Hybrid T62/150TP Turbo Prop Engine (shaft power jet engine) 

Hmm. 10 minutes of flight with 2.5 gallons. Seems reasonable to me lol. On the other hand I wouldn't mind my paramotor having 150hp...

I wish I had neighbors this cool.

The ones that bought homes at an airport? Yeah probably...;)

Its on an airport. They are used to it.

I bet he's got a cool rake for his yard too.

I thought the exact same thing exactly

The speed of sound is 1100 fps. The blade tips are turning 732 fps. About right.

This engine and prop combo is a one of. What you saw was more likely a pt6 or Allison 250 powered aircraft.

Using this engine in a car is not a bad idea. It brings that demon out 😈

In what type of aircraft? Dreaming of a turboprop myself 😊

@@AdalaAkeri Check my channel. See the walk around video. 👍

They are used to it. We live on an airport. The test is taking place on the end of a taxiway.

Whipple may have something to say about that.

​@@theprojectproject01I believe you're talking about Frank Whittle.😅

Thank you. The accessory gearbox, starter and alternator are custom made. The prop gearbox, prob and and blades were built by me in the hangar in front of the engine. Approximately 35 were built in various configurations. The last one was sold in 2001. This one is going into a 80% scale T6A trainer.

Go ahead and call the cops. Its on an airport.

The orange vehicle is a restored/modified Thiokol 1402 Imp snow cat. We use it for winter access to our cabin. I had it home for maintenance. You can see it in action on RU-vid.

Hey I'm looking for something Cheap. Damn the Gov. approved paperwork etc.etc. something for Experimental Aircraft. Price?

B BelcherCheap? Sorry...not with any turbines we know of (unless they're burnt out cores). And, there is no "Gov approved paperwork". All these engine types are considered exclusively for the Experimental Category. No Standard nor Utility Category aircraft need apply...

+rustie61 Do you know what the Belgian buyer needed it for? I live in Belgium and would love to see this

+bayenne5b Me too ;)

I live in Belgium as well. I was in ultralights till 6-7 yrs ago. Would appreciate to know who bought this turbine.

150 150, if they say it's a 150SHP

With the 152's 19.5 gallon tanks, that would be 40 minutes to tanks empty, or 53 minutes at 75% power. vs about 2-1/2 hours at 75% power for a 150 hp Lycoming. So if you never want to fly more than 40 miles and have an unlimited fuel budget, you'd be fine. Otherwise it would be a pretty useless airplane.

on a vl3 evolution and with 5 small blades

@@gravfielddrive It's only a 150 hp engine. There are already 150 hp Cessna 150 conversions. They don't fly straight up.

@@andrewalexander9492 a cri cri with 2 of these would be fun to see

Everything but the core engine was designed and built by me in the hangar in front of the engine.

Its a residential airport. I am part owner.

Yep. I built 35 of them. I kept the last one for my own project.

Are you gonna build more? Might want one for a Glasair Glastar, what’s the price?

@@AdalaAkeri This was the last one. It is going in a 80% scale T6A Texan ll project

Thanks!

The vehicle is a custom Thiokol 1402 snow cat we use for winter acces to our cabin. it was home for maintenance. The engine is slated for an 80% scale T6A Texan ll trainer that is under construction.

Shawn Dubay neither. This guy puts out some serious power and consumes 14 gallons per hour. You'd want a bigger plane than that

No it doesnt, 150HP. A designed experimental would be best. Then you could have larger fuel tanks to compensate for the burn rate.

I built about 35 of these in various configurations. rustie6 was one of my main customers. I still have the one in the video. but he has the test stand now. I am building an 80% scale T6A Texan II trainer for it. 27' span 2 place tandem 1500 lb gross. The tail is done and the wing framework is done, engine, panels etc. I just finished the main landing gear retract system. Skins are next. When the wing is done i will start on the fuselage. It will look like a real Air Force T6A but is light plane style metal construction since it is slower and lighter. I am old school too. 68 yo. All of the drawings for the engine mod parts and the airplane are pencil and paper. I have gone through a case of mechanical pencil erasers so far.

@@turbinator4532 How great to be doing a love like this. Congrats. I sub'd you bud. Second watch was as great as the first !

Put four on a 1/5th-scale C-133 Cargomaster!? :)

I had one on a small helicopter in South Africa that was used for spotting wildlife for years.

Everything except the core engine was built by me. This engine is destined for an 80% scaled T6A Texan II trainer.

Or a pair of Allison B17's...

