Deltahawk's Jet Fuel Piston Airplane Engine Explained
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 май 2024
- In this video we take a look at some of the most prominent design features of the Deltahawk DHK180 V4 diesel airplane engine. This video should help understand the design direction the company took and the potential appeal revealed. Is all the hype around the Deltahawk valid, or is it just a fad?
Checkout the site below for more info: www.experimentalaircraft.info...
Here's a video on another new engine that could potentially threaten market disruption: • Unusual V6 Airplane En...
Follow me on Instagram: / lets_go_aviate
Chapters:
00:00 The Deltahawk is One Step Ahead
01:35 The 2-Stroke Advantage & Differences
05:38 Compression Ignition (Diesel) vs Spark Ignition (Petrol)
07:51 Direct-Drive (dis)advantage?
10:00 V4 Engine Balance
13:53 Synergy
15:03 Other Specs & Features
Image credits:
4 stoke animation-Author Zephyris (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) red arrows overlaid
2 stroke animation-Author A. Schierwagen (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
I4 valves-Author trnsz (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
Cambelt-Author Oto Godfrey (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
OHValetrain-Author IJB TA (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) added red arrows
Ducati V-Twin-Author Desmodromico (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
Golf cam-Author Nathanael Burton (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) added red square over cam
IO-540-Author Cliff (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
O-200-Author YSSYguy (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
Boxer4Animation-Author MichaelFrey (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) overlaid arrows, rotated, cropped
V6Animation-Author AngeTheGreat (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) overlaid arrows, zoom & cropped
CCB-Author Werntec (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
Crankshaft-Author Georg Fischer Automotive AG (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) overlaid arrows
Conrod-Author Flytime.ir (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) overlaid arrows
Inline3-Author MichaelFrey (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) cropped
Inline4-Author MichaelFrey (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) cropped
Air BP-Author Bob Adams (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
Continental CD-230-Author FlugKerl2 (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
GSO-480-Author Hunini (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) overlaid red box
Centaurus reduction-Author Andy Dingley (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
C90-Author Triple-green (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
Adept 320T-Author FlugKerl2 (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
Centurion 4.0 Author Stahlkocher (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
Turbo-Author Panoha (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
Oil icon-Author Freepik (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
Air icon-Author Daniel Bruce (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
Camshaft-Author Stahlkocher (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
Thielert 4.0-Author Stahlkocher (creativecommons.org/licenses/...) no changes
The Inline 6 Airplane Engine : ruclips.net/video/Su9WN0Pi04s/видео.html
Inline 4 vs Boxer 4 Airplane Engine: ruclips.net/video/0wWpSVTHQTI/видео.html
Adept V6 Makes Boxer 6 Obsolete?: ruclips.net/video/RNy6dL3UqDs/видео.html
Just read an article about the engine from Nov. 2023. They have already raised the price to 110,000 for the engine. Millionaires used to buy jets, now they by diesels, and the billionaires by jets. The rest of us, fly southwest.
That is firewall forward, not just the engine. I converted a 172 from a Conti O-300 to a lyc O-360. The cost for the firewall forward conversion was much higher than just the cost of then Lyc 0-360.
BTW, I have owned 4 airplanes. I currently have a Cessna 182 with an Auto-Fuel STC. I am not even CLOSE to a millionaire. The payment is $350 per month and insurance is $750 per year.
I refuse to use Southwest, period! lol
That's a deceptive statement. IIRC, the Kitplanes article said $110K includes engine, FWF kit, and propeller. Not the base engine.
The mechanically driven scavenging blower is not a supercharger, even though it is identical in construction. It's the application that makes the distinction. In this case it merely sweeps the cylinders clear of exhaust gasses (scavenging), in preparation for the compression stroke. It does not pressurize the cylinders before compression begins (supercharging). That is the role of the turbosupercharger (turbo).
in this motor, it is absolutely functioning as a supercharger (much less that's the actual name of the mechanical air pump). Unless it had some form of Valve timing adjustment, it will absolutely provide positive pressure in the cylinder.
A “normal” two stroke also force feeds the upper cylinder. It’s done by air being compressed into the crankcase. A scavenge blower simply replicates that feature.
@@Jessersadler This motor has no valves, it is a two stroke compression ignition engine. No valves, no valve train, no camshafts, no spark plugs. Two strokes are simpler design, less moving parts, less parts to fail, it takes less energy to run fewer parts. Read up on two strokes, if you don't understand them you as missing part of this discussion.
@@orthopraxis235 Valve = port. It's still timing. Timing on a 2 stroke is achieve with placement of the ports. Which just helps solidify the absurdity that this supercharger wouldn't be providing boost. (although there is the "power valve". . . which is exhaust timing. . . by a slide valve (doubtful these motors have it). . .) I comprehend engines, very well.
@@Jessersadler It's a turbocompound engine
Good video! Congratulations from brasil!
They had one of these on display at Oshkosh last year. Was really interesting looking at it and they answered a ton of my questions
When I was a teenager and in collage, I was building and modifying engines for snowmobile racing. One I was proud of was an in-line 3 cylinder with 800cc displacement making 210 hp @ 3800 rpm, naturally aspirated. The engine was strong and reliable, the weak point was the clutch. They kept exploding. We couldn't find a material at the time to handle that power in that application!
I thought the problem was reliability of the crank seal and head gaskets CSC 2003 mankato state MNU
That engine was a 1970ish Polaris 800cc triple, used for grass drag racing in the summer. That was popular then. The crank was 360'ed, and the transfer ports enlarged. It ran on alcohol and water injection. After ~200 experiments, we could control back pressure waves to act as a 'valving' with expansion pipes. We kept the CR to about 12:1 so it stayed together. It was fussy to start and keep running. We used a 3500rpm clutch, it would only semi-idel at 3000rpm. It wanted to run wide open. The whole thing weighed ~400lbs, all aluminum, except for parts of the track. The second time the clutch blew, it sent a big part of it ~150 feet in the air, and it came down in the crowd! Lucky no one was hurt!! That was the end of that!! It did win a dozen races though. There is a lot more to the story, my memory is a little fuzzy these days, I'll be 72 in a week or so. 8) --gary
This video is not really about the DeltaHawk per se but rather a rundown of the general principles involved in it's operation and how those contrast with other engines.
