DeltaHawk for RV-14

[cjs]

All,
Here are some more CADs on the engine installation. These show more detail on what will be the final locations of the heat exchangers and sundry other things.
The engine and component layout phase is taking longer than we expected - but, this is largely because our goal is a complete package ready to present to other RV builders, not just a Frankenstein-ed test bed that isn't ready for mass uptake. If we are successful in this (and, I believe we will be) - there will be very little development work left to do between the package (engine prop, firewall forward stuff) we're putting on my RV14 and what will be later offered to the general RV14 community of builders.

Here are some of the components we are working on and a few thoughts on each:

Cowling: DH is working with a cowling manufacturer on a carbon fiber model. The shape will be very similar to the stock cowl, but distinct enough to telegraph there is something different under the hood. There will be some weight savings as well.

Prop: DH is speaking with a number of prop manufacturers. We have a few choices right now on props that will work, but are looking to narrow this down to one or two 'preferred' props. There is potential to save weight in this area as well (both in the prop and the spinner components).

Panel: We have been working directly with Aerotronics on the panel. Jason Smith (Aertronics) has been exceptionally helpful. Synergy and I have worked with him in the past and his technical knowledge combined with his understanding of pilot needs (he flys, too) is invaluable. The DH engine being different in many ways from the lycoming (no mags, no plugs, turbocharged, etc., etc.) has a lot of downstream impacts on the architecture and functionality of the panel. Jason has helped us sort this all out. We only just finalized the design and I will soon publish the layout for all to see. Its a full IFR Garmin set-up. I've been flying extensively (about 1000 hours) behind a similarly designed and equipped panel (albiet, for a Lycoming), and from a pilots/flying perspective its great.

With all this said - I have to say we will not be flying before OSH 2024. Bummer. It does, however, look like we will have the engine package installed to the fuselage and on display at Air Venture 2024 for everyone to see. We should have static test runs completed by then as well.

Once Air Venture 2024 has ended, the engine/fuse will be shipped to SynergyAir in Eugene for final assembly and test flights. Realisticly, this means the first flight data will probably not be out until October. We will, nonetheless, keep posting on the progress as we move forward.

One last note - Delta Hawk and Piper Aircraft Company just reached an agreement to "begin development of a Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) for installation of DeltaHawk’s engine in Piper’s legendary PA-44 Seminole twin in both new and retrofit aircraft". I know there are folks who question DH's commitment and/or capabilities to fullfill the promises of this engine's development. Its certainly been a long time in process. But, there are many signs to indicate they are indeed committed and it appears many end users are excited about the capabilities of the engine. I can attest that they are fully engaged on working with the experimental community.

And, one last addendum: Here's a YouTube link to an Aviation Consumer piece on DeltaHawk at Sun'N' Fun. If you look fast at the 5:30 mark you'll see our RV14 project.

 

[benjaman]

Craig,

Thanks for the updates on this and please keep them coming, great work you’re all doing there.

I’m new to homebuilding having just started my RV-10 tailcone, but not to product development. It’s one thing to develop great technology but another to be commercially successful with it. You can have the best solution for any given challenge, but if market conditions are against you it can be almost impossible to build a business around it. Until those conditions change or you find a better application. If engine manufacturers are able to utilize decades-old machinery to make proven engines at low cost but can sell them for high prices, that’s hard to compete with. Until fuel options change, for example. Disruption is hard, but it’s amazing when it happens. Before it happens, most people think it is impossible. When it does, most people say it was inevitable. It never was and it never is—it takes relentless developers to keep pushing and bridge the gap.

Kudos to you and the team and I wish you best of luck. By the time I get to my FWF kit, I look forward to having another engine option to choose from.

 

[Yank]

Craig,

Thanks for the updates on this and please keep them coming, great work you’re all doing there.

I’m new to homebuilding having just started my RV-10 tailcone, but not to product development. It’s one thing to develop great technology but another to be commercially successful with it. You can have the best solution for any given challenge, but if market conditions are against you it can be almost impossible to build a business around it. Until those conditions change or you find a better application. If engine manufacturers are able to utilize decades-old machinery to make proven engines at low cost but can sell them for high prices, that’s hard to compete with. Until fuel options change, for example. Disruption is hard, but it’s amazing when it happens. Before it happens, most people think it is impossible. When it does, most people say it was inevitable. It never was and it never is—it takes relentless developers to keep pushing and bridge the gap.

Kudos to you and the team and I wish you best of luck. By the time I get to my FWF kit, I look forward to having another engine option to choose from.

I think the fuel options may end up being the market disruption needed (especially in California). 100UL vs 100LL cost and availability will be, in my opinion, a big factor in the success of this engine. Keeping my fingers crossed that they succeed!

 

[Dad's RV-10]

If you look fast at the 5:30 mark you'll see our RV14 project.

 

[rocketman1988]

I think the fuel options may end up being the market disruption needed (especially in California). 100UL vs 100LL cost and availability will be, in my opinion, a big factor in the success of this engine. Keeping my fingers crossed that they succeed!

