Re: production time -- D-Motor Aircraft Engine Users Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 06:34:07 11/08/12 Thu
Author: Bob P
Subject: Re: production time
In reply to: Bob P 's message, "Re: production time" on 06:32:50 11/08/12 Thu

>D-Motor has had a long string of missed production
>targets, going back for a few years.
>
>On the bright side, D-motor seem to have delayed
>production whilst they improve the engine's design
>(rather than using its customers as test pilots as one
>aircraft engine company seems to do). But if you want
>to go flying any time soon behind a D-Motor, I
>wouldn't hold your breath.
>
>The D-Motor website seems to be going backwards -
>months after the change, half the website
>documentation still refers to the superceded LF26 but
>with claimed performance figures of the LF27. The
>"news" section in their website (impressive because it
>gave what appeared to be an "honnest" description of
>their development program and engine performance
>"hiccups" ), appears to have been wiped clean!
>
>
>And D-Motor's "tunnel vision" in deciding not to offer
>a bed mount option (as provided by Rotax, and even
>Jabiru) makes me worry whether there are any other
>good basic engineering principals that they may have
>ignored/ruled out.
>
>If only they would offer a de-spec'd (simple ignition,
>carbed engine) with a bed mount as an alternative to
>the Rotax 582.
>
>
>just my thoughts
>
>Bob

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]