Exactly. Besides, who designated 2700 rpm as the limit for aircraft propellers-as with much of your other "facts" the term over-generalization comes to mind. Do you understand that turbocharging and supercharging are one and the same, with many variations possible? Your comparison of two-stroke and four-stroke engine power-periods is flawed. A BS presentation (and engine).
@@davidgierke7582 depends on the size of the prop of course, to avoid tips going supersonic... "2700" I suspect and if I remember correctly is mentioned because that is full power on an a/c like a C172...
Yes, a turbocharger is properly called a turbo-supercharger... at some point in history people got lazy and shortened the word....
@@davidgierke7582 A 2-stroke diesel engine requires a supercharger to force air into the combustion chamber, the turbochargers are to increase the amount of air into the cylinders. Every Detroit diesel engine has a super charger or it won't run. They are considered NA unless they have exhaust powered turbo chargers on them. Over a certain RPM the propeller tips would go supersonic. 2700 is pretty much the norm for prop speed. This is a direct drive to the prop engine.
...and not even a good one.
1:47 3:57 4:09
Stroke: One movement of the piston up (or down).
Revolution: One rotation (i.e. 360 degrees) of the crankshaft (i.e. two strokes)
Cycle: A complete loop of stages, repeating after a specific number of strokes (i.e. 2 or 4)
I could go on.
@@davidgierke7582 low prop rpm is associated with lower noise, better climbs. If you have a high rpm you need to have a short prop blade to avoid the non laminar flow of air that results as the prop blades approach the sound barrier. The blades will stall around that speed near the tip. The sweet spot for props is somewhere between 1600 and 2200 rpm.
As with the other guy that dismissed torque as insignificant for aircraft engines. the more torque you have at a lower rpm is better for a mulitude of reasons for prop driven aircraft.
Well covered. Keep up the great videos. Love to have a DeltaHawk someday. I run nearly all my Turbo Diesels at +20% with an ECU reprogram. Hopefully DH's will do this too.
This thing has been in a perpetual state of "next year" for the last 14+ years
Not anymore, FAA certified in April 2023
@@nipponsuxs Still not in production.
It's going to be the same old story. Bringing new general aviation motors to market is an absurdly expensive process due to the extreme demand for reliability testing, yet it's a pretty niche market with low production volumes, so price per unit needs to be really high just to stand a chance at covering the cost of development. But then no one ever actually uses the shiny new engine because nobody wants to pay a large premium for tech that inevitable still has some kinks to work out and nobody knows how to service yet. Sure the fuel costs would be lower, but those usually only makes up a modest fraction of the costs of running a small aeroplane anyway.
So everyone just keeps feeding low-lead avgas to their boring old ubiquitous Lycoming. Innovation is hardly worth it when you just want to fly.
@@fnorgentrue, although the military drone market changes that equation somewhat now... due to that the market for small aviation engines the market is probably larger than it's ever been before in the last 70 years...
@@PistonAvatarGuy I am guessing the price tag securing new buyer contracts or just drumming up customers for this engine may be one of their largest problems getting into production.
Velocity V-Twin specs.
Range at 65%
Lycoming IO 320 1400 NM 185 ktas 75%
Lycoming IO 360 1150 NM 200 ktas 75%
Titan IO 370 1150 NM 205 ktas 75%
Deltahawk Diesel 1900 NM 250+ ktas 75%
UL520T 1150 NM 230+ ktas 75%
THIS!
Thank you.
what is the Vne / Vmo for the V-twin?
Besides the 8V92 Detroit Diesels that we ran in our Pilot boats that along with the GMC blower also ran a turbo these engines developed 600hp. The big cargo ships the one I was shown was a 9 cylinder inline 2 stroke I believe that had an electric motor powered blower motor for starting and had 3 giant turbos for running on. All the ancillary systems such as oil pump , oil and water heaters , and water pump.
I fill and run BRP XD-100 in my 475hp silver 8v92 2 stroke, works great!
Two stroke diesels have been around for years, but mainly in large locomotives. A refinement, not a giant leap forward.
2-stroke Diesel engines have been used in aviation since the 1930s
@@WilhelmKarsten and even opposed piston ones
@ The Jumo 205 was the most fuel efficient engine in the world in 1931.
@Fairbanks-Morse has entered the chat.
Were they this efficient? Did they have the other easily replaceable features that this one has? bottom line, we don't have any now, and if this does as intended it has many advantages, you would have to do a comparison or value spreadsheet to really see exactly how this might work for your application.
We are Detroit Diesel and EMD 2 strokes engines and we've had valves since about 1938 and we're still in widespread use. We also have Roots blowers and turbochargers on the same engine - and wet sumps. Heavens above!
The 'supercharger' in this Deltahawk engine appears not to be a supercharger from your description. It appears to be a positive displacement scavenge pump very similar in operation to the blower on a Uniflow Diesel engine, though I can't find much info I must say.
People mistakenly think the blower on a Detroit Diesel 2 stroke is a supercharger but it isn't. Detroit Diesel and EMD even categorize their blower only 2 strokes as N for Natural. I wonder if the Supercharger on this Deltahawk really is a supercharger since you did mention starting and idling for it?
On turbocharged Detroit Diesel 2 strokes, the Roots blower is retained for starting and idling also causing me wonder about the role of their 'supercharger.'
Until we know more I have to give them the benefit of the doubt that it is a supercharger but life burns one and mechanics like me get rather cynical about manufacturers' unsubstantiated claims.
In an EMD turbochrged engine they use a centrifugal hybrid arrangement for the forced induction. For starting and idling the compressor acts as a crank driven blower and indeed does provide true supercharging in low RPM high load situations (unlike Detroit Diesels and EMD N engines) and as the RPM rises the the turbocharger turbine takes over driving the compressor via an overrun clutch.
