Message-Id: <s7873eda.084@ycc.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 12:38:37 -0500
From: "Bill Gradwohl" <Bill@YCC.COM>
To: <lancair.list@olsusa.com>
Subject:  Engines
Mime-Version: 1.0

Content-Disposition: inline
X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>
Every so often someone complains about how the really high performance engines
need lots of maintenance above and beyond what one would expect, or what's
reasonable from the majority's perspective. From what I read here and also from
other sources, the impression I'm left with is that the TSIO-550 won't make
anywhere near it's advertised TBO for example. 
 
I don't know if these engines are being misused by builders, or if builders are
being sold a bill of goods. I think someone is trying to put 10 pounds of
horsepower into a 5 pound bag with the obvious consequences.  
 
Builders want desperately to believe the advertising, and buy into what turns
out to be a fantasy. Once the money's been spent, they're hooked. The
manufacturers are the dealers, the builders are the horsepower junkies. After
the initial transaction, the junkie will apparently do whatever it takes to
protect his source. Pardon the analogy, but it fits so well I had to use it. 
 
Even the more docile aircraft engines are known to consume large quantities of
cash. They are expensive to purchase, operate, and maintain. I've heard lots of
excuses as for why that is, but I can't convince my brain to believe any of
them. I've also heard lots of reasons why auto style engines won't last in an
aircraft environment. The only reason something won't last is because it's
improperly engineered or misused. I believe the TSIO-550 confirms this if what
I've heard is true. 
 
Someone once said that whatever you subsidize, you get more of. The comment was
directed at government programs ostensibly designed to eliminate social ills and
end up perpetuating them instead. Lets also note that it took a cataclysmic
event to wipe out the dinosaurs so that diminutive mammals could evolve into
thinking beings.  
 
Every time the major engine manufacturers sell an engine, any engine, a dinosaur
is being fed. Every time one of their engines is factory reman'd, a dinosaur is
being fed. Any time factory parts are used by anyone to repair one of these
engines, a dinosaur is being fed. The FAA's regulations that demand the regular
feeding of these dinosaurs by certified aircraft owners don't help the
situation. 
 
The technology in these engines is at least 50 years old, and the manufacturers
have little incentive to improve the product as long as the money flows in. The
aviation community will keep getting more of the same. Manufacturers actually
have lots of disincentive to innovate given our legal system. Aircraft owners
want the dinosaurs to survive because they need the byproduct resulting from the
feeding. Some call those byproducts engines and replacement parts while others
would call them something else. 
 
The major engine manufacturers effectively monopolize the market and as a
consequence thwart innovation. I contend that if these manufacturers
disappeared, we would all be better off. Entrepreneurs would quickly fill the
vacuum to keep a supply of replacement parts available, and fledgling engine
developers would have a wider audience and more money to improve their
offerings. In a relatively short period of time we would finally have engines
with at least 1990's technology, and competition would help lower costs.  
 
I'm hoping for a meteor strike, and soon. That CLASS of individuals out there
with engines that aren't living up to their advertising might want to consider
taking some ACTION to get the dinosaurs attention. 


Bill Gradwohl
IV-P Builder


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LML homepage:   http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html