>Thats easy!
>> Get the 140 hp Dual Port Fuel Injected EA81 with redundant injection
>>here:<
Very easy if you want to substitute baggage capability for engine
weight. The extra weight also means the battery has to be in the tail to
keep the C of G within limits. This increases the pitch inertia which
degrades the handling characteristics slightly.
For those who are new to the forum and are trying to make an engine
choice the following might be a useful summary:
Subaru - too heavy, NSI (the company producing the engine/gearbox
package) have a poor customer relations record.
BMW - nice engine but torsional vibration proved to be a too difficult
problem to overcome after exhaustive development work.
Mid West Rotary - very smooth and light but excessive fuel consumption
and very difficult to set up to run smoothly at all rpm's.
Wilksch Diesel - lovely engine with many original design patents. It is
very fuel efficient and cheap to run due to much cheaper jet fuel. This
is an engine to watch in the future for the replacement of
Lyco/Continentals but it is just too heavy for the Europa. The radiator
adds significantly to the frontal area which may increase drag.
Lyco/Continental - too heavy and high fuel consumption.
Jabiru - the only workable alternative to the Rotax for the Europa. True
it is simpler. If you want a simple aircraft you would probably not have
chosen the Europa in the first place. Although it has a higher power
output it is at 3300rpm which is too high for the prop to use
efficiently so the performance advantage is negated. Being aircooled the
fuel efficiency is slightly down on the Rotax. Some cooling issues were
apparent from the cowling mods seen on early aircraft. It definitely has
a price advantage which is the one area which lets the Rotax down. If I
was cost limited I would sooner spend it on the engine rather than
expensive avionics.
Rotax - still the most suitable engine for the aircraft if rather
expensive. As Ivan Shaw said in the early days of the Europa 'there is
more work in developing the engine for the airframe than designing the
airframe in the first place'. The P51 argument would be relevant if
there was an engine that was significantly more suited to the airframe
but so far this is not the case.
Choice of versions of the Rotax
912 - very fuel efficient but a little underpowered for the Europa
especially at max weight with high density altitudes. Using a VP prop
helps to extract maximum power at take-off without affecting cruise
performance.
912S - the extra 20hp make all the difference. Probably the first choice
for most Rotax users. Make sure the higher power starter is installed to
help prevent kickbacks on start due to the higher compression ratio.
914 Turbo - yet more performance but at a price and increased
complexity. Probably the best engine for those who regularly operate at
high density altitudes. However the 912S with a VP prop will give
adequate performance up to density altitudes of at least 10,000ft and
will comfortably exceed Vno at low altitudes.
|