Mistral is still hanging in there.

[Gerald Jordan]

Well it looks like Mistral is still kicking. I was getting to think they might just fade away.
I really hope these guys can get this motor certified and in to production. It would have been nice to see them put it into a Helio to test but I guess they wanted to put it into a plane that is in production.

http://www.mistral-engines.com/content/view/full/184/item/787/offset/0

[mrhelio]

The G-360 is the ideal powerplant, but the fuel burn is a bit high @ 20-22 gph in cruise

[Gerald Jordan]

Ya it is a little high.
For the amount of cross country I do it wouldn't be so bad.
With the right prop I think the Helio would jump.

[Gerald Jordan]

Well I guess I gave them the kiss of death with that still kicking comment.
This seems to happen to so many start up guys.
RIP

[mrhelio]

I talked with them sometime back, they did not to pursue Helio because of the lack of the entire fleet, somewhere around 250 airplanes.....

The Aviation market right now is very weak

[c/stolaircraft]

I just got off their web site looking in to how they work  vs reciprocating engines.  look neat
They would be good for helios. Do you know how they do at high altitudes?

Reuben 

[Gerald Jordan]

This is the way I see it.
Please correct me if I am wrong.

GO-480
12 GPH @ 75% power setting. Probably 8,000 feet or so. At this power setting you would be putting out about 220 hp. Does anyone have sea level numbers for the GO-480?
Weight Installed is about 700 lbs installed?
Please correct this if you know these numbers for sure

Mistral 360 TS
17 GPH @ 61% Power Setting @ Sea Level At this power setting you would be putting out 220 hp. The same power as the GO-480 @ 75% power.
The weight of the engine is 622 lbs Installed.

The thing I wonder about is the consumption at altitude for the Mistral.

It looks like the Mistral does nicely at altitude.
The 360 TS is turbo charged and according to the Mistral web site it produces 360 hp (Take Off) at 15,000 feet and could carry 290 hp to 25,000 feet.

Of course this is going by the data Mistral has put on their site. Who knows if these numbers are going to pan out on actual working aircraft in the real world?

I would like to hear comments on this.

GJ

[c/stolaircraft]

Think that with less oxygen in the air at high altitudes It would decrease the fuel consumption put I don't know how much. And with the mistral you can run auto fuel which is cheaper than avgas.

I think that if you run auto gas in them that you could operate them for about the same amount that you run a go-480 for.

Reuben

ps correct me if I 'am wrong.

[391stol]

One of the main reason for 100ll compared to auto gas is the safety factor. 100ll is much more stable and less likely to flash off in a crash.  If you think you cant run a 8:7 (go480) compression engine on 92oct. car gas no ethanol of coarse your wrong. I run a exp cub engine with 10:1 compression on car gas all the time.

[c/stolaircraft]

yes you can run auto gas in a Go 480 but you need a stc to run it if you are going to be doing any kind of charter work.

[391stol]

STC ...... The plane cant read

[Gerald Jordan]

This was the other one I was hoping somebody would have picked up
It just seemed to disappear.

http://www.aero-news.net/subsite.cfm?ContentBlockKey=OSH2004BOMBARDIER

GJ

[c/stolaircraft]

HAHA but the FAA can! OH that's right don't tell anybody

Reuben

[mrhelio]

yes you can run auto gas in a Go 480 but you need a stc to run it if you are going to be doing any kind of charter work.

You also run the risk of lowering the compression, why do that in the GO-480?

Defeats the purpose

[Doug Johnson]

I found another rotary engine site it will probably never make it to production but it's interesting. This rotary engine has direct injection and Turbo compounding.

http://www.rotaryeng.net/turbo-compound.html

By the way what did happen to the Bombardier Engine? I clicked on the previous link and it still works maybe its not completely dead.

Recently I was looking for information on direct Fuel injection and ran into a new engine that Bombardier is putting into snow machines. The two cycle engine is not dead this engine weighs 60 pounds and develops 120 Hp. It's oil injected but only uses about two quarts per season, I'm not exaggerating or making that up, and if it does run out of oil it will run for 4 hours without to much damage at least thats what Bombardier claims. They have a new NASA aluminum alloy that they use for their pistons so they can run hotter and the direct fuel injection is controlled by coil in the injector thats similar to that in speakers. And of course a computer chip  to control all this. This Engine also gets much higher mileage and better EPA emission levels than comparable 4 cycles.

Rotary engines also have oil injection and Run pretty Hot.

Maybe There's a 2 cycle in our future.

Doug.