Diamond Aircraft Industries LMS-9 and LMS-19

VTOLicious

VTOLicious

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
24 November 2008
Messages
1,335
Reaction score
1,686
According to this source (PDF p21) the Ural Works of Civil Aviation (a subsidiary of Rostec, UWCA) and DAI signed an agreement on co-production and co-development of a family of light multipurpose planes for four, nine and 19 seats at the Le Bourget air show in June 2013. http://en.take-off.ru/pdf_to/to28.pdf

The nine-seat LMS-9 powered by a pair of E-8 diesel engines rated at 440 hp each will have a maximum takeoff weight of 3,500 kg, while the takeoff weight of the 19-seat LMS-19 powered by a pair of 700-hp engines will equal 6,400 kg. The maximum cruising speed of both models will account for 440 km/h, and the flight altitude
will stand at 8,200 m. The LMS-9 burning 85 kg of fuel per hour will be able to fly fully-loaded out to 1,500 km, while the LMS-19 with a 140-kg/h fuel consumption out to 1,335 km. The price of the planes is estimated to be $2.5 million and $3.75 million respectively.
Click to expand...

Regards Michael
 

Attachments

  • Unbenannt.JPG
    Unbenannt.JPG
    301 KB · Views: 795
  • LMS19.jpg
    LMS19.jpg
    61.3 KB · Views: 733
All these projects seem to hinge on the availability of the new powerplants. That's always cause for careful consideration.
Granted, Diamond (via its subsidiary Austro engines) has developed the excellent AE300 for its DA-42, but developing a brand new engine is always subject to cash-flow considerations. Remember the D-jet? it was supposed to be certified years ago but has been essentially frozen.
I can cite at least half a dozen companies that tried bringing a Diesel to market and slowly faded from the news.


That being said, i sincerely wish them luck. I see the potential for higher powered diesel engines which could power new GA aircraft in the FAR-23 class (not to mention helicopters and UAVs).
 
The inlet and exhaust in that scaled model is that of a Honeywell TPE331. This new project certainly does not hinge on the availability of any new powerplant.
-Luc
 
The TPE331 family bridges a span of power ratings that starts at the upper end of the planned Diesel engines and ends at almost twice that. It certainly looks like the aircraft shown in the pictures could use the higher power. What is the relationship of those aircraft models to the use of Diesel engines mentioned in the article, then?
 
Well if you are a company that produces both airplanes and engines, it is natural to offer combos.

Since the engine is near the CG, it is far more easier - relative to a single - to convert from turboprop to diesel when the diesel is ready or as market dictates.

-Luc
 
Keeping your options open is certainly wise ;D

I'm just wondering how big they can go with a Diesel and still make sense. I can see extrapolating from the 168 shp AE300 to something three, four times the power, but does it make sense to go much higher than that? If we're talking about 1,000shp+ power requirements, I doubt you can make up the advantages of power-to-weight and TBO of a gas turbine with just better bsfc of the Diesel.
 
Any more information on the engines? It sounds like they are claiming an SFC of 0.23 lb/hp/hr! ???


*Edit: see post below for correct values*
 
Avimimus said:
Any more information on the engines? It sounds like they are claiming an SFC of 0.23 lb/hp/hr! ???
Click to expand...

Obviously the developmet of the diesel engine is related to this CleanSky project ;)
http://www.cleansky.eu/content/page/diesel-engine-light-helicopter-technology-streams
http://www.diamond-air.at/news_detail+M5f93e04c66f.html

"Diesel powered helicopter demonstrator In order to test a flight-worthy prototype in 2014, an existing helicopter has to be adapted with only limited modifications. The EC120 airframe was chosen since its light weight requires a 330 kW rated engine only.
Preliminary demonstrator engine EC120 installation layoutPreliminary performance studies indicated that the payloadrange
domain is enlarged w.r.t. the turbine powered reference version provided that the weight-to-power ratio (including power off-takes for cooling and auxiliary engine functions) does not exceed 0.8 kg/kW and specific fuel consumption is less than 240 g/kWh. No diesel engine in this power range currently offers the required combination
of low fuel consumption, high power density and reliability matching helicopter specifications."

BR Michael
 

Attachments

  • Engine_graphics_02.jpg
    Engine_graphics_02.jpg
    648.1 KB · Views: 376
Thanks - that is saner - around 0.39 lb/hp/hr for those who aren't into converting from metric! The target power to weight ratio is also noticeably better than existing piston engines.

It will be interesting to see how the 700 hp project turns out...

It really is a shame that piston engines don't scale well above 750 hp (power to weight ratios for turboprops are increasingly better with each power increment, and fuel economy increases for turboprops above 2000 shp)...
 
"The V8 engine that is being tested is the HIPE AE 440 – the result of a collaboration between France’s Teos Powertrain Engineering and Austria’s Austro Engine. The former company, which specializes in car racing, designed the core engine. The latter manufacturer rather focused on components like the full authority digital engine control (FADEC) and, above all, airworthiness.
The engine has a total weight (including oil, accessories, etc.) of 528 lbs. For an equivalent level of performance, a turboshaft would weigh between 265 and 285 lbs. An equivalent level of performance does not mean equal power rating. A diesel retains its performance from sea level to 8,000 feet at ISA+20 temperature, which a turboshaft can’t do, according to Clean Sky officials. However, the demonstrator is not fully optimized, its designers concede. The starter is not a starter-generator and it has two batteries instead of one.
In September, the demonstrator will move from the test bench to an iron bird. It will then, in January or February, be integrated into the demonstration aircraft. Ground tests will last until April next year, when the first flight is planned. The flight test phase is expected to run through October 2014."
http://www.aviationtoday.com/rw/products/engines/European-Researchers-Test-Diesel-Alternative-to-Turboshaft_79572.html#.Uuq0OLT-Zp9
 

Attachments

  • 57257_original.jpg
    57257_original.jpg
    147.6 KB · Views: 248
The shape of the valve cover, indicates that the engine (only a model) shown is very likely a race engine (very likely Les Mans). This shape is typicall for race engines, were the engines are integral, load carrieng part of the frame. Furthermore we can see a dry sump pump down right, which would make little sense for typical helicopter applications.

