Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Turboprop Cessna 172

month ago there was a maiden flight of Cessna 172 with TP100 turboprop. No more info available to me.
More details here

LKKU, LKTB

Thanks for the info, Michal. I am quite surprised to read the turboprop was found less noisy than the original powerplant, though.

EBZH Kiewit, Belgium

Well, within the airfield perimeter, at idle power, it will probably make a lot more noise, but according to Chapter 10 criteria (climbout), it might actually be quiter.

Last Edited by boscomantico at 28 Nov 11:59
Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

Plus, according to their website, it runs at 2158 RPM, while the the piston variant probably runs at somewhere between 2500 and 2700 RPM, propeller noise ought to be lower.

LSZK, Switzerland

Noise is usually mainly driven by RPM and the propeller diameter resulting blade tip speed. As far as I remember Mach 0.70 to 0.75 is where noise is becaming a critical factor. Feel free to do the math…
I am trying to find out more on this conversion and their plans -STC etc. Stay tuned.

LKKU, LKTB

Does the turboprop come with manual fuel pressure adjustment to adjust for ambient air pressure and temperature fluctuations? Because such a thing would come in handy in cruise where no adjustments are needed. And electronic turbine FCUs are vastly known to fail very frequently.

Nice! The noise of a TP is alone worth every penny

Doesn’t the downward-pointing exhaust affect the W&B envelope?

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

No, but it comes with an optional CAN to RS232 converter, which features cheap Sub-D connectors, which are known to be no good.

More seriously, here’s some more data about the engine. I wonder whether they’re going to increase the tank size, given that their SFC is 0.82 lb/hp/h, i.e. almost double that of a piston engine.

Last Edited by tomjnx at 28 Nov 13:28
LSZK, Switzerland

Talking of W&B: do I rightly observe the engine (and firewall) have been moved further forward, to make up for the reduced engine weight? Same happened when the Pilatus Porter was upgraded into the Turbo Porter, leaving a curious empty space between cockpit and firewall. If so, that space could neatly serve for extra fuel storage – even with a cork & needle level indicator!

Last Edited by at 28 Nov 15:03
EBZH Kiewit, Belgium

It’s not cheap. The turbojet version, which is a very much simpler machine, costs about US$ 100k or close to it. It’s used in the SubSonex (the same kit manufacturer making the Sonex series and the Onex)

I would guess the turboprop is at least US$ 150k, maybe 200k. Then it has to be installed, so the whole thing will probably cost at least 300k + the C-172 itself.

The SubSonex looks supercool, and anyone can build it. It also requires jet rating though, and I wonder how to do that in EASA land. Is there anything such as SEJ-rating?

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway
14 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top