Carter Test Flight Updates

Hognose

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
2,182
Location
Seacoast New Hampshire, USA
Aircraft
PA-28/J-3/various
Total Flight Time
Gyro - 2.5! FW, hundreds not thousands. Helo, 0 (some day!)
Talked to Larry Neal tonight. We mostly talked about his business but also covered the latest test flights at Olney, which are not up on Carter's website yet.

Essential points -- they are flying a new rotor with more length (IIRC this one is 35 feet and the old one was 32), integral "spinner" or "hub fairing," and integral droop stops. Smoother than ever and they are flying consistently at pretty high Mu values (in Feb with the old rotor they were maxing out in the .8 neighbourhood). He likes the new rotor and the engineers are reducing/reviewing the data now.

In addition, the powerplant has changed. It's got the same GM crate motor putting out 350/380 HP, but the new propeller has made a real difference. The prop is putting out over 1800 lbs thrust vice 1400 on the last one, which is a pretty significant improvement.

There are some other changes -- the machine's a bit heavier, but better balanced (no more great wad of ballast in the nose), the ballistic chute is improved, etc. Between the Feb. flights and these April flights they also made two mods to try to resolve a yaw condition that was cropping up at high speed (160kt) back in February. Because I wasn't expecting to talk about the CCTD, I hadn't done my homework and didn't ask Larry about this.

This could be the breakout year for the CCTD, guys -- and for the gyroplane. And this isn't even Larry's big news.

cheers

-=K=-
 
crate motor, oh boy.

crate motor, oh boy.

I hope its the better crate engine with all the forged parts.

and not the piece of junk they have been foisting off on the driveway gurus. that engine was junk, as it is put together with junk. They had a big sticker on the manifold saying "not for marine use".

I called gm tech support and after 4 phone calls I finally got to speak with someone who told me it was because it could not take the duty cycle, meaning dont run it at revs because it will come apart or burn up. Great deal for the money though, for your pickup. In an aircraft, I hope they reworked the powerplant. The hypernuetic pistons are not worth the ashtrays they make. Not that I smoke but even their wiz bang "pink" rods are crap. I sent back all the gm high po stuff when I was building my 350 for my sea ray last year. was very dissappointed with the quality of the gm speed parts



Jonathan
 
I think theirs is an LS1. I have a 385 HP ZZ4 in my Corvette and am very happy with it. I blew up the two previous motors (L98s, ptui!). And many clutches. Unfortunately with the ZZ4 I blew up the ZF 6-speed (synchros) so now it's a five-speed (skipping 2nd) unless one doubleclutches. Doubleclutching extends the life of the clutches, too (and the flywheels, $1100 wholesale, ouch).

FWIW the L98 had the pink rods, and the rods weren't my problem. Once it was overheating and once oiling to the top end. or rather, not oiling to the top end. Funny as I always think of oiling problems in a Ford context (I have a 65 Mustang and helped a buddy with a Shelby-alloy-427-engined Cobra last year. I used to have a 427 Galaxie and I know that motor's failings all too well).

However, while car engines are standard tech in their own realm, I would normally stay away from an auto engine in an aircraft. If what you want to do is tinker with an engine, get as bog-standard an airframe as possible and make the engine your focus. When you have an airframe with some ridiculous number of patents applied for (I think Jay is over 20?) then an experimental engine will hold you back.

The right engine for the CCTD would have been (and still is) the Rolls-Royce (Allison) 250. It makes 420 (and up) HP, it's lighter than the V8, IIRC, and it's got about 10% of the moving parts count and 1% of the metal-on-metal friction. It's a lot more money than one auto engine install, but I reckon the Carter crew is at about six by now.

And Harry, you're absolutely right -- I still haven't posted Larry's Big News!

cheers

-=K=-
 
Since my first visit to CArter's last year I had the impression of a big problem with weight, just to get 4.000 lbs airborne is a big headache, but the man is an engineer and must know what he is doing.
Little things always cost him days of replacing parts and redoing stuff, and that is the big plague over there, but they are very close do achieve the proposal.
You can not make mistakes around that ship it is costly.
Heron
 
correct myself,

correct myself,

Actually the pink rods are no longer being made, they are still available in limited qtys. However GM is foisting of heavy "powder'd" metal rods that look like they came out of a house wifes cookie tray, which is great if they were for eating but not for use in a high hp environment. There were so many casting defects and stressrisers it was scary. At least the holes were drilled in the right places though.

I think you could build a sustainable gm engine but not one currently being put together by the foreign labor with the cheap parts that are marked "high performance".

Jonathan

I wish them luck though.
 
Carter Copter

Carter Copter

Olney eh?......I grew up about 25 miles from that airport.

Glad Carter Copters is getting some use of the airport. A local gyro club is having a fly-in there 23, April. Might be my chance to interact with some gyro pilots.
 
Olney

Olney

MattPearson said:
That's us Charlie! The TEXAS Rotorcraft Association. Hope to see you there.

GREAT! Hope to meet you there. Just look for an old curmudgeon with a cheesy mustache wandering around looking quite lost! :D
 
Charlie,
You and Matt are just a few minutes away from each other. Don' tell me you have never seen Matt dragging the wheels of "Superfly" in Lake Lewisville. :D

Fly Safe,
Chris
 
Back
Top