The International Cessna 170 Association

sfarringer wrote:Guess that explains why no one has it on a C170!

Seems like their business model is kind of self-limiting, but apparently they have all the business they want!

I work for an OEM, and every day we get calls along the lines of "if you'd only certify XYZ I'd be a customer!" When we get enough of those we do it. Funny thing, when I call most of those people back they seem to have lost their check book. That's ok because I factor that in, and for most part they were well intentioned. They tell a bunch of people and I eventually sell anyway. But the point is that as an OEM you have to really, really be careful about where you stick your R&D dollars. We can't chase every opportunity.

If you are wary of funding their development (and taking my OEM hat off and putting my customer hat on....I would be), then spread the risk. Cessna built 5000 170's. Find 10-15 other people to go in on roup buy. Each throw in $1500 and go to MT with that. Putting my OEM hat back in, if I can get15 customers to put money in, even a little bit, it's getting done.

DEM

Or talk to John Nielsen at Flight Resource. He has many STCs for MT installations. That's really what you're talking about here, isn't it? An STC for installing the prop on an O300?

Each engine/prop/installation has unique vibration characteristics that require investigation. It's beyond me, but it costs money to do that research/approval process...all done in the interests of safety-first, then practicality, then profitability. When the Continental engine was dropped in order to use the Lycomings Cessna had already purchased for the Cardinal fiasco... this engine lost it's future market and it's development-attraction to OEMs.

There have been some more developments and all hope is not lost.

Give me a little time to tighten up the loose ends and I’ll report back.

Talked to them at the AK Airmen gathering this weekend, They said they made a fixed pitch for our 8 bolt engines and since it's a wooden prop it falls under the TCDS. Anyone have any experiacne using MT fixed Pitch? I am looking for performance like with the 8042 seaplane prop?

G280driver wrote:There have been some more developments and all hope is not lost.

Give me a little time to tighten up the loose ends and I’ll report back.

Any updates? I've reached out to Flight Resource to see if they have any performance data for the MT 80" Ultra on the C145/O300, and what they thought about the electric CS option.