I would've thought for the amount of effort they've put into this Deltahawk engine they could've come up with perhaps a bit more of a compact and sophisticated forced induction/scavenge pump than off the shelf tech supercharger and what looks like an eBay turbo LOL.
It seems like a 3/4 baked cake with the customer a full paying beta field tester. Time will tell.
The DD 2 strokes cannot run without the blower as they blow in fresh air through the cylinder ports, and the pressure involved is barely above atmospheric. It is not supercharging because it doesn't provide boost pressure over ambient. It merely provides aspiration. This DeltaHawk engine seems (and sounds!) similar.
]
The Deltahawk uses a Lysholm screw-type supercharger housed in the "V" between the cylinder banks. It is visible in the cutaway of this Deltahawk video: ruclips.net/video/vJkA8VI6QdY/видео.html
Just in case RUclips won't allow my link, the Lysholm screw-type supercharger is housed between the cylinder bank (5:23 in this video). Lysholms have been around a long time and were used in the Mazda Millenia and are common in large commercial air compressors.
@@jfess1911 I was just reading these comments about the Lysholm screw compressor and thought of Mazda's Miller Cycle V6.
The (sadly defunct) Zoche two stroke aero diesel was a radial format with two up and two down cylinders. All four con-rods were carried on one crank pin. There was zero primary and zero secondary vibration. It was available in 2.5 litre single row and 5.0 litre twin row formats. Rotating mass is reduced the crank simply has to counterbalance the con rod weights.
excellent video! Thanks!
Where are you from and how do you know so much! fascinating walk through of this long awaited engine!
Very good! Thank you!
The prop diameter governs the maximum rpm, due to tip velocity, the wider or larger the diameter or hub center to blade tip radius, the faster it is traveling at a given RPM, when the tip breaks the sound barrier a wood prop becomes a shower of toothpicks, a ducted shroud or canard augmented prop blades are used, less radial air dispersement occurs and drag from boundary layer tip vortices is reduced
Thus more blades instead of higher RPM.
ULPower 520 has same HP weighs 108 kgs iso 162kgs. It weighs 50% more ! I want to see how that compares including fuel and range, but mostly COG wise. It would require all new airframe designs.
Yeah but this has more power at high altitude and it uses less than half the fuel for the same power
2 stroke diesels have been around since the beginning of the compression engine. Detroit Diesel was famous for their 71 and 92 series and most if not all large ship engines are 2 stroke but as far as I know they all use exhaust valves and most are forced air intake. There are naturally aspirated but very low power. They all use recirculating oil systems. My point is this technology is mostly adopted from other systems but I agree that this should be a better choice for aircraft. The one thing I question is the inverted cylinders and the probability of oil pooling in the backside of the pistons and seeping through the rings when not running. I think this is why they have to hand rotate radial engines prior to start up and hand rotating a diesel with oil in the combustion chamber could be a dangerous situation.
Most Diesel engines require glow plugs and glow plugs need to be preheated for the engine to start. It is unlikely anything would happen with a cold engine being slowly rotated by hand.
People, chill out on pissing match. Interesting video. I was not aware of this engine. A engineer had a long night thinking.
JUMO already proved the technology for aircraft applications
@@WilhelmKarsten : The JUMO was an Opposed Piston (OP) configuration with 2 crankshafts. The Deltahawk engine has only one crankshaft. There is a modern version of the OP engine called the "Gemini" engine, with only 3 cylinders but I don't know it's availability. The last I knew it was still an "experimental" engine with no plans to get certified.
@@InquisitiveSearcher Jumo built 2-stroke Uniflow Diesel engines (Oechelhäuser Cycle)
In 1,2,3 and 4 crankshaft configurations.
Wish I could own one! I hope it’s is a success!
A quick correction: A four stroke engine does NOT produce power during 25% of its cycle. The power stroke starts when the fuel is ignited and ends when the exhaust is allowed to leave the cylinder. The exhaust valve opens around 120 degrees beyond top dead center on most engines, since there is little to gain by keeping it closed and opening it early helps scavenge the cylinder. Thus, the effective length of the power stroke is around 120 degrees on an Otto cycle engine.
This works out to about 16.7%, not 25%.....
👍
or with an offset on the pistons and an atkinson cycle you can push that a little further but lowers the power to weight delivery and gains efficiency which will get you to nearly 22%
@@leonmusk1040 I'd like to see where you get that 22% figure. Atkinsons are used on a lot of hybrids for efficiency reasons and they could care less about power. They gain efficiency due to the increased expansion ratio. This happens because the intake valve is held open longer, pushing some of the charge/air back into the intake manifold, effectively reducing volumetric efficiency. Since the exhaust valve opens later, the cycle runs closer to full expansion. Typically, diesel engines run around 30% more efficient than gasoline Otto cycle, so I have a hard time buying that 22% number.
@@Flies2FLL i believe toyota cracked 40% efficiency. they were bragging about something like 41% with dual injection which puts them in diesel teritory. another thing about otto is that you can have a 2 cam profile engine having both otto and miller so you have fewer pumping losses at part throttle operation.
@@SoulTouchMusic93 I wasn't talking about efficiency, I was talking about duration of the combustion stroke. I'm not sure about Toyota's engine, but if they achieved that level you can bet it was during laboratory conditions.
@@Flies2FLLThe production Toyota Prius 1NZ-FE engine depending on the exact model ranges between 36.5% and a very impressive 40%.
VW TDI engines that came out 30 years ago were already 43%.
The 2-stroke Jumo 204 was 40% in 1930!!!
Thanks for the video. Commenting for effect. Keep up the great work, clearly not thrown together on the fly
Thanks, appreciated
Excelente idea es casi igual a un diesel detroit 2t diesel pero no necesita arbol de levas y valvula de escape en la cabeza. Que simplicidad.
So basically a Detroit Diesel screamin' Jimmy in a new package?
Ha ha ha, less the valves which made it more efficient. Now has extra porting to catch the rings. Screaming Jimmy must be 80 years +old if WW2 landing craft are factored in. Still the southern oceans do appear to be behind in technology.
I worked for many years in fire suppression. Detroit Diesels were frequently used for sprinklers systems fire pumps. That big engine started and hit full throttle in seconds was incredible.
Then there's the Junkers Jumo 205 opposed piston diesel engine... Just sayin'
@@brianb-p6586 Better to uniflow than to not-flow... I actually think that going with the side port exhaust is a bad idea.
End of the day any alloy engine from a road vehicle with a turbo and reduction box would be lighter and more reliable in the long run..🤣🤣
Interesting indeed. I still like opposed piston engines too . Don't see either replacing jets though.
I think it's not intended to replace Gas Turbines, rather it is a small piston engine designed to burn Jet-A, which is available worldwide as opposed to High Octane AvGas which can be hard to find in some markets.
The opposed piston 2 stroke does not have cylinder heads so it radiates out less than the DeltaHawk design. If the opposed piston had ceramic cylinder liners there would be very little heat sent out through the block and even better efficiency.
6 v 71 Detroit diesel shortened 2 cylinders and turned upside down
No. Detroits have exhaust valves in the cylinder heads.
Did you in case the air cooling cylinder and pressurize it back into the intake?
Has to be supercharged to scavenge with positive displacement for the 2 stroke port system. BUT, that's better than oiling cams and drag levers and pushrods and lifters. Zoche tried an air cooled radial design like this that did not work well over time. There is a V-6 for the 300-350hp market under cert testing.
Is it possible to mitigate peak pressure, in an engine with a mechanical diesel pump, by altering the fuel pump cam lobe profile to delay some of the fuel delivery during the combustion event to spread out the combustion pressure curve, but still deliver all the fuel necessary for best power output?
Junkers Jumo 205 two-stroke opposed-piston diesel engine was used in passenger airliners in the 1930s. No doubt using kerosene instead of diesel could have been possible.
Detroit Diesel two stroke Diesels have 4 exhaust valves at the Top of the head per cylinder
Why 4 exhaust valves but not 1 large exhaust valve?
Just a small detail but the 2 stroke doesn’t produce torque at 50% since the exhaust port is uncovered at about 60% of the stroke so so really it’s more like 35-40% which is still better than the 4 stroke.
Thanks, you are correct. Every second stroke creates torque, but as you said, not the whole stroke after combustion happens creates torque because of the exhaust stage overlap.
But what if you are using a supercharger...as a valve...to close the intake during the power phase of the stroke... and only opening the intake...once the exhaust has closed?
BOOM!
I know this is what they are doing because you can't normally turbo charge a 2 stroke... You need something restricting the energy bleed between the inducer and the exducer.
I guarantee you they are using the supercharger not just as a power adder but also as a valve to cut off intake.
Take a look at the video from Deltahawk's RUclips channel at 5:23. You think this is possible with the illustrated layout? It could restrict airflow but doesn't look like the supercharger is used as a valve. Let me know.
@@LetsGoAviate it doesn't have a valve, it is the valve! A supercharger is a interval pump, so at times it is pushing air, at other times it is compressing in air. If you are clever, you can make it so that it does this at a different interval for each cylinder.
Great Video. DH is also getting ready to release a 235 HP version of this engine. Which is what I am curently interested in. Higher HP V-6 versions are also on the way. Sounds like rotating assembly components of teh V6 will be interchangeble with its V4 brother?
They are really moving this forward. Looks like the higher HP V4 versions will be the same weight too. Great power to weight balance there.
Zoche had a very promising air cooled, radial, 2 stroke diesel. From an engineering standpoint it was a winner but business issues kept it from market.
Great presentation and the theories of the Deltahawk are promising but the proverbial eating of the cake has still to be proven in the field. Much prefer this to the electric offerings though.
Wonderful analysis.
Thank you
A lot of the principals mention in your interesting report were incorporated in the engines of the WWII era sub on which I was stationed in the early '60s.
It was a 9 cylinder/18 piston achate cycle supercharged diesel. The upper and lower crankshefts were couipled together by what they called a vertical crankshaft. The supercharger caused the cross flow with fresh air displacing the exhaust. Ignition took place between the two pistons when the were at their closest (and the fuel was injected).
When commisioned, it have 4 of these, but when I got there external streamlining had been added to the hull (Seee Guppy III) and one of the engines had been removed to make room for a fresh water still and other equipment I can't remember now.
Nobody was worried about pollution then, and it was a filthy beast! ;)
That was a Fairbanks-Morse opposed-piston engine. Uniflow scavenging via a positive displacement compressor.
Great video on a new engine! I love seeing new, innovative ideas for GA. It feels like a lot of it, especially engines, hasn't changed much for decades.
Speaking of which, I recently came across the Veloce aircraft (2, 4, and 6 seaters) and saw they recommend the AeroVolare 43T engine. Would love to get your opinion on it. On the airplanes too, but especially the engine. Thanks for your hard work!
Have you visited the AeroVolare Web site? The home page is rife with spelling and capitalization errors. Such lack of attention to detail may translate to lack of attention to detail in the design and workmanship of their engines. No thanks.
You made me think of the Detroit Diesel
It would be really cool to see a head to head on this engine vs the Rotax 916 is.
I know there's fundamental differences, but it seems like these 2 engines are going to be some of the prime choices for many people so comparisons are going to be inevitable. At a glace the Rotax produces 20 hp less while weighing 170 lbs less - might be enough of a difference to overlook some of the electrical wiring mess that comes with the Rotax.
As I recall the Rotax has a reduction drive so it runs at like 5,000 rpm. So much lower TBO. I think it is like 500 hours
@@robjohnson8522 2000 hr for the 912, 912is, 914, and 915 and they all have reduction drives
@@robjohnson8522 the 912, 912is, and 914 all have that reduction drive and have a TBO of 2000 hrs. Don’t have official specs on the 916 but I would imagine it would follow suit
Here is some additional data on the Deltahawk engines. The cylindar sleeves are replaceable. So factor in the 100K price tag, but also factor in likley much lower costs and simpicity of replacing parts, also external oil pump, there are other features I don't recall (from merely studying the webiste of Deltahawk) that are time savers over the typical lycontisaurus type of engine. The engine seems very sound and as explained it looks like it can do what they say.
Additionally, if you factor in the simplicity of part replacement, even cylinder replacement, with the sturdiness of a compression ignition (essentially a diesel) block, in something like an experimental category, if one has a repairman certificate s/he can replace these fairly easily replaceable parts themself. So there are a lot of variables to see how this new engine, if it runs as intended, could be an excellent value added acquisition to your air travel. People think in terms of price, sometimes costs, but here the value of this 100K engine may prove to make this a lower cost of operating. Then there is the potential fuel savings, availability of using Jet A fuel instead of 100LL. A lot depends also on the company and how well they handle this next phase.
It isn't out yet in production in many aircraft so we have no real world data on what's true or not in the field. The company claims it is revolutionary, just wish they would hold off on that until it proves to be so. Maybe focus your energy on getting the production run successful . Their certification of the Deltahawk engine was a huge thing, not only in itself but represents that the company will do what it takes to get this moving along (and is willing to go get more money and can do so if need be ) so it looks like this company could get this produced as intended. Wait and see.
Great video. One thing you didn’t cover in detail was the decision to have it an inverted V layout. Other than access to injectors and plugs and perhaps the CG what benefits are there to this. I presume the oil savage system has top and bottom sumps to scavage from (sometimes flying upside down) and even sumps at the forward and back ends of engine. This would require a ballbearing type oil pickup “one way “ valve to avoid cavitation of the pump?
As a long time mechanic, my experience with inverted engines gives you the ability to swing a bigger prop. Diesel engines have good torque, so your prop could be larger.
That makes sense cheers.
good point + a cooling system
Not light at all
Very interesting video, a couple of thoughts I had whilst watching was: it's spoken of as a diesel (compression ignition) engine ruunning on jet fuel , but could it be setup to use diesel to use in say gensets? also with the direct drive engine RPM is limited so an increase in torque (for power) is desirable so is the engine "undersquare" (longer stroke than bore size) to take advantage of "leverage" (and the slower speed longer stroke gives more "port" movement timie) and the other thing noticed was regarding the supercharger which on the animation looked to be a lobed Rootes type and also a lot of commentary about engine balance would an ecccentric vane Wade type (iirc) be usuable as not only a supergharger but as a form of balancer as well have any advantages?
Interestingly this engine is actually square as per the bore and stroke length displayed on their website.
I'm not sure if the supercharger could be used to even-out the secondary imbalance as it would need to spin 2x crankshaft speed. I think that would would be unnecessary though, as the secondary vibrations in the V4 is small enough to basically "ignore". It would likely be smoother than the rocking couple secondary imbalance in a boxer 4.
I'd certainly go undersquare if I were designing it for just that reason.
When it’s done, I will volunteer to be the first paying customer for a ride around the freedom factory!
An excellent video but you made one little error at 12:50. The piston moves slower at the bottom of its stroke, picks up speed part way up and then slows as it approaches top dead center. Your point regarding accelerating and decelerating mass still holds true, though.
Thanks, appreciated. It's actually correct, because as the piston moves down from TDC, the conrod goes sideways, shortening it (relatively speaking). This pulls the piston down additionally, accelerating it. Past mid-stroke, the conrod starts going upright again, conrod getting longer (relatively speaking), and with the piston going down, the lengthening conrod slows down the piston. Same thing on the way up.
@paulmaxwell8851 You are right about the piston 'loitering' at bottom of the bore. Because the big end is swung out to the side at the 90 degree crank position, the piston is then sitting a lot lower then half way down the cylinder (this is the cause of secondary imbalance/vibrations). With the crank turning at any particular speed, the piston spends more time in the lower length of travel than in the upper positions, and therefore travels at a lower average speed at the bottom.
Why are the prices blurred, did some company get upset at you for sharing the average prices?
Two stroke diesel, turbo charged, is fine for aviation.
It might be even a fine APU !
I like this very mutch🎉
@LetsGoAviate >>> *_"...consider that this engine has already overcome perhaps the single biggest roadblock that any new Aviation engine faces..."_*
Even before I heard the end of that statement I guessed it would be *THE F.A.A.* 🤭
Aeromotive Diesel 2 strokes were a "thing" back in airship days, but they were "rather large"
This is a great evolución of 2 GM stroke diesel engine.
It's just a shame they are so darn expensive. Those of us in the expiramental market didn't need it to be certified. We wanted a reliable piston Jet-A engine, no need for the cost associated with certification.
Because DH sunk so much cost in certification, many of us can't afford em in our expiramental aircraft.
It would be nice if there is a fadec version like the austro
Diesel... which CN is needed? Is CN 51 enough? How about biodiesel?
In the early 1960s SAAB said in their engines "every stroke is a power stroke"
this seems like the best idea for a new modern aviation engine. Simple rules the day.. no valves, no cams, no timing chains or guides. No gear reduction, no ignition system, no spark plugs. Why have they been in development for 15 years??
Sounds like it will run on Amonia as well ??
I thought I would throw in that one advantage of a direct-drive engine is that the propeller can serve as a flywheel--geared engines have to have a separate flywheel adding cost, complexity, and weight. There are practical limits to compression ratio--above a certain point, NOX starts to form in an endothermic reaction which robs power, creates noxious emissions, and reduces TBO by introducing acidic products with the H20 from fuel combustion. Diesel engines also require longer connecting rods, to increase piston dwell time at the to of the stroke, which adds weight with the rods, the larger counterweights needed to balance them. and the higher deck height required. (This is also a major reason why conversion of spark ignition engines to Diesel is problematic.)
That's why so many direct drive engines still have flywheels. Instead of having dead mass, you can have a generator in place of a flywheel. Do you see a flywheel on Rotax? Diesels don;t require longer rod for dwell time, diesel actually ignites and expands quicker than petrol. Slightly longer rods are negligible on weight. Diesels dont have any higher rod ratios than petrol, the main advantage of a longer rod ratio though for a low revving engine is reduced thrust loading as diesels have far higher combustion pressure.
BORE DIAMETER limits dwell time and rpm range.
