Teledyne Agrees to Sell Teledyne Continental Motors to AVIC

[pilot06]

While not warbird related, this may or may not be of interest.

Continental "GA" piston aircraft engine sold to AVIC Intl. a Chinese manufacturer of aircraft components.

THOUSAND OAKS, Calif. & BEIJING--(EON: Enhanced Online News)--Teledyne Technologies Incorporated (NYSE: TDY) (“Teledyne”) and AVIC International Holding Corporation (“AVIC International”) announced today an agreement to sell Teledyne’s general aviation piston engine business to Technify Motor (USA) LTD., a subsidiary of AVIC International, for $186 million in cash. Under the transaction, AVIC International will acquire Teledyne Continental Motors, Inc. (“Continental Motors”) and Teledyne Mattituck Services, Inc.

With major customers such as Boeing, Airbus, Honeywell and Snecma, AVIC International is a trusted supplier and partner of leading aviation companies in the U.S. and around the world.

http://eon.businesswire.com/news/eon/20101214005524/en/Teledyne-Technologies-Agrees-Sell-Teledyne-Continental-Motors

Patrick

[CAPFlyer]

Isn't AVIC who's also supporting the Nanchang community here in the US? They seem to be one of the few companies who's has a semi-decent reputation over the years in the aviation community, so hopefully it'll hold true with Continental.

[walkerarmyairfield]

Very SAD news. This is the worst news we in Aviation we can receive. We all know General Aviation is on the way out in America. All our manufacturing will soon end up out of the United States. Wichita is counting the days till ole Beechcraft is gone from town.
The young people with an interest in Aviation will never see the great time most of us had in American Aviation.
Guess the FAA will be hiring a lot of product watchers to live in the foreign plants if the China's officials let em in.
I will get the old Cessna out later today and be thankful for all the good times and cherish my aviation memories.

[bdk]

#1) This is all 40+ year old technology that is leaving. This country cannot expect to survive on low tech manufacturing. There is just too much competition internationally from low cost manufacturers with far lower labor rates. On the other hand, maybe the US government should subsidize the manufacture of extremely low volume production things we don't want anymore like Telex machines, telegraph keys and mechanical dial phones.

#2) General aviation has become unaffordable for most (or at least remains so). Anything that will help to drive costs down is a good thing in my book and could help launch a resurgence in popularity. Hopefully that can offset the disincentives the FAA and TSA seem to add daily.

#3) This company may be able to sink more money into their newly acquired general aviation brand and products to ensure that parts and new engines are available for years to come.

#4) A few manufacturing jobs lost, but if the products can have a reduced price point there may actually be more jobs for distributors and retailers, and more aircraft might get sold which helps the airframers as well.

[JBoyle]

The fact that the Continental sold for "only" $186 million should say something about the perceived value (and future) of the company.
In the overall sceme of things, than's not a lot of money.
It looks they took into account they're buying old technology and a fair chunk of potential liability....(thank your neighborhood trial lawyer).

[bdk]

P.S. The Chinese company has committed to keeping Continental at its current location in Mobile, AL

[shrike]

I wonder if this has anything to do with the possibility/probability of Cessna's 162 on again/off again production in China.

In any case TCM parts delivery can't get any slower than it already is, so maybe it'll be a net plus

[John Dupre]

One of the reasons for buying TCM is the development of diesel engines that TCM bought last year from SMA. Now I don't think the diesel will ever really be viable in aviation compared to air cooled 4 cycle opposed engines (too heavy and extra cooling systems add complexity) but at least TCM is trying something new or I should say retrying something old since diesels were tried and failed in the 30s and 40s.

As for old technology I believe there is a reason that piston aircraft engines have settled on horizontally opposed air cooled types with magneto ignition. Simplicity, reliability, compactness and light weight. Small radials have too many parts and too much surface area and make for a larger more awkward design when combined with a nose wheel landing gear. In line engines are not compact enough and have a similar problems with a nose gear. Through an evolutionary process the ideal engine has come to the fore for the 65 to 350 HP range for tricyle gear light aircraft. Magnetos may be ancient but they are simple, reliable and independent of any other source of electricity. You are not going to see any other configuration of air cooled engine succeed the opposed type. You aren't going to see cases made of anything other than aluminium or cylinders made of anything but steel barrels and aluminum heads because anything else is going to be too expensive. There could be detail design changes like Lycoming's adoption of the roller tappet but that is going to be cost benefit decision driven by market demand rather than a pure engineering development.

I think AVIC is banking on the diesel designs and will move those to China if they succeed. The vast bulk of TCM's market is in the US and it really wouldn't make sense to move everything to China only to add shipping costs to every order back to the US. I also don't think the supposed "China Market" for aircraft is going to be anything like the pie in the sky projections people are talking about. China's economy is like its political freedom, a mile wide but an inch deep.

[shrike]

Diesel engines weren't entirely a failure. They had a niche in long range aircraft where the initial weight penalty of the heavier engine was offset by vastly improved fuel efficiency and either reduced fuel load or increased range.
The current big draw of the kerosene burning recip has as much to do with future fuel availability and/or commonality as it does with anything else. The Thielert engines biggest flaw (aside from the financials of the company) is the gearbox which has a TBO and reliability that falls short of that of the engine itself.

While general aviation in China is not likely to be a growth industry anytime soon, a domestically produced modern light aircraft would allow them to train pilots for their growing domestic airline industry. Currently the Chinese are training large numbers of pilots in US schools (and I for one am grateful, as that's the indirect reason for my own continued employment)

I won't argue against the horizontally opposed format from a packaging or engine dynamics point of view, but with the IOF-240, TCM has finally brought aircraft engine management up to 1980's automotive standards. Magnetos, while self contained, are not especially reliable, that's why there are two of them. Their lack of variable timing is the major factor requiring stocks of high octane fuel in low compression engines (refer back to engines capable of using Jet-A) A 2000 hour TBO is roughly the equivalent of 100,000 miles - which is when many modern cars call for their first tune up, whereas Slick and Bendix both call for 500hr inspections. 25000 miles between ignition overhauls might have been impressive in 1950, but not now.

Lycoming's switch to roller tappets was driven by increased cam and lifter failure - already a Lycoming weakness - due to the removal of the last phosphorous based additives to motor oils. As a stop-gap they make and recommend a phosphorus based oil additive. (handy for old cars for the same reason BTW). Given that the roller lifters add more than 10% to the cost of an overhaul and 25% to the cost of either a propstrike or overspeed inspection, that decision was driven by Lycoming desire to cut warranty claims rather than any consumer demand.

[Enemy Ace]

The Chinese government have been very closely examining the general aviation scene in the USA for years. They usually have a contigent at most aviation technical events such as the NBAA convention. OSH and AOPA gatherings, etc.
Most of these individuals are very polite, and very smart with doctorate level educations in engineering, production management, etc. They have really taken the NBAA's "No plane, No gain" message to heart and are very serious about developing their country's aviation infrastructure in all of its forms. I have been priviledged to talk with quite a few of them and have always been very impressed.
While they will probably never have a USA style aviation market (i.e. no fleets of privately owned RV type airplanes and warbirds operated for the fun of it) a time will come when small/ medium sized businesses in China will be able to operate small GA type aircraft as business tools.
If even a small percentage of their plans become reality they will have a huge GA market in the years to come. The purchase of Continental motors is a wise investment for them and if we're lucky the trickle down effect will make flying in the USA more affordable.
Just my .02 cents.
-Robert