Rolls Royce Turbine Engine For Small Planes

A 300+ hp (flat rated) turbine that weighs well under 300 pounds designed for small general aviation aircraft. Is this what the high-end piston market has been waiting for? Pilots may be asking, and Mooney may have an answer.
Aviation news at www.avweb.com

[@DAV632]

Virtually NOTHING posted or in the news since 2012 on this engine... just a note that the RR 300 is in full development and going into craft such as the larger Robinson 4 place. A 300HP (roughly) at HALF the weight would require some serious re-jigging of any normal plane's CofG ratings but having worked that out you'd also be looking at an additional 250 to 275 lbs of fuel in a small single!!! Wow.

[@myobboy9973]

There have been 2 - 20 hp turbo shaft engines in the model aircraft world for ten years already, the turbo shaft has been with us for about 70 years, 45 years ago I got my PPL in a Cessna 152, which are apprently still a popular type, the GA world is just so slow. Since 1965, it has been like watching the presession of the equinoxes.

[@JEMHull-gf9el]

Put it on a J3 cub!!!

[@ztungaz]

why? the R66 blades aren't delaminating quickly enough for you?

[@gasturbine101]

What doers it cost per hour and the life between major overhauls?

[@mamulcahy]

Working with Mooney is the kiss of death!

[@747driver3]

Best airplanes ever. Love my Ovation. Wish it had this motor.

[@victorm3408]

Check out the Cessna 210P(pressurized) Silver Eagle or Beechcraft Bonanza (unpressurized) A36 Tradewinds with this engine. 200knots plus, better fuel economy than PT6 Pratt & Whitney, but what you pay for is reliablility. Comes at a price ($200k + installed, not sure?). Diesels will be interesting, although Thielerts on Diamonds were problematic. Avgas is on its way out and I don't trust pistons anyway. With the trend away from Twin Engines due to fuel costs, turbines are the way to go. I wouldn't trust a single engine diesel over a turbine. By the way, new Beechcraft singles will be diesels...

[@wlbrobinson]

This guy doesn't trust pistons ? your a know nothing

[@jlo13800]

Does this have oil injection like a 2 stroke or Rotron rotary?

[@cellokid5104]

Paul hasn't aged a day since 2008

[@lcprivatepilot1969]

Only his voice

[@lvgeorge]

What is the Cost of this Engine, per unit ? Can I install it in a Eclipse 400 type aircraft or Home-built that meets design qualifications? What are the design qualifications? Where are you, the manufacturers, currently using this engine? Thx...

[@damiandiesel1]

Not for a working man, and as you saw him avoid the direct question of fuel consumption, not competitive in terms of fuel efficiency when compared with a piston engine of similar output.

[@stealhty1]

Wow,FL250 Makes sense, They like to be flown at Full power he stated,but what if the air gets really choppy and we need to slowdown ?

[@PistonAvatarGuy]

Amazing to think that this tiny thing could replace an R-985 radial engine.

[@willjohnson3907]

They have one on a Cessna 188. It replaced a 520 though.

[@GeorgeSemel]

Well with 100 LL going by by, Thank you EPA and they are have a tough time with coming up with a replacement, This engine would solve a lot of problems. In most places in the world 100 LL Avgas is hard to come by. Jet -A , Diesel and home heating oil is the way to go. Would love to have it on my PA-32-300 that I fly. But like a lot of things that engine would set me back way more that what I spent on the airplane.

[@6mrviagra9]

"power to weight Ratio", more power in a lite Robby the better, yah can carry more also maneuver faster and fly through rugged terrain without a problem

[@rosewhite---]

is all the green bits plastic to get the weight down so low?

[@roysankar8501]

24gph? Thats like 50% more! Would this be suitable for a C206 sized plane?

[@oscarpimentel3364]

More cost of parts and overaul

[@SuperYellowsubmarin]

The R66 already the RR300 turbine, why would you need more power ?

[@mr.ginnationfunlifestyle3891]

Today it is 2020! What happened to this particular turbine today? I don‘t hear or see anything about it. 🤔

[@PepsiMagt]

It's used in s few light helicopters. It's very inexpensive for a turbine, but at 250000 $, it's very expensive for a light aircraft. And you will need to develop a custom gearbox for it.

[@brianb-p6586]

@@PepsiMagt No, it is not found in any aircraft. The RR300 is in some helicopters (the video mentions the Robinson R66), but the RR500 project was abandoned in 2012 - it never went into production.