Don't know of any turbine powered "parasol" powered ultralight. Thinking it would be quite the overkill and not really a safe idea to try. A rigid airframe with full control surfaces is recommended.

+Magnús Because of the wheel, you can't see the 3" clearance. Although, the soft grass and lower than usual tire pressure did allow the front of the test stand to drop about 3/4" under heavy load at max power. We have since changed to larger tires which gives a much higher ground clearance margin. Would have made an expensive lawn mower though....

+rustie61 expensive single use lawn mower haha, the torque would rip the motor apart, or throw it away

+Magnús The prop would fail and fracture well before the engine would be wrenched out of place. Same with a ground strike while mounted in an airframe. The prop is designed to fail well before the airframe ever would.

+rustie61 but this engine is lighter than aircraft so there is less force to counteract the torque of the motor, so both things could happen, if you propstrike a plane the bulkhead and the airframe often gets twisted and bent, also all the motor has to be inspected, the prop flange could warp and the crankshaft, the main bearing amongst other things on the real airplane

Just look at that manicured lawn.

It is a custom design for this engine and gearbox only. Mechanical controls. 60" dia. 2800 rpm at mil power (108%)

We live on an airport. Its normal.

This is a single shaft turbine with a PSRU gearbox mounted directly to the main planetary reduction gearbox (which has an approx 10:1 reduction). The main gearbox runs at 6000RPM, and the PSRU (Prop Speed Reduction Unit) reduces that to 2800RPM for more efficient prop speeds (approx 2.14:1). All prop pitch controls run directly through the PSRU to control load from flat pitch (or even Beta) to full pitch/full load/max thrust (RPM remains constant). FYI, "twin shaft" turbines have two separate sections....an N1 Gas Producer, and an N2 Power Turbine (with separate governors in each). In the single shaft turbine, one set of wheels (compressor and turbine) does the job of both N1 and N2, requiring only one FCU (Fuel Control Unit = governor).

rustie61 WOW! Thanks dude for the reply! Love these things! Cheers and happy days! Trev

rustie61 That's an interesting small motor. What shaft Horse Power does it produce? Is this a commercial motor? - I assume it is. What is the intended target craft? Small light aircraft? Un-manned drones? Nice.

treheth atheaqthqae The T62/150TP in the video produces (as it's name implies) 150HP....and the T62/100TP produces 100HP. In the TP (TurboProp) configuration, it is intended for a wide range of fixed wing aircraft that require that level of power. But, the TP versions can be broken down to TS (TurboShaft) versions that can then power rotorcraft with the same power level requirements, respectively.

It's all written in the description.

Not really, it's a constant rpm turbine engine, so going 100% rated rpm during operation.

If you want to put a turboprop's turbine in a car, you should get a Solar T62T32, its basically this but an APU that outputs at 6000 rpm rather than about 1900 for turning a prop, then put the engine in the engine bay backwards after making sure the engine bay is big enough, route the intake through two cowls that pull in air from the grill or perhaps hood scoops, run the exhaust into a y-pipe to split it into 3 inch pipes and either route those into two turbocharger exhaust housings with their turbines mated to generators to recover energy that would otherwise have been wasted or just dump the exhaust straight into like 2 mufflers and resonators to make it less deafening. Then you gotta add the other bits that ran the APU into the car and program a throttle control that can ramp the turbine up and down in rpm according to how much you push down the gas pedal, then you gotta be very careful with the clutch when driving it so it doesn't overload the turbine. It would be best to try to put a torque converter in between the output shaft and the clutch housing on the gearbox, perhaps an NV4500 out of a first gen Silverado would do the trick, 5 speed and made to handle more than the 380 ft-lbs of torque from the big L96 engine, and the T62 won't make that much power since it only makes 150hp while the L96 made 360hp and their output shafts rev around the same, so the NV4500's 6.34-to-1 first gear will help any vehicle get going. The T62T32 costs about 11 grand in proper working APU form, and the NV4500 costs about 2 and a half grand from what I can tell, so if you have a bunch of money laying around and are a proper machinehead able and willing to do it, it can be done. Turboprop engines and helicopter engines are really good choices and have been used before to make jet cars, so its possible for sure. An for the exhaust size, the full turbine is about 21 inches in diameter, and according to the size of the exhaust outlet in comparison I'd say the exhaust diameter is around 8.5 inches, that can be pushed down to 4 inches over probably a foot of pipe to let the air accelerate and from there it can be split into two 3 inch pipes through a 4 inch y-pipe and two 4-to-3 inch adapters, and at that point its either to a pair of semi-truck turbo exhaust housings with their turbines driving generators to sap the energy out of the exhaust, or just right into a set of mufflers and resonators. The exhaust velocity of a jet engine is usually nearly mach speed, so 312 meters per second, the exhaust pulses of an internal combustion engine can run up to 125 meters per second, and so since a turboprop's exhaust accounts for maybe 15% of its thrust at the very maximum we can say at 8.5 inches outlet diameter that's around 47 meters per second, since velocity is a function of the cross sectional area, the 56.75 square inches of the 8.5 inch pipe down to the 12.57 of the 4 inch pipe results in 212.2 meters per second exhaust velocity, and that slow down to 119 meters per second after the y-pipe, so the 4 inch is too much of a restriction, so realistically 8.5 inches at the turbine outlet to a 4.5 inch y-pipe down to two 3 inch pipes and then the exhaust velocity is much more reasonable. A turboshaft is a compressor, so it can easily handle a certain amount of exhaust backpressure, so a gradual downsizing of the outlet to a smaller size is easily doable and should be no trouble, and from there two pairs of Apex Xlerator mufflers which would total around 300 bucks for four of them should quiet it right down to bearable levels instead of being so loud you need ear protection. A pair of 3 inch diameter resonators should also take care of some of the pitchy noise that gives you headaches too, but that'd run another 200 bucks for a pair of them, but I'd imagine much of the noise can be taken care of by, believe it or not, the turbocharger generator thingies should you choose to put them in, its one big reason the Chrysler Turbine was so quiet, since its rotary regenerators sapped much of the thermal energy out of the exhaust to preheat the intake for better fuel economy that the exhaust was left much quieter and far cooler. Holy shit I wrote a metric fck-tonne of words XD