I think it was around 2014 when the last Diesel engine contributed to Les Mans (and won), so this was very likely a surplus engine design from Renault. Making a research project an earning some Europeen taxpayer money with an existing design was propably a great idea...
 
Does Diamond have the capital necessary for development of projects like these?
 
VTOLicious said:
"The V8 engine that is being tested is the HIPE AE 440 – the result of a collaboration between France’s Teos Powertrain Engineering and Austria’s Austro Engine. The former company, which specializes in car racing, designed the core engine. The latter manufacturer rather focused on components like the full authority digital engine control (FADEC) and, above all, airworthiness.
The engine has a total weight (including oil, accessories, etc.) of 528 lbs. For an equivalent level of performance, a turboshaft would weigh between 265 and 285 lbs. An equivalent level of performance does not mean equal power rating. A diesel retains its performance from sea level to 8,000 feet at ISA+20 temperature, which a turboshaft can’t do, according to Clean Sky officials. However, the demonstrator is not fully optimized, its designers concede. The starter is not a starter-generator and it has two batteries instead of one.
In September, the demonstrator will move from the test bench to an iron bird. It will then, in January or February, be integrated into the demonstration aircraft. Ground tests will last until April next year, when the first flight is planned. The flight test phase is expected to run through October 2014."
http://www.aviationtoday.com/rw/pro...rnative-to-Turboshaft_79572.html#.Uuq0OLT-Zp9
Click to expand...
That is pretty good stats for a diesel. That's lighter than the GM/Isuzu Duramax or the Cummins I6 family.

Though the comment about a turboshaft being unable to keep the same performance is BS. The technical term is "downrating", where you limit engine power to the altitude rating because the compressor can move more air.
 
When a turbine is down rated it not only becomes worse in terms of power to weight ratio, it will also be much thirstier at lower flight levels. Since helicopters are mainly used at low flight levels this isn’t a good approach at all.
 
Nicknick said:
When a turbine is down rated it not only becomes worse in terms of power to weight ratio, it will also be much thirstier at lower flight levels. Since helicopters are mainly used at low flight levels this isn’t a good approach at all.
Click to expand...
Depends entirely on how you build it.

Optimize it for best efficiency at your theoretically "downrated" power output (say, 85% of theoretical max) and it's most efficient down low but burns notably more fuel as you go up in altitude as you have to spin the compressor faster than design optimum to maintain power levels.
 
Turbines need the maximum temperature and pressure ratio to reach maximim efficiency, so you can't built a non regenerative downrated turbine which will reach the maximum at sea level.
 
Nicknick said:
Turbines need the maximum temperature and pressure ratio to reach maximim efficiency, so you can't built a non regenerative downrated turbine which will reach the maximum at sea level.
Click to expand...
Two spool turbine, maybe 3 spools. Power turbine achieves max of 6000rpm. Rest of engine only needs to be at 80% rpm to spin the power turbine that fast at sea level due to mass flows. As altitude increases, rest of engine can be spun faster to maintain total mass flow through the power turbine. Total pressure in the burner stays constant, temperature should be close to constant, depends on how much increased compressor rpm increases temperature while outside air temps drop. Hot and High will still suck.
 
No matter how many spools you are using, the only way would be a regenerator. In your example you will notice, that the low pressure turbine will have an higher pressure ratio and spin faster (=more power output whith the same mass/air flow) in greater height. So the effect is the same, the turbine will run less efficient on lower height.

In this configuration total pressure ratio over the high pressure turbine stays constant, but not that over the low pressure turbine.
 
Nicknick said:
No matter how many spools you are using, the only way would be a regenerator. In your example you will notice, that the low pressure turbine will have an higher pressure ratio and spin faster (=more power output whith the same mass/air flow) in greater height. So the effect is the same, the turbine will run less efficient on lower height.

In this configuration total pressure ratio over the high pressure turbine stays constant, but not that over the low pressure turbine.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I believe that, but I'd need to get replacements for a bunch of my Aviation maintenance, repair, and theory books to look it up to prove one way or the other.

Since I'm now looking for books for that, do you have any recommendations that don't require me re-learning calculus first?
 
Despite gas turbines are basically quite simple machines, the books are usually not so easy to read. If you read a book about combustion engines, you will usually find examples typical for every decisive parameter (e.g. isentropic flow values of the valves, efficiency, piston speed and so on). Unfortunately, the turbine folks focus purely on the theory. I have a full book about turbines which doesn’t contain any real life value of any turbine. If aliens would find this book and could read it, they would have no idea which efficiency and which power to weight ratio the turbines of the earthlings could reach….

For me, it was much better understandable when I was practicing with old exams. When I had a concrete example and given problem, it all became much more logic and the math behind it wasn’t that difficult.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom