This Denali is on track to be some real competition for other SETPs.

Very cool. I hope that new GE motor kills it. Looks great

Specifically, GE noted that a total of 855 conventionally manufactured parts has been reduced to 12 additive parts, including sumps, bearing housings, frames, exhaust case, combustor liner, heat exchangers and stationary flow path components.

I hope that's a game-changer. Sad though, that if successful it will mean the loss of highly skilled jobs.

Ashley

[youtube]https://youtu.be/sOfNp6ypF0c[/youtube]

It will be interesting to learn what this engine will actually do BETTER than the PT-6. If the HP is essentially the same, its going to have to be much more efficient, cheaper and have much longer TBO to really hurt PW powered planes.

It's a free turbine, so I wouldn't think it would have tons better SFC. But I know they have fuel slingers rather than nozzles, as well as higher TBO, so this seems to promise a lower operating cost.

No HSI helps too.

I would think it is reasonable that Pratt is marketing it's fadec version of the PT6 to various manufacturers. When there is any announcement of it being picked up for an airframe things will get interesting.

The GE revision of the Walter 601 which they have labeled the H80 shows a little better SFC than a comparable Pratt, but before GE bought in, the 601 was a fuel hog compared to a PT6. The GE engineers certainly know how to squeeze efficiency out of a reverse flow engine.

This new GE engine is supposed to have variable stators which could turn out to be a huge benefit in fuel consumption. With the ability to control the volume of air going through the engine at lower altitudes, you should be able to achieve the engine efficiency that is generally only available up high where the ITT maxes out for your desired HP production.

I hope it makes PT-6 powered planes depreciate faster than "Which plane is best" threads pop up on BT.

Once the PC-12 becomes a "bottom feeder" TP, I can get one!

Maybe this has been answered elsewhere, but why isn't the Garrett TPE331 engine being produced and used, given its superior economics to the PT6?

Because it doesn't really exhibit superior economics. Repair costs on the Garretts have really gone up due to a few rule changes on how they handle cracks in the rotating components. They are also crazy noisy on the ground, have fewer knowledgeable mechanics/shops, very little if any PMA support, and have almost no OEM uses any more. They are also more difficult to engineer into a single engine application due to the rear exhaust.

Honeywell have really botched up the Garrett line. They're not a good owner. They should sell the line to someone who cares about it. The engines are great and have superior SFC.

I actually mostly disagree. I think Honeywell has done some incrementally good things to support the engine and refine some parts. I don't think their HSI/Overhaul pricing is rapacious compared to P&W.

They are not doing a lot of new development on the engines, though.

They seem to be doing zero marketing or trying to attract new customers. They missed the whole SETP wave.