I used to drive a truck with a Benz engine and while it was powerful and sounded delicious, it had problems. We lost two engines in the new fleet the first when the breather tubes clogged up with ice. Basically, when going down the highway in cold weather (-20C and below) ice from the crankcase would condense on the inside of the breather tube. When the tube sealed up, oil would shoot out the dipstick and run the engine dry. It was a pain having to stop every hour to clean it.
MB has always been seen as a stellar company, Maybe the fact the in the large truck spot they teamed up with Detroit Diesel that made them go downhill, they were bad for having fueling issues, head gaskets leak and turbine failures, had my fill of fixing all these problem and more for several years then all of a sudden it seemed they were gone and replaced with the DD platform engines
MB had a go at the class 8 trucking industry mostly Freightliners in the US..Strong start but fizzled out, seemed like very few liked them, Gonna be interesting to see how they do in the aircraft industry.
You are tue, MB diesels are leaders in Europe, and talking Detroit Diesel, I could say they were used in trucks, marine, cranes and heavy equipments. The two strokes had more power than many, every time the piston goes up and down, it delivery power. But the enviromental laws, didn't let these motors to survive. I worked in many of them, from the smaller ones, 53 series to 149 series. I to tell true, I had a lot of fun!
Yeah back in the day that was always a problem with all engines, Its pretty standard anymore that the road draft tube is eliminated and recycled back to engine or heated with engine coolant.
how will this aircraft get fuel then? is there an aviation diesel supply system in europe? I've never experienced diesel for aircraft here in the states which is why i ask.
If your using a diesel that doesn't like to rev over 2700 rpm anyway, why add the weight and complexity of a gear drive? What is the ratio on that anyway, like 1:1.3?
The reduction gear is 1:1.69. The engine spins faster than the prop therefore requiring a gearbox. Given rpm is prop rpm. Max prop rpm is 2300, meaning the engine is spinning at 3887 rpm
With all due respect to your knowlege and experience, every engine since the Wright Flyer have all been modified mass produced engines. This engine seems over engineered too with the changes being exhibited in the video. The only thing that remains appears is the long block. All of the aircraft parts are new and different. Even the engines designed specifically for aircraft have their roots in the mass produced market,(mostly automotive). It may make repair parts more available and less costly.
MB diesel engines are good, very good. In U.S. the caterpillar is the number one. Can you think a Cat engine in an airplane? I thinl MB diesels are a little heavy for LSA. With this kind of airplanes, lighter engines are recommended, and hosre power of about 100 hp ad little bit more.
lol I didn't know there was a "rank" among us engineers. And perhaps I have been too harsh on the automotive industry. It is just I have seen some very questionable practices at some of my former employers to put my life in the hands of a product we knew was going to fail prematurely. Because the warranty would be expired by that time and it was "cheaper" to do it that way. But a class act like BMW, Mercedes, etc. would be just fine as air worthy products.
Well, you make a fine amount of points. But I'm a Volvo-owner, and I can tell you that as long as the oil and filters of the engine, gearbox etc is changed often enough, the engines last pretty much forever (the oil removes mud and steel crumbs and move heat, lubricate etc). BUT, what doesn't last forever is that darn microchip (which usually stops something important from working properly). But the idiot owner of the engine doesn't get it, so MOST cars fail because of too few oil changes.
I'll have to pull rank on all you guys 'cuz I have an entire brain;...[most] car engines can't run @ 6000 rpm, be subject to undue crankshaft stresses, go through a 2.5 reduction gear reliably.....and if you have a problem and land at airport: Continental parts\service are a bit easier than '83 Cadillac...dummies....DIESELS AND PROPS LIKE IT AT 2700 RPM.....-I would want to put a Jag V-12 conv. into this 3\4 scale Spitfire I'm building, ..but I gotta know what I'm in for...
I don't know what your profession is, but I am an automotive systems manufacturing engineer, and I know what I am talking about. Just because there are many car engines flying around in aircraft does not make it an acceptable practice. When it was created, it was intended for a car. Period. A cost effective motor that gets a couple hundred thousand miles and has a budget for warranty claims. It is not designed for high altitude, sharp banking, etc that an aircraft encounters.
Yeah, I am not thrilled at the concept of putting a mass produced car engine into a plane. I am an automotive engineer, and I can tell you that we consider an engine failure a matter of inconvenience, not a matter of life and death. The only exception is when we produce something that has to be 100% reliable, like an ambulance engine. Those are over-engineered and cost much, much more than your typical Escort engine. I want something DESIGNED for aircraft, not just because it will fit!
