award Besides a graduate degree in mechanical engineering, I worked for Boeing and earning my Airline Pilot rating. I've flown for the airlines the last 26 yrs and hold ATP B737/757/767, CFI-Inst-Multi certificates, +17,000 flight hours and counting.
When you call people ignorant you project your ignorance. You lost troll. You are done. Run along kid.
The Thunder Mustang is better.
ROLLS ROYCE ENGINE!
Rolls-Royce Merlin won't fit in a 3/4 scale replica. Rotax 912/914 series are the most common.