Turbine Otters Revisited

[wabano]

Thousand horsies, I'm sure glad that this issue was solved, could have been
just this plane...

That then would put it on equal footing with the PT6, in my view.

As for a sexy nose, that sure is:


However, you have a much better view over the PT6 anteater nose,
short stacks, much lower, if you get to see something...

[Cat Driver]

Won't that GPS show track up?

[wabano]

There is a Garmin POS lower that do that...
Nothing like the big picture to keep you up there.
WILL THAT LOW EVER GO AWAY???

[DaCanuck]

Just some clarification on the Walter Turbine Otter.

In regards to the comment:

"that darn Walter spools down every time you go into Beta, getting a lot of guys in trouble"

There has never been an issue nor any incident in 8 years of them operating.

In regards to the comment:

"..(the walter) not being able to haul the load of the PT6 at least on amphibs"

This is not true as the P&W has the same HP as the Walter and in all of the Walter flight testing, it met or exceeded the P&W performance data in all areas. Also, the Walter will beat the P&W & Garrett out of the water partly because of the thrust line of the engine and partly because of the Otter STOL Kit.

In regards to the comment:

"The only other issue I can think of with the walter is support. Parts are hard to come by and walter engines guru are even harder to find".

The Walter engine is used in over 50+ countries and on over 30+ aircraft since 1971. GE now owns Walter Engines and is setting up their network support system for the walter with a 24/7 BizJet Ops center (877) 456-5387 for Walter Tech support. This along with the West Helena Facility (USA) and both Bluewater Aviation & Stolairus Aviation (Canada) to deal with any support issues.

In regards to the comment:

"... I didn't like (on the Walter) was the need to remember to transfer fuel periodically to the collector tank between the engine & cockpit"

Fuel management is required on all 3 Otter conversions. The Walter has audible and light warnings and turning on the pump switch is easy. The Walter 50 US Gal firewall forward fuel tank gives the Otter extended fuel and brings the C of G in line better for Aft loading. A nice plus with this Turbine Conversion.

ALSO, the AVIA 3 Blade (106") prop is hydraulically operated and doesn't have locks and stays in the position selected.

Finally, Fuel Consumption has been a big issue and is very hard to compare when based on short haul/cycle operation. Each operator has different conditions, loads, terrain, etc. but with short haul operation, Walter's M601E-11 Engine maintenance is about 1/2 to 2/3 the cost of the P&W & Garrett engines over 7,000 hours. That pays for a lot of fuel.

BR / MJ / KA
Stolairus Aviation

[Meatservo]

I've flown the PT6 ones and I can say that you probably won't regret the conversion no matter which engine you get. I have good friends who have flown all three and they all say the same things, whichever engine they get.

I have never flown the Walter but if it's true the nose doesn't stick out as far, this might be a useful thing to keep in mind if you're doing a lot of flying from docks of questionable quality or doing a lot of beaching in wooded areas where you can't tail in, especially if you have lower-time pilots. I find that flying the aeroplane is an easier skill to perfect (I didn't say "easy", just "easier") than the boating skills necessary to stay out of trouble on the water with the long nose on the PT6.

I also saw a garret powered otter that impressed the hell out of mw with its ability to land in almost the length of its own fuselage with a full load aboard. That got my attention. I haven't flown one of them either but the pilot who did had no complaints.

[FighterPilot]

Any possibility of going Polish?

[Chimo]

Yes, I suppose Polish is a possibility, but I'd rather go Czech and leap forward into the 1990's. 2 out of 3 Polish Otters had major engine problems here this year. Frankly I do not think that would be the long term forward thinking solution.

[Brint]

Have you looked at Viking's newly certified conversion? It's profiled in the latest issues of Wings and Canadian Aviator. Not sure if the numbers chance much (higher price etc) but they are talking about a gross weight of 9000 lbs.

[Ballsssssss]

What about the short stacks pointing smelly exhaust at the cabin? The Garrett points the exhaust down and away from the cabin. Something to consider I have heard. Seems to be a lot of Walter groupies on here, but Garrett Otters are multiplying like rabbits, so they must be good. Can't argue with 900 HP either.

[wabano]

Any possibility of going Polish?

1000hp PZL? PT-6 Pratt? GE-Walter?
All MADE in Poland!

[Blown Juggs]

What about the Orenda ? I hear they ran a bit hot

[alpine]

Though Im biased, I would have to say the PT6, easier starts, and the fuel savings arenèt all that much on the garrett. The main reason is the garrett gets temp limited quite early, and runs only around 70-80% AT 10K. set the same fuel flows, and they will fly at just about the same IAS.

I have operated Otters with the PT6-135 and -34 in the past. For the last four season we operated the Garrett. Among other advantages the fuel saving is considerable: for a IAS @ 10,000 ft, 4 us gal less. For a typical 400 mile return trip I would never to go with just front and centre fuel with the PT6 Otter. With the Garrett we do this on a regular basis. At full gross 8400 lbs it takes us only 6 minutes to climb from 1600 ft to 10,000 ft, then we pull the power back to achieve a IAS of 125 MPH between 60 and 65% depending on the load.
I don't recall what our climb time was with the PT6 but it was more than twice as long. You can see there is quite a saving there as well

Well, I might as well list all the pros and cons: I can't comment on the Walter, have never even seen one

Pro Garrett: lower fuel burn
instant power response
shorter take off run
faster climb
no exhaust smell inside cabin
bleed air ejector instead of vacuum pump (fail safe)
7000 hour TBO even for new operators ( 3500 hr hot section)
new electrical system comes with the conversion

cons noisier on the ground
has to be pre heated for the first start if OAT is below -10 C
engine has to be removed from airframe for hotsection inspection

[wabano]

Very true about the power response, I flew both the Dart and it's Garret look alike
and the power is instantaneous, even more than an R-2800, which will fart
loudly if you up the power after cool off/approach idling...

But what about this prolonged idling before shut down and hand turning of the prop?
It's a relatively new thing as we never had to do that before!
And all our engines reached their TBO with no problem...

[supercub7]

Did you make a final decision Chimo?

[chesty]

I doubt chimo made enough money this season to think about an upgrade to a turbotoy!

[wabano]

The "cha-ching" machine don't "cha-ching" no more.

Amazing the number of times the "turbotoys" get "sold".

However, when time come to put the cash where the mouth is...
(When they don't haggle, GUARAANTEEE,the bank is gonna decline!)

[DHC2_in_ak]

We have 4 PT6A otters now. Don't want to, don't need to sell them.
The Garrett's prop spins for a long time on shut down. And we are working in rivers with ALOT of trees on the banks and few, if any, ground handlers.
Speaking of banks, the Garrett wood (pun) make a really expensive weed waker. We perfer the relitively fast slow-down-to-stopped speed of the PWC.

[Chimo]

It's official!
PT6A-34 conversion on order.
Thanks for all the input.
Dave

[wabano]

What's the latest on the Vazar Husky?



Is that a photoshop or is there a real one flying?

[Oldfartus]

Saw one of those on Hogan's Hero's yesterday, we're about 30 years behind the rest of the world as far as televisual feasting.

[wabano]

By the way...the Donald has sold his airplane,
the one with the Orenda...it has now a PT-6...

Orenda is out of aero-engines...
Which was picked up by Trace:

http://www.sealandaviation.com/blog/?p=40

The TRACE engine is a powerful, liquid cooled, fuel-efficient, high-performance V-8 engine that is a cost effective alternative to turbine aircraft engines in defined utility applications. The TRACE design allows efficient engine operation at temperature extremes. The engine is the only viable reciprocating alternative in its horsepower class in the world and is fully certified by the FAA and Transport Canada.

“The future looks bright here at TRACE,” said Czarnecki. “We are currently working with companies that are retrofitting TRACE engines into existing aircraft and an OEM that will be released publicly in the first quarter of 2010. “With 600 horsepower, the TRACE engine offers aircraft manufacturers the ability to offer a powerful reciprocating engine at a fraction of turbine pricing, which allows for more affordable aircraft to be introduced in the market. Our benefits in performance, operating and initial cost are significant advantages for TRACE, especially given the current economic conditions.”

Elias Hernandez
CBS 7 News
October 14, 2009

Midland, Texas - It's a signal to the rest of the world.

A new kind of airplane engine, built right here in the Permian Basin, is ready for the aviation marketplace.

TRACE Engines received its "production certificate" from the Federal Aviation Administration today.

It amounts to an endorsement of the company's manufacturing capabilities and quality control.

Chief Operating Officer of TRACE Engines, David Czarnecki, said, “In the last three years only three other companies have received the Production Certificate and we did it with zero findings. That's thanks to our staff and our company.”

The TRACE engine is an extremely powerful, fuel-efficient, V-8 engine.

Officials say this is just the beginning of a growing aviation industry in West Texas.

TRACE Engines is associated with the parent company of CBS 7.

[lost in the north]

se aland is doing work on the beaver,400,000 gets you a trace engine ...

[wabano]

Anyone seen the radiator?

The one on the Orenda Otter was huge...I think from an over the road truck...

[Blown Juggs]

Christ ! That Husky is one ugly concept.
Nice to see Orenda / Trace back in the mix. I see on their website that the Otter isn't on the list of a retrofit but the Beaver is.
600 HP is a little light if you're trying to make a better airplane out of the Otter. As for the Beaver, pretty good the way it is I always thought.

[wabano]

It had a full trial on the Otter...was found to be an excellent mix,
very effective with a fuel burn same as the beaver and a better load than the
piston AND turbine Otter(re fuel burn).

Problem was Orenda's core business is building small turbine parts,
and this is a turbine killer...
So Orenda did everything in their power to sabotage their own project...
(Must have got an offer they could not refuse by U no hoo...)

I think someone is still flying the other airplane that was fitted
privately under an experimental license.