Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

Thread: Power of UL POWER AERO ENGINES ?

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    REUNION ISLAND - Indian Ocean
    Posts
    6

    Power of UL POWER AERO ENGINES ?

    Hi !

    I am a owner of a UL260i motor (from the belgian UL POWER AERO ENGINES company)... which is yet to be started...

    I seriously doubt the output figures given by the company. Max output is supposed to be 95 - 97hp. It happens to be around 79 - 85hp after various investigations.

    Is it a widely spread engine in the USA ? Are there any owners in this forum, and if so, are you happy with it ?

    Thanks ?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sacramento, California, United States
    Posts
    236
    may want to place this on the hombuilders corner as well.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Oklahoma City, OK
    Posts
    199
    Check the RV12 forum on VAF. There's a guy on there that put one in an RV12. IIRC, it flew pretty good.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    REUNION ISLAND - Indian Ocean
    Posts
    6
    What is VAF ? Where is it ?


    Edit : thanks to malexander below

    2d Edit : impossible to register !!!
    unable to answer to the anti robot questions
    What is the model number of the first RV that Richard VanGrunsven offered for sale at Van's Aircraft?
    What is the last digit of the localizer frequency in the ILS or LOC RWY 16L approach at Fort Worth's Alliance Airport (KAFW)?
    Answers in PM ?
    Last edited by MYR; 09-12-2012 at 05:38 AM.
    I'm a French speaking person. Sorry for the mistakes I can make.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Oklahoma City, OK
    Posts
    199
    Quote Originally Posted by MYR View Post
    What is VAF ? Where is it ?
    VAF is Vans Air Force web site. It's a web site owned by Doug Reeves dedicated to the RV line of aircraft. Lots of information on there.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    12
    MYR, those questions are there just to stop automated spamming of their boards. The first RV offered for sale was the RV-3.
    They link to the approach plate for KAFW - http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1209/06918IL16L.PDF so the localizer freq. is 110.15

    I've generally heard good reports on the UL power engines. They quote powers at higher RPMs than Continental/ Lycoming /Rotax so there may be some loss due to using a smaller propeller or a lower RPM limit. In other respects the quoted powers should be comparable.

    Where were you informed of these lower power figures?

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    REUNION ISLAND - Indian Ocean
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark View Post
    Where were you informed of these lower power figures?
    This diagram comes from a german factory called SILENT HEKTIK that makes improvements with all sorts of engines :
    ps means hp
    1st line is Power announced by the Factory
    2sd line is the point of Max Power mesured at the Propeller Shaft
    3rd line is the point of Max Torque
    As you can see the max power of the UL POWER 260i was found at 2700 rpm for 79 hp.
    I'm a French speaking person. Sorry for the mistakes I can make.

  8. #8
    FlyingRon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    CJR / NC26
    Posts
    972
    You'll note that the rated 95 HP is for 3300 RPM and the German site measured 79 at 2700, which seems reasonable to me. It's almost perfectly proportional (probably within the margin of error).
    POWER = torque x RPM.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    12
    It does seem odd that they are quoting output power at a lower RPM for the direct drive engines.

    With a fixed pitch prop, you are unlikely to get the rated power of any engine at take-off as you won't achieve the rated RPM.

    It is difficult to get an exact like-for-like comparison between the UL power and the Rotax as they are rated at very much different propeller RPMs. You may be forced to a smaller diameter prop with the UL power engine to avoid transonic tip speeds which yield lower efficiency and much more noise. The smaller diameter prop will provide roughly comparable thrust in cruise at a given power output, but the static thrust will be reduced compared to a motor that produces the same power at a lower RPM turning a larger diameter prop.

    Using a larger prop and downrating the RPM limit will give poorer performance than the smaller prop at the full RPM rating.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    REUNION ISLAND - Indian Ocean
    Posts
    6
    Maybe "FlyingRon" and "Mark" are right. Maybe "Silent Hektik" has determined that these direct drive engines have no more power at a higher rpm.
    Anyway, it is sure that аt above 2700/2900 rpm we are compelled to use little diameter propellers, so it is rather difficult to use the available power, because little propellers don't blow a lot of air around the cowlings.
    I'm a French speaking person. Sorry for the mistakes I can make.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •