Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Received: from [24.50.193.34] (account <marv@lancaironline.net>)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 4.0b6)
  with HTTP id 1660454 for <lml@lancaironline.net>; Tue, 30 Jul 2002 21:19:48 -0400
From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Turbine power
To: lml
X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro Web Mailer v.4.0b6
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 21:19:48 -0400
Message-ID: <web-1660454@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <20020730221355.BLVW28706.fed1mtao03.cox.net@cx1149477-a>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Posted for Robert Dorsey <rmd-mcse@cox.net>:

There is one thing that you have to be aware of regarding "rated HP"
figures for turbines, and it depends on the model and manufacturer--many
times the HP listed is de-rated. This gives a better reliability due to
cooler burn and same HP delivery for a range of altitude. Not sure if the
smaller turbine manufacturers do this, but I would inquire if I were in the
market.
For instance, the engines on the Piper 400LS are de-rated to produce 1000
SHP, and they also produce that up to a very high altitude (fuel controller
dials in fuel flow based on info sent to it by the DEEC). During
developement 1750 SHP was easily attained on the same engine. 
Bob