[@PepsiMagt]

@@brianb-p6586 ok. Thx for the info

[@prophetsnake]

Hope it holds oil better than the RB-211 or Spey.

[@DaveAhl]

how does this compare to an old reliable PT 6? lower HP

[@ashsmitty2244]

700hp Walter burns 115-120 litres. Why is this so thirsty? Should be closer to 18 gallons for it to be relatively worthy.

[@timothyjones1866]

They forgot to mention what it's going to cost

[@russelhodtwalker2574]

will it work as a pusher prop

[@garrygballard8914]

So what ever happened to this ??? Haven't ever heard anything since.

[@oscarpimentel3364]

Guys, show the engine during the Guy talk, is more positive the vídeo, congratulatíons per engine however It did need bê criated 60 years Ago, is very simple, the Alison did make It joint with one kit Soloy for Hughes 300, Bell 47 and some planes is the C10 model with reduced HP and same type of Allison C18, however the costs I think is not did bê low. Because It not tive sucess tô salé.

[@rathwije1579]

This is the year 2016,Is this engine widely available in the market ,are there any more developments and how much please.

[@badsanta69]

+Rath Wije I see the helicopter variant is in R66, so hopefully we will see some STC and new production work. When the 100LL situation comes to a head, I hope this thing gets pumped out in quantity. www.rolls-royce.com/~/media/Files/R/Rolls-Royce/documents/customers/civil-aerospace/rr500-turboprop-tcm92-11545.pdf

[@rathwije1579]

Thanks.

[@moyadapne968]

3:12. Rolls Royce need a proof reader. (Number 3)

[@garethessex]

Quite right!

[@moyadapne968]

Thanks, but I haven't been able to sleep since I saw Tanner White said it one month before me. That'll learn me for not scrolling down prior to commenting :(

[@6mrviagra9]

will the RR500 fit in the Robinson R66?

[@rawmark]

i wonder if this engine is in the acclaim S?

[@thomasrose6962]

the cutting-edge turbines used in RC would put out twice that power using the same gearbox

[@Draxindustries1]

does this engine have a turbine or a turban, theres a huge difference..

[@XdriftfreakX]

can you put it in a y2k?

[@DarkShooper]

is it available from hobbyking?

[@av8rshane491]

Soon as they get one and reverse engineer it.

[@Dudeman9339]

i wanna see something like this powering our cars. would be neat to see that work. perhaps i could come up with something

[@miscbits6399]

If you don't mind a 40% fuel burn penalty..... Toyota spent 30 years trying to make a practical GTV then gave up and used the gearbox they'd developed for the task in the Prius with a conventional piston engine

[@allanradcliffe6204]

2018 any update?

[@cjellwood]

that will be strapped to a go kart before next year is ended i bet ya

[@drspastic]

why are these not in hybrid cars

[@brianb-p6586]

Inefficiency. The "mid-sixes" numbers they're talking about are in the range of 0.649 to 0.677 pounds of fuel per horsepower-hour (those are at maximum continuous power and cruise power, respectively), which is 0.395 to 0.412 kg/kWh. That's much higher fuel flow for the same power than a conventional piston engine; an 80-year-old aircraft engine might run 0.452 lb/(hp·hr) or 275 kg/kWh, and a modern car engine runs about 0.370 lb/(hp·hr) or 225 kg/kWh or better. And turbine engines get even less efficient in smaller sizes, so a car-sized engine would be really bad.

[@SuperYellowsubmarin]

Well, I wish I had !

[@flyingisamazing]

Cause a mooney can handle the speed

[@thirdyiii9649]

300+hp turboshaft weighting 300lbs. seriously? thats is a weight of piston engine power to weight ratio dude not good at all.what make is so heavy?

[@JB-zn1kx]

cost 2x what the air frame does

[@97bdwoody]

wtf is a TURBUN ? Geez !!!!

[@floatthecreek]

+97bdwoody Turbine, not turban.

[@doktorbimmer]

*poor brit have trouble pronouncing French words...*

[@tihspidtherekciltilc5469]

I may be able to afford the brochure but that's about it.

[@6mrviagra9]

Have you ever been Animal hunting in a helicopter before?

[@Love2FlyKAP]

What a joke. That surly will help kick start homebuilding and GA .... really!

[@kevinmoore4887]

For 4+ seat small aircraft that can use 300 hp and fly fast without falling apart, might be a good engine. Turbines run full throttle, high altitude , and fast. Not suitable for a Lyc 540 replacement. Maybe a bush plane, like a Caravan.

[@Studmasterify]

Buddysimo Simonetta i'm betting on the return of steam :}

[@thefireman285]

+ Buddysimo Simonetta, A few years ago I would have def. agreed with you. But now I really think it may be electric. The advancements in battery output and storeage has been phenominal.

[@brianmason3941]

i want this for my Valkyrie!!

[@fidelcatsro6948]

just use 2 hayabusa engines...its cheaper

[@falrus]

@@fidelcatsro6948 and burn twice less fuel

[@swim2kill]

It only weighs 13 lbs more than the rotax 915is with 300 hp. awesome engine

[@MarkT]

Don't understand why not start it up right there.

[@rat_king-]

Trade show rules..... they once got told off for starting a car in one. Buzz kills

[@ronaldreed7698]

Id put one on an airboat

[@TheCmoney84]

how much does this cost? 200k?

[@andrewpage9600]

TheCmoney84 lol. more like 1 million plus. the impeller at the inlet is around $85,000 by itself.

[@TheCmoney84]

dam son...

[@Justwantahover]

A million for a measly 300 hp engine?

[@fidelcatsro6948]

i think i prefer using 2 hayabusa engines!! cheaper!

[@cjellwood]

the US military tried that back in the 60's. There were officers wives driving around military housing areas in jet powered cars lol. it was not very practical for many reasons

[@leonardocoelhoneves9644]

muito blabla e pouco video conteudo!!!

[@TheSweettooth95]

can you poot it in a motorcycle?

[@Halakah7]

Done, lookup the TMC Dumont created by Brazilian ex-Formula One driver Tarso Marques...

[@talusranch990]

Yeah. anyone can afford it......m

[@mandarin1257]

Wow, I'm early!

[@daveverster7483]

Rolls Royce..jokers.We I civil aviation, especially GA have waited with bated breath for this powerplant..to no avail..nothing,.not even news! We'll stick with Allison and other American GA powerplants!

[@michaelmooney3369]

I worked on Allison 250's in the US Army on Kiowa and Kiowa warriors. I can't believe they retired them.

[@scottneil2427]

This video could just as well have been made in 1965. Typical GA plane = 50 gal tank, 48 gal usable. Using his 24 gph rate, we have 2 hr endurance - 0.75 reserve = 1.25 flight endurance X 250 mph average cruise (includes climb time) = 313 statute miles. Taking off from Santa Monica, you cannot make San Francisco or Las Vegas without landing. The challenge for these types of engines has always been consumption. We had 250 lb, 300ish hp turboprops like this since the 1960s.

[@scottneil2427]

Turboprops always had small dimensions. Turboprop nacelles have always been compact for this reason. I hope that wasn't his big breakthrough.

[@TheDave570]

@@scottneil2427 They have a half empty, half full mind set, which helps no one but their bottom line !!

[@miscbits6399]

the only way to omprove efficiency is recuperators, which add mass+bulk. That's probably doable on small engines but it takes a mindset change because it necessarily makes the package a lot larger

[@markg4459]

He also said the engines weigh about half what a reciprocating engine does. That means you would likely be able to carry more fuel than otherwise would be the case.

[@danielb516]

200 grand im looking for 15 grand ...later

[@toadamine]

You can't even get a small lycoming for that, maybe aviation isnt your thing 🤓👍

[@TRPGpilot]

You maybe need to take up fishing, (from the shore) instead lol

[@BradyDearinger]

@@toadamine you can get over 150HP engines for GA with $15k. Looks like aviation isn’t your thing. Little buddy, don’t be a dick.

[@boomerang379]

I’d like a Diamond DA-62 with these engines.

[@Daytonaman675]

boomerang379 I would love a hotrod DA42 IV with two 400hp turbines

[@AlfredoPachecoJr]

Searching online, I found that anew RR250's ran around $250K+ new. This engine is to be less I belive. Secondly, the RR500 turboprop and turboshaft have been postponed as of a Feb 2012 article from Heli-Expo. I haven't found anything else after that about the current production status of the RR500 project.

[@ThePaulv12]

This is still a dream for GA even after 8 years.

[@andrewmorris3479]

The PBS TP100 is a perfect solution. Last I heard they were still seeking certification.

[@ryderkairo9454]

pro tip: you can watch movies on flixzone. I've been using them for watching a lot of movies these days.

[@liamalfred6136]

@Ryder Kairo yea, I've been using Flixzone for months myself =)

[@DanFrederiksen]

The should have made a small turbofan instead. 10kg.

[@tihspidtherekciltilc5469]

@@ryderkairo9454 Wow, both of you just happened to join YT at the same time. Nothing suspect there.

[@DougHanchard]

It was sad when the RR500 program was cancelled in 2012 and never launched.

[@gmcjetpilot]

Safe to say dead program. Too bad a 300HP Turbo Prop would be nice, but purchase price and operating cost is show stopper. Walter M601 20 years was $60,000, a PT6 like engine 600HP. GE bought them and guessing prices have gone way up. Garrett TPE331 is another small Turbo Prop, but still more HP than 300HP.

[@100pyatt]

Super cool buttttt it's like putting a Ferrari V12 in a VW beetle... The price vs target buyer market doesn't match

[@cartmanrlsusall]

One day the magical 100hp from75pounds of engine and accessories will be achieved, sport and ultralight aircraft would love that combination

[@TRPGpilot]

They express power in kilowatts and weigh things in kilograms now . . .

[@morteparla6926]

It has been possible for a very long time. 2 stroke Snowmobile engines have been making over 100hp while weighing virtually nothing for decades. Now I should state that 75lbs for even a snowmobile engine is incredibly light, but a 140lb, 3 cylinder snowmobile engine making 150hp --- those have existed since the late 80's --- and these engines are liquid cooled! If, let's say Polaris, decided to make a 100hp 2 stroke aircraft engine, that weighs 75lbs, I have no doubt in my mind they could do it with ease.

[@chippyjohn1]

The PBS TP100 is 62kg making 180KW

[@zapfanzapfan]

Development abandoned in 2012...

[@skyking6989]

Same old line of baloney. Great ideas but at the end of the day these great ideas never ever come to fruition. Everyone knows where gonna be stuck with the io360s for years and years to come

[@2Phast4Rocket]

The market for GA powerplant is shrinking every year. It is difficult to think of a big name aircraft engine manufacturer putting millions of dollars into a shrinking market.

[@davem2361]

Is it? The EAB market is growing!

[@2Phast4Rocket]

What I am talking about is the total number of new GA aircraft being registered is shrinking. The only bright spots are the experimental homebuild and the LSA. These two represent the very small portion of the GA

[@MrChiangching]

Its obsolete, Siemens has an electric aviation motor with 350hp and 125 lb weight.

[@2Phast4Rocket]

Hmm, it's no wonder nobody is lining up to purchase this Siemens motor.

[@victorm3408]

3600 TBO ($125,000)? Is this the Allison? Does it need a 1,750 hour hot section inspection ($60,000)?

[@RossDuClair]

General Aviation does not enjoy the type of growth required to build modern aircraft. We are still sitting behind engines that have not changed since 1934. Yes, modern aircraft are more electronic, but the engine? Not so much.

[@FerrilEwok]

And now we wait for Ricers to slap one in a civic and work on how to make it sound like a fart

[@hermanngoring397]

+FerrilEwok xD

[@robertslugg8361]

Sadly, they have now moved on to cheap WRX's and are now blasting through meet-ups because apparently "no one" has ever heard a WRX revved up.

[@benth162]

LMAO..... Only an Ewok would come up with something like that.

[@Mr.Oblivian]

Don't quit your day job.....

[@godchi1dvonsteuben770]

Why would they bother to do that. Would be alot cheaper to just turbocharge and tune the Civics stock 1.6 liter. They push 300hp, reliably, all the time. Not uncommon, not even expensive. You can buy a 300hp Civic for around $5000, any day of the week...

[@lucasschofield8716]

so basically the only aircraft small enough to use an engine like this are ones which cost less than the engine does....

[@philzambo]

It's used in drones

[@josesbox9555]

philzambo Ive seen them. Can fly for a long time.

[@tedstriker754]

this engine will need planes designed for it. Most of the airframes that could use that much power are designed for piston engines of twice the weight. Installing one of these would cause such an aft CG shift as to be insurmountable. Or it would have to be mounted in a very long nose, which would then need compensation by adding extra rudder area like seaplanes need for their pontoons. It would work in a Glasair taildragger.

[@royl657]

not to mention the fuel consumption of a turbine engine. Yes, it's small, but I doubt it would provide better fuel burn than today's diesel piston engines that use JetA1. Take the Diamond twin star for example, twin engine aircraft, high speed cruise 190ktas at 16.8gph total!

[@adventureairinc7355]

@@royl657 Yes, but their rate of engines issues is horribly high. In my whole flying career I had two major engine issues (one complete failure in low altitude and one 40% power loss o takeoff) and both of them were with Thielert diesel engines. Old Lycomings and Continentals might not be the future, but modified car diesel engines aren´t the future either.

[@ictpilot]

@@adventureairinc7355 They haven't been using those engines in a long time. The new ones are very reliable.

[@miscbits6399]

That w/b issue would be a good excuse to use recuperators (low mass high bulk) which vastly increase turbine efficiency, particularly when off full power. There''s a good reason the things are installed everywhere turbines are used on terrestrial applications

[@robertbee9776]

I'll trade three good sewing machines and four lawnmower blades 46" new condition for one of those.

[@tihspidtherekciltilc5469]

I'll see you and up that a half eaten cheeseburger and a warm beer.

[@sandsifter149]

What the fuck is a POUND ??

[@olivierwery7336]

Hum it's a unit of mass. 2.2 pounds=1kg it's also written lbs. And it's very commonly used all over the world in aviation. And all over North America.

[@svdumitrescu]

+Olivier W :: And why then, for God's sake, have you overthrown the Britsh Empire, fought and declared Independence, since after a century and a half, you're still using theri archaic measures??! It's totally stupid, nowadays to use decimal values for a measurement system that was designed for fractional render. It's either Emperial with fractions OR Metric with decimals. What you're actually using is totally stupid. Not to mention gallons, not to mention feet, inches and so forth

[@olivierwery7336]

+Silviu Vasile Dumitrescu bud I'm European I grew up in metric, but now that I live in North America I had to adapt. I can't agree more with the fact that imperial is stupid. Even worse there's imperial gallon and us gallon which are different. But it's like changing the national language of a country. It's not something people get use to easily the change is slow. Here in Canada people tell you their weight in pounds but the weight their car can pull they'll tell you in kg. Just live with it.

[@seaplaneguy1]

Look, the Inch is found in the Pyramids and goes back way before 5000 years. Inch means thumb or the width of a thumb. Time is recorded in inches inside of GIZA Pyramids. Actually an inch comes from 1/25th of 1/10,000,000 of the polar radius. The Meter is 1/10,000,000 of the 1/4 arch going through Paris. It is in error by over 3%. The meter is based on an arch, which is about as STUPID as you can get as a standard. (think about it....) The Mile in contrast is 5280 ft which is 2x2x2x2x2x3x5x11 = 7x7x7x7x7x PI /10. It is a number divisible by every number to 16 except 13. If you use a 28 day month with 13 months you then have the perfect number system with all numbers from 1-16 divisible. The world speaks English because the system is superior and allowed the English to win in battle over the French and Spanish who corrupted their measurements. Why not decimalize all measurements such as timel??? Why not 1000 units of time per day instead of 24 hours/day, or 100 degrees instead of 360 degrees? The reason is simple: 10 is only divisible by 2 and 5. Notice that the scared cubic was 25 inches, which is 1/10,000,000 of the Radius of earth. The polar radius is the longest straight line in any planet and is how you would characterize a planet in location (center of Gravity) and volume. By doing the calculus of each distance to the surface from the center of gravity you can know the true volume of a planet very accurately. This polar radius standard was originally proposed by Napoleon for the Metre but they did not have a way to measure it without a space ship. So the measured from top to bottom of France and guessed. To have one system you should take 25 inches x PI/2 to get a meter. Since the meter is based on a arch, it is not a true standard. In fact it is now based on a frequency, which is circular and varies with orbit...not good. By using the polar Radius you have a stable system. All the ancients used it. It scales to make. 12 inches = 1 foot...about what a man's foot is who is 6 ft tall. The inch is about the width of the thumb. The meter in contrast scales to nothing and there does not work well for design. Also, the mind and how it works works better with feet and inches. The meter is much too large. The bottom line is only ignorant people think the English system is inferior to the unscientific Meter system has many flaws and it not truly a decimal system as we still have lots of non 10 based factors, such as hours and degrees. You can decimaltize any unit (Micoinch) Miroc mile, and have the "benefits" of easy math. This is not unique to Meters. The English goes back to the Roman (their gallon was 6x6x6 inches or 216 cu inches or 1/8 of a cubic foot). The USA gallon is a "wine bibbers gallon" and measured 7x3x11 = 231 cu inches. It is 7 x 33 or sacred 33 or sacred blood of Christ. Yes, Christ is linked to the gallon.... Notice that the mile has 11, 3 and 7 as divisible. This makes the math much easier....and when you are calculating without a calculator, doing the math is very important when you are being shot at by French and Spanish ships...Hence why you speak English.... So wake up and learn some history and stop promoting an ignorant system (meter) that is NOT scientific due to the arch base of the meter....