Bore diameters larger than 100mm reduces rpm and dwell time
@@chippyjohn1Any engine with less than 12 cylinders needs a flywheel.
Not true, Diesel engines are Stratified Mode, Compression ignition.
Dwell time is reduced because it is limited to After TDC... Otto Cycle engines can Rev higher because spark ignition can be Advanced, prior to TDC.
@@WilhelmKarsten Not every engine needs a flywheel. A flywheel is for momentum, once an engine is running at high speed the flywheel has little purpose, why do you think race cars use lightened or no flywheels. If you didnt have a flywheel on your car everytime you release the clutch it would stall. Diesels also inject fuel well before TDC, every engine is different. Diesels experience far higher cylinder pressures meaning they need heavier components to cope, heavy components dont like high rpm. There are many factors why diesels aren't made to rev high, but nothing to do with not being able to advance injection timing.
Perhaps--but what you say does not negate what I said--the way I learned it, Diesel combustion differs from SPICE combustion in having much less of a relative pressure spike, but the pressures are much higher overall and necessarily maintained for longer--that is one reason rpms are lower--the ignition is spread out--and also starts later in the stroke. There is less proportion of the stroke for ignition. The higher compression pressures required for Diesel ignition are maintained longer with a longer dwell,. I would think that a generator serving as a flywheel would have to be direst drive itself, unlike that in a car engine--but if it replaces a flywheel to allow geared drive, you still have the weight, cost, and maintenance of the drive gearing. Longer con rods may add negligible weight themselves--the big weight addition comes from the knock-on effect of a higher block height they require,. Thanks for your addition to the conversation.
Price and Availability stock?
so when the EMP goes off you're not falling out of the sky, I love mechanical everything
Everyone has great points in this debate. But the point I make is that this video is well done and extremely informative. Besides the fact that he might have misnamed certain parts. HE DID AN EXTREMELY GOOD JOB ON THIS VID. APART FROM EXPLAINING THINGS THAT OUR COMMON BRETHREN NOT COMPREHEND.
Thanks so much. Please let me know what I misnamed so I don't repeat the mistake.
So how does an engine without cams or electronics time when to inject fuel? I'm assuming that am engine without valves wouldn't need cams unless there specific cams for the injectors. Thanks for the video.
The injection pump is timed to the crankshaft
Thanks...
you showed loop scavenged petrol 2 stroke in your animation,many diesel 2 strokes do have exhaust valves such as the detroit diesel 2 strokes
The zoche aerodiesel was also a two stroke turbosupercharged capable of putting out 300 hp. Would have been fantastic. Regrettably they fell off the earth
Does the engine loose horsepower with higher altitude are does the turbo compensate?
It should produce full power up to around 15,000 feet
Can I put this engine in a truck? Could it work in a 1961 Chevy Apache?
2 strokes with opposed pistons fuel injection and pressure lubrication solves all the
problems with 2 stroke engines.
The 2 stroke doesn’t necessarily rev higher, it just fires twice as many times as a four stroke at a given RPM, and therefore a 2 stroke at 3k RPM exhaust note sounds like a 4 stroke at 6k rpm
Yes true, the 4 joke stroke has to rev higher to make the same power, they suck even in cars/trucks to. I hate the new ugly 4 joke outboards too!
I prefer the Safran 4 stroke diesel, aeroengine.
what about propeller pitch control? I cannot believe the propeller is fixed pitch, which would be extremely inefficient.
Funny how this makes very similar power numbers to the 2.8 duramax in chevy colorado and gmc canyon.
I don't know where you are but diesel in Canada we are good to minimum -40
That engine somewhat resembles the Daimler Benz inverted engine!
What is the TBO. I will be a believer when one of these goes 2000 hours. It does look promising. The added weight of this engine is offset by the plane needing to carry 40 percent less fuel. Added weight on front mounted engines will have to be offset with more weight in the back, either ballast or heavier trim. Someone needs to design a plane around this specific engine.
Also, when comparing weight to other engines, keep in mind this engine is turbocharged, meaning it actually produces 180hp at all altitudes. Non-turbocharged engines outputs 180hp only at sea level density altitude, and power decreases as altitude increases.
@@LetsGoAviate That particular problem has been solved by more than one aircraft piston engine developer.
What happens if the oil seal to the turbo fails and the engine rpm runs aways?
Can someone explain that please.
Some Diesel engines have a safety device that closes the air intake to safely shut down in the case of a false fuel runaway event.
See 'A small plane crash on North Coralina highway...' 12/15/23 Seems all engines are subject to failure... Seems time will have to tell on the ratio for newer types of failures...and the value of these newer ones...
I want to see an aircraft version of the Achates engine.
Junkers Jumo 205 flew across the Atlantic to Brazil in the mid-'30s.
What? Did you think Saudi Aramco invented it?
@@floycewhite6991 no I didnt think that. I mean a modern version
@@ianboard544 Ah. Sort of like the military small-boat engines of that type. Except you'd want to mount it horizontally.
I would think oil would be draining down to the pistons and that would be a issue
Brilliant video and explanation as always. ❤
Thanks!
Great video! Honestly, super interested in this engine as well. Much more reasonable in terms of actual performance and reliability basics for the overall design. Makes wonderful sense to run a diesel thanks to the given, relatively, smaller top rpm. Honestly, torque and hp is an odd one for me, given work performance is so key to applicational use. What I mean by that is with how high the torque is, and the relative weight of the prop and how quickly it needs to get to any given rpm at any given aerial maneuver, it then might still become more efficient to run a cvt transmission style of prop gearing (cone and ball or ring and ball in the crank to prop area) just because its torque is so high! But That also means it might be able to run a shrouded counter-rotating prop design that has stators in-between with some hollowing out to run into the compressor of the turbo for a ram air effect for the engine. Which would be really cool! Weight of course is always something significant to consider, from my recollection counter rotation prop designs are only more efficient up to about 10-15% but that was often without shrouds or using the stator issues (given sudden pressure changes within inside and a changing aerodynamic pressures, boundary vortex separations, over pressures at the leading front edge of the stators, trailing vortex issues going into the next set of props, and so on with prop angling like a given helicopter blade pitch, stator pitch, and so on with that) to increase given power and performance characteristics in the engine to reduce some of the given prop sizes, stator sizes, lack of efficiencies, and so on from counter rotating props. Especially with hollow shrouds and the tuberluar leading edge designs of given wings being very capable of helping reduction of air plugs on the shrouds ring leading edge boundary layers. Also food for thought, that can help be broken up (hot spots) by having them help ram air into the engines compressor & be sucked down at certain speeds by increasing the rpm of the compressor through a given cvt transmission gearing for best use of exhaust gases for rpm matching of decreasing or neutraling that given air pressure at the ram air areas.
