Hot Wings Caravan?

[DHCdriver]

Do you guys remember a few years back AOG air out of Kelowna( no longer) were installing a Walter turbine on a caravan and the project fell through. Just wondering if anybody knows if that project ever got going again under new management or is dead in the water, Just curious?

[DHCdriver]

Nobody can remember? This project was lead by Dave Baron, the aircraft had an american registration,I think maybe they had some U.S backers. The project seemed to be going good then AOG forclosed(don't know the reason). This project was featured in Canadian Aviator 3-4 years ago. Ring any bells. DHCdriver

[Brint]

I seems to remember hearing a rumor that the Hot Wings program got lost in some internal politics when AOG folded. Could be wrong and I can't remember details. I would think someone out there owns the rights to what they developed.

Can't wait for the Blackhawk conversion ( http://www.blackhawk.aero/Products/XP42A.aspx ) to get the ol' stamp of approval!

[bcflyer]

Agreed. The old Caravan would be quite the performer with 850hp in it. Problem is they will likely get an increased gross weight approval to go along with the increased power All of a sudden it will perform like a regular Caravan only you'll have more freight to load!! LOL

[Maynard]

Why not just get the Texas turbine....-12's down to 900 shp

[DHCdriver]

WOW! Whats the fuel burn compared to the -114.

[Northern Flyer]

I fly an Otter with the Garret and it is far superior to the -34 Otter performance wise. It also burns less fuel than the PT-6, starts in half the time, and is quite frankly a turbine powered elevator.

A van with the Garret would be awesome. I flew the Grand Caravan for a few years doing off strip work and I would have given my left nut for 900 hp many times.

[ettw]

Based on an aircraft assesment for a company I worked for some years ago, the Garrett ran about 40 to 50 percent cheaper than a PT6 based on O/H costs alone. I have never worked on Garrett powered aircraft but that number alone really opened my eyes to that engine option. So if you factor in the lower fuel burns it is quite a looker.

ETTW

[iflyforpie]

You'll need the extra pickup of the Garrett after the lake shore neighbours grab the pitchforks and run you out of town...

[Redneck_pilot86]

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/20 ... ravan.html

Still in the works? This article was in the June/July 2011 issue of Flight Global.

Canadian aircraft modification specialist Arctic Aerospace is working with the National Research Council of Canada to certificate a Cessna Caravan wing leading edge cuff and winglets system that Arctic says will cut drag, boost performance and reduce ice accretion.

Once approved by Transport Canada later this year - with reciprocal approval by the US Federal Aviation Administration to follow - Arctic will hold the supplemental type certificate for the modification and NRC will earn a fee for each kit purchased.

NRC performed the preliminary analysis of the wing root and wingtip sections to assess the aerodynamic impact of the changes and will develop the wing and fuselage loads analyses and conduct the flight testing programme. Arctic will produce the drooped aluminium leading edge cuff, which increases the wing chord by 100mm (4in) across the wing, as well as the metal and composite winglet for all Caravan models, the company says.

Arctic says the modifications will boost maximum take-off and landing weights and reduce drag, resulting in less fuel burn.

Improvements in en-route climb performance, service ceiling, speed and range are also expected to be confirmed by the flight testing.

NRC reports from preliminary trials that the wing cuff modification "has the potential for reduced ice accretion under applicable conditions". Both the Transportation Safety Board of Canada and the US National Transportation Safety Board have called for more attention to Caravan icing issues after a series of accidents in the mid-2000s. FedEx Express recently decided to install glycol-based TKS ice protection systems in lieu of the legacy pneumatic boots in its fleet of more than 250 Caravan cargo aircraft.

[DHCdriver]

Wow, thanks for that. I'm glad it's not dead in the water, looks like it would be a good kit. To me any time you can lower the stall speed its a good thing DHC

[JDW]

seems like the garrett kills the pt6 in just about every way

In terms of performance advantages, the sexiest is, of course, speed. Texas Turbines says the Supervan 900 is between 25 and 40 knots faster at cruise than the standard Pratt-powered Caravan, and our flight bore that out. The Supervan is simply able to put out a lot more power at every altitude, giving it better forward speed at both the maximum power of the TPE331 and at the same fuel flow as that of the PT6. Reducing our power to match the probable true airspeed of the stock Caravan, we saw a notable reduction in fuel burn and, hence, a big increase in range. At just about every power setting, the Supervan can cruise faster on the same fuel, more economically at the same speed and higher at the same temps.

This makes short trips quicker and certain long trips doable in one leg. In the bush or in the mountains, these factors can mean added utility — in some cases a stop for fuel, if possible, wouldn't be necessary — and added safety thanks to better reserves and escape options, and improved economy.

As you might expect, takeoff performance is spectacular, on average more than 30 percent better — this for an airplane that's an excellent short-field performer to begin with. At its max weight, the Supervan, which enjoys a 260-pound gross weight increase over the stock Caravan to begin with, still gets off the ground around 400 feet earlier than the Grand Caravan does. And the Supervan clears a 50-foot obstacle around 1,000 feet sooner than the stock airplane, doing it in around 2,000 feet.

Rate of climb is impressive, with the Supervan enjoying a 1,400 fpm maximum rate of climb at gross weight on a warm day, compared with the published figure of 800 fpm for the stock Caravan. We felt the improvements in takeoff roll and rate of climb going out of Lockhart too. Light on fuel but with five people aboard, we were off in a few hundred feet — the airport didn't feel necessary. A small field would have sufficed. Once airborne, I pulled the nose up, chasing the best rate of climb of 90 knots indicated, which gave us a rate of climb approaching 2,000 fpm on that day. Near sea level on a cool day on a 4,000-foot runway, the extra power was meaningless to us. Under marginal conditions, however, say on a very hot day at high altitude with a big load, it could make all the difference between being able to make a flight (or make it with breathable margins) or not.

Though it is the primary difference between a stock Caravan and Texas Turbine's Supervan conversion, the added power of the engine is only one of the advantages you get with the TPE331-12JR. The TBO of the Honeywell is a big selling point. For commercial operators, the TBO is 7,000 hours, with a hot section at 3,600 hours, compared with a 3,600 TBO for the PT6-114a. For Part 91 operators, those figures are 5,000 hours and 2,500 hours, respectively.

Full article: http://www.flyingmag.com/gear/mods/refu ... e?page=0,0

[JDW]

guess there is the noise issue...

You'll need the extra pickup of the Garrett after the lake shore neighbours grab the pitchforks and run you out of town...

[trey kule]

edited after I read the article

[Forestdump]

Just a bit off topic but only by a smidge. Does anyone here have real life experience with the TKS campervan? Really want to hear from them.

[DHCdriver]

I'm very curious also, never had anything to do with the Garrett's, been a PT-6 guy most of the A/C that I've flown. Just wondering the fuel burn compared to the PT-6. Some of the other topics on here, have mentioned it was really good. Nice to here what others have to say? I like my 1900 but have always been a fan of the Caravan. DHC

[Redneck_pilot86]

The downside of the Garrett mods is that you lose the IFR. With the -42 used in the blackhawk mod, you get the extra power and retain the IFR (still to be certified in Canada, but word is its close. Already certified by the FAA)

[Panama Jack]

The downside of the Garrett mods is that you lose the IFR. With the -42 used in the blackhawk mod, you get the extra power and retain the IFR (still to be certified in Canada, but word is its close. Already certified by the FAA)

I was just about to ask about that while reading the thread. Thanks for the info.

[ettw]

Im still pissed about the money I lost on the TSX when AOG went under......It was going to shorten up my retirement timeline for sure.

Sigh.......

ETTW