[@olivierwery7336]

+seaplaneguy Hey I know that. As I said I don't care I'm as comfortable in metric as I am with imperial. And of course imperial has to make sense in a way otherwise no one would ever have used it. Doesn't mean it's not outdated. Metric is clearly superior.

[@briansmobile1]

LOL!

[@MAGApepe]

bummer it failed

[@robertlafnear4865]

MOONEY is OUT of the Question !

[@because1101]

I,d rather make composite wheel,s on it

[@mikeklaene4359]

I want a small turbine to put into a redesigned 182/206 class aircraft. Time to phase out 100LL.

[@jameshenry3530]

As of October 16, 2016 the RR website claims that they are expecting the RR500 to be certificated in 2012. Since they have not even bothered to update their webpage in 4+ years, they have abandoned development of this engine without explicitly admitting this is the case.

[@michaelmcneil4168]

Oh! Hang on... ...2008? So it was down to American'ts voting for a Chimpanzee!!! Good Grief. Who wrote that story? Charles Schultz? I always wondered why they never put a propeller on the Axials that idiot goose-monger left Whittle holding after the Rover fiasco.

[@Mike-01234]

I guess didn't get enough interest in it would be better to target the kit plane market.

[@davem2361]

I would totally put one in a Harmon Rocket II

[@michaeldautry]

There’s plenty of interest in this but the price might be too high...

[@brucejones2354]

Price might be to high? YA THINK?

[@ionhunter]

Just ordered one for my 150G.

[@cranezilla1016]

+Ion Hunter 350HP, $150K+, 21GPH, one hour flight time for your 150G? you might want to reconsider.

[@ionhunter]

Crane Zilla good point, I'm going to need 400hp.

[@garyfischer4357]

Beautiful. How much $$$$? That's the rub.

[@edilbertosantana8307]

Amazing.nice video.

[@BLAMBERRY]

Wtf happened?

[@kazansky22]

So what ever happened to these?

[@tariqsyed445]

This would be an excellent replacement for the heavy six cylinder engine, used in the Super Mushak ! It will greatly enhance performance parameters, and become a true Super Mushakk ! I sincerely request the PAF to seriously consider this engine replacement. It will also use Jer-A-1 fuel, used by the jets, instead of expensive and difficult to obtain and handle, High-Octaine Aviation petrol. Please think outside the box, for truly enhanced performance of the Mushak.

[@MrZeddy100]

Howmuchisit?

[@MrZeddy100]

Gotnomoneyanyway#dreaming

[@Rico11b]

LOL!!! More like a WHOLE LOT SLOWER. 13 years later and this is still almost completely of unheard of in general aviation circles. It's a pipe dream and a very expensive one at that.

[@thomasleemullins4372]

I think that is really cool. I think it would be neat to see what planes it goes into and can be used with.

[@thomasleemullins4372]

I wonder if it will be listed at this site? minijets.org/fr/home

[@thomasleemullins4372]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_RR500

[@thomasleemullins4372]

www.rolls-royce.com/products-and-services/defence/aerospace/trainers/m250-turboprop.aspx#/

[@williegillie5712]

Smartest thing RR can do in my opinion. Get rid of that noisy turbofan and put a prop on their engines

[@swahili.sumbua9120]

hey i was wondering multi engine turbine engine it is a multifuel and it says diesel which type of diesel just the regular one or a specific i would appreciate the reply

[@6mrviagra9]

Have you ever been Animal hunting in a helicopter before? watch some Deer recovery videos you be suprised how much power you need to carry out the operation lol

[@coolhari2000]

Such a tease, 12 years later......... still nothing. Austro turbo diesel is the closest. lol

[@peanuts2105]

It's nice to say my airplane is powered by a Rolls Royce. Not many people can say that. Even my girlfriend thinks that's cool

[@Dont_Think_Do_Films]

What happened to it

[@imsneeky]

u can buy a 300 horsepower civic now ferril,lol,no need to wait for ricers to do anything

[@mohammadzakirhossain4112]

this English 102 kg, but i want to know that how many hp this engine?

[@michaelhansen2670]

Cost?