Well there’s a lot of thrust coming from turboprops it’s basically a jet engine but it usually has the exhaust section pointed downwards but he has it pointed out why I’m not sure of that

@@gravfielddrive Maybe a specially designed ultralight? I want to see that on a Hummel Ultracruiser. Edit: The 5 gallon fuel limit kind of ruins it.

Love to see it on a cessna 150 or pipper tomahawk

@@marco.9900 There's absolutely no way to mount this safely and feed this and make the weight restrictions. Light sport absolutely I'd love to see something like the darkaero with that. Depending on fuel it would be interesting on a kitfox.

@@kade426 You could put this engine on a Cessna 150. Nothing bigger, unless you used two of them, but it could be done. The engine would probably have to be a little bit beefier to handle a tougher propeller. Especially if it's a constant speed propeller. But with some.modifications, this engine could go on a Cessna 150. As for ultralights, it would work on gyrocopters. If those are even considered ultralights. And yeah. Any light sport, it would be perfectly fine

I love that idea. The EZ is superb and that looks like it would fit. I always wanted to build one out of carbon fiber and give it an electric drive system. My thoughts being the carbon fibers light weight could help offset the weight of the batteries.

It's a radial outflow, centrifugal compressor with compressor guide vanes (diffuser nozzle) that direct the compressed, high flow air (at about 2.1lbs/sec) into a circumferential combustor where fuel is mixed, ignited, and exhausted through more guide vanes (turbine nozzle) and into the radial inflow (centrifugal) turbine wheel. In all, the air path takes about 5 separate 90 degree turns before leaving the turbine wheel (two consecutive 90deg turns could actually be considered a 180). It's pretty much a continuous, "suck-squeeze-burn-blow" through many turns until all this effort is converted into shaft power at the turbine wheel. On a "standard temp day", this particular engine also produces about 80 lbs of exhaust thrust when at 100% power (load)....

+Sangyoon Kim It may seem quiet on video, but it is indeed loud when you are up close to the engine, Interestingly, turbine sound dissipates rapidly with distance. Recip (piston) engines sound louder because the low notes of the staccato combustion cycle will travel much longer distances than the constant, higher pitch "woosh" of a turbine (moving all that air). But, turbines are indeed quieter when flying....it's only when you are up close that they are loud. Also, the prop makes a LOT of noise all by itself.

The air intake is halfway between the back of the spinner and the exhaust opening. It sucks air in radially and axially.

You have to build them yourself.

Simply contact us at "wpsturbines.com" and we can supply you with all of the particulars....

Direct drive. Compressor/Turbine is geared down from 61,000 to 2800 prop rpm at mil power and 2650 at std.

This engine was assembled in 2001 before anyone had a smartphone.