Me too but I’ve been waiting the better part of two decades…

 

[cjs]

All,

A few more things to share. See below the CADs on what should be the final design and layout of the ducting as well as the cowl design. DeltaHawk is certainly letting function drive form as the performance of the package is paramount. However, I think they've done a great job maintaining the aesthetic of the RV14, while allowing for the distinct design elements that differentiate the DeltaHawk powered RV14 from one with a Lycoming. As beauty is in the eye of the beholder - let us know what you think. Incidentally, as folks will likely spot these, let me point out a few differences between the stock RV and the DH in regards to the FF:

> Yes, the cowling is longer. By about 3". As I posted earlier in this thread, its almost identicle to the cowling length on my current RV14. Hopefully this will give some perspective on how 'long' the nose will be. My 2-cents, it will not be very noticable, and likely only to those who are very familiar with the stock RV14. I'll post more detail on the exact structure of the cowling as we get it fitted in place.

> The nose cone/spinner are larger than the stock RV14. I cannot speak to this (aestheticly) as I have the stock ones on my current14. But, from looking at the CAD's, it appears it will look fine.

> There is an inlet on the lower cowl. This is similar to what I currently have on my 14, and also somewhat like is seen on a lot of RV7's. The shape of the DeltaHawk inlet is unique and will likely be the most noticable clue that to whats under the hood.


Fabrication is moving forward and, as I mentioned previously, DH will have the entire set-up (FF package with engine) mated to the fuselage to show at Air Venture this year before sending it on the Eugene for final assembly (of the airframe) and initial flight testing. The caveat here is that until static testing is completed, the design is still subject to modifications. Much work has been done to ensure everything plays well together - but, as builders are all too aware of, nothing quite duplicates the real world. That said, DeltaHawk's experience gained with the Cirrus and other installations is proving to be a great benefit to the RV14 project.

Finally, I will have something to share on the panel later this week.

Craig

 

[Carl Froehlich]

Craig,

How will you make the transition from the cowl inlets to the duct? I’d guess neoprene sleeves like on the James cowl and plenum.

When you say the spinner is larger is that length, diameter or both? Like the RV-10 the 14 could use a larger diameter spinner. I’m using a 14” on the new RV-10 project.

Carl

 

[cjs]

Carl,
Re nose cone/spinner - A bit bigger all around. As for the cowling - as we get into the smaller details, the chances of something being modified increases until the final design is fitted. So I can’t speak to the transition yet. Nonetheless, DH should have all this worked out by the Air Venture and on display for all to see.
Craig

 

[czechsix]

A few more things to share. See below the CADs on what should be the final design and layout of the ducting as well as the cowl design. DeltaHawk is certainly letting function drive form as the performance of the package is paramount. However, I think they've done a great job maintaining the aesthetic of the RV14, while allowing for the distinct design elements that differentiate the DeltaHawk powered RV14 from one with a Lycoming. As beauty is in the eye of the beholder - let us know what you think.

Hi Craig, thanks for sharing the pics of the updated cowl and ductwork. Overall it's looking pretty good but one thing that jumps out to me is the break in the plane between the forward upper fuselage skin and the top surface of the cowl where they meet at the firewall. On the original RV-14, Van's lofted the upper surface lines to flow nicely together in the same plane. This is one of those things that won't bother some folks, but people like me who are cursed with an eye for this sort of detail will notice the disparity immediately and it will be much more obvious on a completed airplane with glossy paint.

Looking back at the pics in your 4/18/24 post, I don't see any structure (engine, mount, etc) that is up high enough to prevent lowering the upper cowl surface to be in the same plane as the forward fuselage skin, so I hope DH will consider making that change to improve the aesthetics. The larger spinner will require the cowl 'fairing' area behind it to extend further aft before it blends/disappears into the upper surface, but IMO that would look much better than how it is currently lofted.

Regarding the spinner, no surprise it needs to be bigger due to the larger diameter starter ring gear (presumably needed for mechanical advantage in starting a high compression engine). I think it will look fine, but curious whether DH will be making a custom spinner or leaving that to prop manufacturers like Hartzell & WW (er...which are both the same now)? For ideal aesthetics and aerodynamics, the lines of the spinner and cowl should match nicely...Van's has accomplished that by designing & providing both. I hope there will be a matching carbon fiber spinner available (polished or chromed metal is pretty but very expensive, heavier, and prone to cracks and other maintenance down the road that I don't want to deal with...been there, done that).

The cooling inlets in the pictures look like they have a sharp edge, this might just be a preliminary drawing but in the final iteration there should be a generous radius around the inboard edges of the inlets (lots of NACA research to support this and you can also see it in how Van's designed the original -14 cowl inlets).

Also, the top view drawing you provided does not appear to have any engine offset. The RV-14, like most low wing airplanes, was designed with the engine angled several degrees nose right to help reduce the amount of nose right rudder/trim needed due to P-factor. Obviously this mounting angle affects the engine mount, forward cowl shape, and possibly the fit of the ducting as well. Curious why DH doesn't appear to be implementing any offset into the design for the -14?

Thanks,