Anyways, I really like the design of this engine and think it will probably have certain benefits over others by a long shot, might have heating issues if the turbo ever gets too rowdy at lower altitudes and higher engine rpm thanks to not having a air to air intercooler, or at the very least a type of dry pump oiling system for the (at least i didn't see it but could be wrong) super turbo (super charger and turbo combo is usually called a super turbo and is often made to switch at a given rpm from the serpentine belt system having a clutch or solenoid disengage it) to make sure it maintains lubrication and pressure in that air when performing higher g moves. Weight is a big deal of course as well, so I would (maybe I'm weird but whatever) give it a type of low pressure liquid heatsink fin thermosiphon/heatpipe air fin cooling around the engine and chop/carve into it into the path of the air to improve overall cooling and reduce weight outright. Mostly so I could run cool looking gills and some aero effects to channel some air into it from the prop while having most of the air from the props going of the sides and top in a vortext stall or something to improve lower pressures and outright low speed stall characteristics. Who knows, could be that cool dude with a stupidly modified flat 8 with open hood back in the day with a Cessna (although I don't think it would be quite the same just because it would be more futuristic but the feeling is there, cool guy feeling modder, chopper that kind of thing :p)
Its also 100k + for an engine. Which, is totally something that boggles my mind! Its so intense to think about, like what! I could get a v4 from a Ducati and super turbo it, make the right changes for aviation fuel being used through fuel lines, injectors, compression ratios, and some basic weight reductions through simple high performance aluminium parts, a better camshaft, all that and probably have it beat except for the need for a cvt gearing for the prop. I don't know if they'd let you fly it! Because faa rules and what not, you would need to make sure you have the fuel heating too, then go through it all to make sure but it doesn't seem impossible. They run off of much smaller radiators as well, so you could modify those given v4s to be more air cooled too, at least partially, and be able to probably hang with them. Might be a project but I wouldn't doubt at all it could be done way more cheaply than buying that, or at least comparable in terms of cost. But you also did the cool guy/gal move and made it your own ;) time to let that engine be seen 8) oh yeah!
Can it run on standard diesel fuel as well?
Yes
@@LetsGoAviateif that's the case, the power output would be higher, as well as EGTs.
@@Jessersadler I can't think of much reason to use standard auto diesel though, other than perhaps emergencies where Jet A not available. Jet A is less than half the price of diesel in the USA and generally good availability.
@LetsGoAviate Jet A average today is 6.14 a gallon. diesel is around 4. Red diesel is even cheaper. . .Not to mention diesel will make more power, and have better lubrication. Seems like plenty of reason.
It sounds like an old detroit diesel. I love it. It's loud AF 😂
Don't I remember that the Messerschmitt BF-109E had a Daimler-Benz liquid cooled, supercharged, direct fuel injected, inverted vee engine? Albeit a V-12. It was a gasoline engine not a diesel.
Yes, but it used a centrifugal supercharger which requires a fairly high revolutions to produce significant boost. Two-stroke engines need the higher-pressure air even at start up to prevent the exhaust gasses from blowing back into the intake port. For this reason, two-stoke engines generally use a positive displacement system like their own crankcase, a Roots blower or Lysholm compressor that still provides pressurized intake air at low rpm's.
@@jfess19112-stroke Diesel engines are usually NORMALLY ASPIRATED rather than supercharged
The only advantage is that it's running on cheap kero instead of expensive petrol and two stroke oil.
This is standard practice in outboard motors for near a century in many parts of the world.
You start the motor on petrol mix, and switch to kero when the outboards warmed up.
Best thing is to use a piezovalve compressor assisted head fuel injection, like mercury, evinrude, tohatsu 2stroke outboards, resonant exhaust supercharging, and preheat your kero before feeding into the spray injector.
Avgas is becoming scarce and every airport has jet fuel.
Two stroke diesels usually have a valve train
Blower is a device and “supercharger” and “scavenging pump” are the functions of those devices. This is technically a scavenging device in this configuration because the engine would never run without the pump doing the scavenging. I’m sure the marketing team overrode the engineering team in naming.
That depends entirely on the manifold pressure, if the manifold pressure is over 1 BAR at MSL thent it is "supercharged" if not it is _Normally Aspirated_ as opposed to "Naturally Aspirated".
@@WilhelmKarsten en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturally_aspirated_engine
@@yolo_burrito No, not the same thing.
Naturally Aspirated and Normally Aspired are NOT the same.
ruclips.net/video/ccAZZhbm8kU/видео.htmlsi=zgAp5xryoa4U3qKH
@@yolo_burrito "Ask cars" is not a accredited engineering reference source.
You got rolled by Wiki.
@@yolo_burrito There is a very important difference between Naturally Aspirated and Normally Aspired... they do not mean the same thing.
Mmmm , sort the problem about primary engine balance , why don’t they do a 120 degree V6 ?
if the v4 in question is at 90° shouldn't primary balance not be an issue
Yes it's 90° and therefore it's safe to assume they've used the correct weight for the crankshaft counter balance to achieve perfect primary balance.
Diesel aircraft engine- Luftwaffe Jumo diesels in ww2... seems familar ?? ;)
As I understand, it’s not a tbo, it’s a time between replacements. It’s a very expensive engine.
I also thought so but they state "low overhaul costs" on the website
@@LetsGoAviate Maybe some kind of exchange rate.
Is this 357 with all fluids or empty 🤔 I know a big problem initially for these engines was the requirement to be liquid cooled.. I think hes over explaining the engine quite a bit by comparing it to other A/C engines.. it really should be in a class of its own and not compared at all when trying to explain its specific limitations/benefits
How does the engine deal with the fact that cetane index is not part of any Jet Fuel specification?
I want one for a Miata...
@Lets Go Aviate 5:24 you are wrong. Thx for the video of this interesting engine but crank drillings for lube oil delivery to bearings are obvious in the cross section at 5:30. There are oil jets but they are for piston cooling not lube. 😢 details matter.
Displays in black text at 5:05 that my illustration isn't accurate.
@@LetsGoAviate sorry I was as off by 20 seconds, edit made. However your response doesn’t imply you understand what I’m talking about? Your commentary indicates splash lube, which is wrong.
a diesel on a car can run for 300k km easy. The reliability on this is not gonna be a an issue at all.
Wouldn’t that be an A4 instead of a V4.
Thought diesel have more torque from the longer stroke and longer throw of the crank. More off center you push the crank the more torque you can make for the same amount of effort.
Would an upside down i4 (inline 4) then be a !4? 😆 Lame joke aside, because of longer stroke yes, as well as higher compression ratio. It's to be noted the Deltahawk is actually a square engine (bore and stroke is the same).
@@LetsGoAviate ruclips.net/video/mVsdWyYXdoQ/видео.htmlsi=KLA_G3FEg4yHBmsS
Diesel engines tend to benefit from long strokes more than gasoline engines, that is why long-stroke diesels are common. The combustion of diesel fuel is slower than that for gasoline, so a diesel tends to run at lower revolutions, and this again favors longer stroke engines ( at high rpms, longer stroke means higher pistons speeds and greater forces on connecting rods, etc). Another reason that diesels tend to have long strokes is related to the higher compression ratio. With a short-stroke diesel engine, the piston gets so close to the cylinder head that the fuel tends to impact the piston before combusting (newer injectors have reduced this problems). Even so, many diesel engines have a bowl-like depression in the piston for this reason. A smaller diameter piston also has a smaller area to seal with the piston rings, reducing blowby (a bigger issue at the higher pressures).
Hmm. Why didn't they make it horizontally opposed, like every other GA engine? Opposed engines have perfect primary and secondary balance. V4's like this do not, and 90 degrees is the worst angle for a V4. Obviously there is some reason to point the cylinders slightly down....
In the 1930's, Daimler-Benz produced the DB600 series of inverted V12 engines. These were 60 degree V12's mounted inverted on fighter planes such as the Bf 109 so that the heads were pointed towards the ground for ease of service. Mechanics could stand on a small stool or if they were tall, simply stand on the ground and do all regular servicing of valves, spark plugs, and fuel injectors versus the upright RR Merlin or Allison V12's that required ladders/scaffolds to do the same. I don't think that GA equipment will benefit this way....
And this is still liquid cooled, so there is that complication. Radiators, hoses, and water pumps are all reliability issues; Add complexity, add potential problems. This engine is a great idea overall, though I think that in 10 years you will start to see the KWH/Kg ratio of batteries become so high that electric motors will begin to replace ICE power plants on GA equipment.
In the end, my opinion is that this would have been a great business proposition in 2000; Now I think it's future is limited. I wouldn't invest in this company.
Great video!
Thanks, great comment and good points!
I think it's upside down simply because as a 2 stroke with a dry sump lubrication system it really doesn't matter which way is up. The upside down V might allow for sleeker cowl designs, and I'm not sure if there is any more to this decision than that.
As for doing a V, well Continental already did the boxer 4 diesel on the CD-230. I would not say 90° is the worst V angle, but very likely the best as it's the easiest angle to achieve perfect primary balance. All other angles require split-pin cranks, which sort out primary balance but worsens firing interval.
While the boxer 4 does have perfect primary and secondary balance, it does have a rocking couple on secondary imbalance. A few people have jumped on me saying it isn't true, but it is fact.
As for opinion, the 90° V4's side-to-side secondary imbalance will likely be comparable in magnitude to the boxer 4's rocking couple due to secondary imbalance.
Liquid cooled does add complexity, but the practical real life reliability concerns are often overblown, especially by pilots and builders that has never owned or worked on one. Assuming it's designed well, it just doesn't give problems if setup as per manufacturers guidelines. I'm on my 3rd watercooled engine airplane, so "putting my money where my mouth is". It will obviously need more things to be checked when inspected or serviced, since it's an additional system and components, like you've said.
As for future limited, only time will tell. If electric for light aircraft doesn't quite pan out in the next 10 or 15 years like I predict, the these companies with engines able to run on SAF, might just be in the pound seats.
@@LetsGoAviate Interesting points, but you have to understand that the rocking couple you site is minute, essentially not a factor on horizontally opposed engines. These are known as the smoothest form for ICE devices, especially the 6 cylinder variants which in many cases need only rudimentary engine mounts.
IF these engines can be affordable and but jet fuel instead of av gas(RARE) Then it could revolutionize the vintage plane world. If u can fly a dc3 with this engine tech and burn Jet A in piston engine... well that may be cheaper than a turbine conversion. At least on some aircraft dc3 prolly bad example being radial. But like an old seaplane u need to be able to fuel at modern airports etc
I don't get it... compared to a Lycoming O-360, it produces the same HP but fuel consumption is higher: 10.8gal/hr vs about 8gph for the O-360, it's heavier than the O-260 by about 100lbs, and it is 2x the cost of an O-360. Who exactly is this Deltahawk engine for?
It only produces the same horsepower at sea level. The Deltahawk is turbocharged and will give 180hp at all altitudes, where the non-turbochrged O-360 will lose power with altitude, roughly 23% loss at 5,000ft DA.
@@LetsGoAviate But.... the partial pressure of oxygen lowers with altitude. A second stage of supercharging is needed once the maximum air intake cannot provide enough oxygen to burn all the fuel.
@@floycewhite6991 Correct, I should have said, it will provide full power up to around 15,000 feet.