The International Cessna 170 Association

So if you had two of them on a 170, could you log multi-engine turbine PIC? Now that might make it worth the effort! Especially with the price of fuel coming down.

Woudln't you need a type rating to fly the 170 then?

I always wanted a type rating! C170 Turbojet, has a nice ring to it! Not many other multi-turbine taildraggers either.

As long as we're hijacking..........

Whatinhell are you guys smoking ???

hilltop170 wrote:Miles-
Are you selling those jet engines out of your hangar? Might be a good retirement hobby!

If I were, I sure wouldn't be doing it here... (ABC's of Retirement: Anywhere But California)

Actually, I'd never heard of these until Arash's post. The address is over at Mountain Valley Gliderport (that's L94 for Dick...)

Aryana wrote:Use that fellows aluminum camera mount for the strut, adapt it to hold this turbine and voila! Minor alteration? Temporary attachment?

Another 104 lbs of thrust with one on each side. Hope the struts don't rip off though!

http://www.sitewavesstores5.com/mm5/mer ... _Code=TURB

Now with internal kerosene start. No propane needed!

Max Thrust: 52 lbs
Engine Weight: 5.53 lbs
Diameter: 5.07"
Length: 13.65"
RPM Range: 33,000 to 112,000
Max Temp: 750C
Fuel Rate at Full Power: 24.7 fl oz per minute

image.jpg

LOL!

The guy that owns JetCat USA (and CST) is a former coworker of mine, and like a second father, John Redman. Fascinating guy; ex-AF crew chief on F-16s and F-117s, incredible scale modeler, full-scale pilot- one of the best guys you could ever hope to meet. Anybody in the Tehachapi area that's looking for something interesting to do should stop over and visit him. He's just started flying again full-scale again and is looking to get a Rans S-20. I keep telling him he needs a 170. His shop (for both companies) is located at L94.

Put in a big alternator and install a couple of old tube vacuum cleaners on the sides and let'r rip!

I read the other day that Cessna did put a turbine in a 170A. so anybody have any info on that subject. there wasn't any documented evidence with the statements but there was something about airflow control over the wings ,plus a inclusion of electric motors to blow air over the wings . this was done in the 1950,s ?? history is repeating itself.

Wasn't there something about that experimental airplane in the book, "Cessna, Wings For The World", by William B. Thompson, the Cessna test pilot?

blueldr wrote:Wasn't there something about that experimental airplane in the book, "Cessna, Wings For The World", by William B. Thompson, the Cessna test pilot?

I believe that the model was the Cessna 305 (two variants) that employed a bunch of other wizardry to study the effects of boundary layers. I believe the quote from the test pilot regarding the airplane was "it was a rather nasty little monster".

blueldr wrote:Whatinhell are you guys smoking ???

Only the best BL!

Seriously, just having some what-if? fun.

ghostflyer wrote:I read the other day that Cessna did put a turbine in a 170A. so anybody have any info on that subject. there wasn't any documented evidence with the statements but there was something about airflow control over the wings ,plus a inclusion of electric motors to blow air over the wings . this was done in the 1950,s ?? history is repeating itself.

That is indeed a true story except it wasn't a 170. However, that turbine powered a compressor to provide massive quantities of air blowing over the wings for some boundary layer experiment, not thrust to speed up the plane. It apparently didn't work too well from what I remember reading.

gahorn wrote:Put in a big alternator and install a couple of old tube vacuum cleaners on the sides and let'r rip!

I think you are referring to Electrolux. And if I remember correctly from taking my mom's apart, it was indeed a turbine! I'll never forget the smell from that exhaust every Sunday after church when I had to vacuum the house.

hilltop170 wrote:

ghostflyer wrote:I read the other day that Cessna did put a turbine in a 170A. so anybody have any info on that subject. there wasn't any documented evidence with the statements but there was something about airflow control over the wings ,plus a inclusion of electric motors to blow air over the wings . this was done in the 1950,s ?? history is repeating itself.

That is indeed a true story except it wasn't a 170. However, that turbine powered a compressor to provide massive quantities of air blowing over the wings for some boundary layer experiment, not thrust to speed up the plane. It apparently didn't work too well from what I remember reading.

We discussed this some time ago here.

It was W. D. Thompson, and it was a highly-modified 170-B/305 which used fans to blow air thru the wings and exit vents in the wings to effect the boundary layer. The Army was interested but their curiosity diverted toward helicopters which made the project sort of interesting but useless. (another example of gov't over-indulgence, perhaps...?? helicopters? )