Cessna’s New Turbo Diesel 172 Skyhawk

Cessna will offer the 172S Skyhawk with a Thielert turbo diesel engine with deliveries to start in mid-2008.

25 Responses to Cessna’s New Turbo Diesel 172 Skyhawk

  1. zfaylor September 2, 2008 at 3:00 pm #

    yea thats practical…or we could use diesel and run it on vegetable oil or atf or used motor oil or another one of the thousands of products a diesel can burn. i love how ppl like you think electricity comes from magic.

  2. chrismd00 October 11, 2008 at 8:12 pm #

    You would never have enough energy from those solar panels. That is a foolish idea. That would never work in this plane. Look at the shape and size of current solar powered craft.

  3. Merlin2Stage2Speed October 23, 2008 at 11:13 am #

    With light aircraft such as the 172, the power to weight ratio is an especially critical design element. Sure, there are a range of electric motors light enough and compact enough to fit the 172, with > 110Kw power ratings and high torque. But the excessive weight of the batteries that would be required to provide any decent sort of range effectively kills the concept of an electric powered 172. You’d never get the aircraft off the ground.

  4. tpvalley November 28, 2008 at 10:12 am #

    Can u buy diesel at airports?
    or will this run on jet A?

  5. tpvalley November 28, 2008 at 10:12 am #

    actually there is a solar powered plane!
    A huge unmanned flying wing, takes hours to each height, it wasgoing to be used as a satelite altenative etc! as it could stay up for ages

  6. bikersrule07 December 2, 2008 at 8:18 am #

    you are bang on sir, i was a electrical engineer,and i love people like freddytuber,who thinks the whole would can run on elec power,hmmm how and where would you get all this power from?…

  7. freddytuber December 24, 2008 at 6:01 pm #

    How said magic? Solar cells on the wings! Like the SUNSEEKER plane on YouTube did.

  8. freddytuber December 24, 2008 at 6:03 pm #

    Never? That’s what I call positive thinking. Pretty dumb actually since SUNSEEKER already proved otherwise.

  9. freddytuber December 24, 2008 at 6:04 pm #

    Absolutely right, thoug it was unmanned. The SONEX and SUNSEEKER are manned planes.

  10. freddytuber December 24, 2008 at 6:06 pm #

    Electrical engineer? Ha, you don’t even know of solar cells! If the plane is parked, wind generators could also be deployed. During flight wind generators could be used to reduce induced drag and charge batteries. Do your homework befoer posting here.

  11. freddytuber December 24, 2008 at 6:10 pm #

    Not enough energy from solar panels? SUNSEEKER has a solar sustain mode and already flew with an average of 50 mph on it. And cells will get more efficent all the time.

  12. bikersrule07 December 25, 2008 at 2:25 am #

    Really Freddytuber, if its soooooooo easy to make,you make it…..you make the promise that it will work,you go to the banks,to get a loan to build it.
    and how in the fuck,would adding turbines to an airfoil reduce induced drag?? please explain that 1 ,instead of blowing crap out of your ass

  13. freddytuber January 4, 2009 at 2:37 am #

    You assume a lot my friend and it makes you look dumb. I am talking about wind generators, not turbines. How I would do it? Pay me and I tell you! You are an idiot – so shut up, biker. Everthing is easy if put your mind to it. Well, maybe not exactly YOUR mind.

  14. bikersrule07 January 4, 2009 at 9:52 am #

    okay as i said,you goto the bank,you get the loan,and i sure hell aint paying you crap,im not an idiot,and you still havent said anything about how adding wind gens to wings would reduce induced drag,i really dont think you know what your talking about when it comes to induced drag.

  15. bobdagangster January 9, 2009 at 12:46 am #

    you are wrong. To power a c-172 with only electrical power continuously, and assuming that you can catch all the energy with the solar panel(100% efficiency in full sunshine), you would need a solar panel with an area bigger than the wing area of a 747. An other problem is that commercial solar panels are no more than 15% efficient.
    Conclusion: you obviously can’t power a conventionnal plane(not a glider/motor glider like sunseeker) from solar power only.

  16. freddytuber January 15, 2009 at 11:29 pm #

    Solar panel efficiency is up to almost 30% now and still improving. SUNSEEKER already flew in a solar power sustain mode, so I don’t get your 747 wing area since it is already proven that it works on a converted sail plane.

  17. sideslide23 February 12, 2009 at 8:21 pm #

    I hope this aircraft runs on Bio diessle, because if it does, I’ll be dieing to buy this plane

  18. louisluigi March 25, 2009 at 3:29 pm #

    Finally another fuel propelled engine in these aircraft. Man aviation is so fucking conservative, unbelievable. But hey, better late then never!

  19. cardinaldriver March 30, 2009 at 1:40 am #

    Too bad Thielert flaked out like it did. They had a good thing going until they started mismanaging the company. I just feel sorry for all those DA-40 owners who bought those with the Thielert’s and now, can’t get parts for them.

  20. cardinaldriver March 30, 2009 at 4:11 pm #

    Sorry, I meant DA-42 in that last comment…just caught that.

  21. jmitterii2 April 13, 2009 at 5:15 am #

    Is Jet A cheaper than 100LL? Haven’t checked the prices lately. And I’m confused, he says its a deasel, but it can be fueled by Jet A?

  22. llaughridge April 22, 2009 at 6:58 pm #

    Diesel engines can run on Jet A, if so tuned.

  23. futurepilot764 May 4, 2009 at 7:01 pm #

    Actually there is a video on my favorites and they said by 2016 we’ll have bio diessle jet fuel that is cleaner burning and is about 50 cents a galllon. And the best part is you won’t need to make changes to today’s aircraft.

  24. tchapman1977 September 14, 2009 at 5:27 pm #

    It depends upon how the engine is built. Some piston engines can get a supplemental type certificate to run on automobile gas instead of 100LL (my father’s Piper Cherokee 235 had that certification). You have to adjust your maintenance schedules if you do use car gas (i.e. they’re performed sooner, rather than later). It’s possible w/a diesel as Jet-A is similar to diesel. It depends upon the price differentials of fuel vs. maintenance costs whether it’s financially beneficial to do so.

  25. SVnerd January 3, 2010 at 8:36 am #

    It’s not that it’s cheaper but it’s a question of availability. A flight school here in Saudi has to import 100LL from Europe because no one here refines the oil into 100LL. This means that the school is charging $300 an hour to rent a C-172SP! That and cessna spare parts are hard to come by in the middle east.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes