Toyota May Follow Honda In To Jet Manufacturing

Goob,

Nice try. Use better bait next time.

Of course an Obama supporter would say that. Anything to give war a bad name....

Yes, Japanese warplanes have a great record of winning battles dating back to their loss of WW2

GoObama08, you're starting to sound like JoshLexus4Ever, who was banned a while ago. Are you back, Josh?

Oops, wrong name. I meant GoObama.

Your cousin is a fool.

I'm pretty sure the HondaJet is better. I like Toyota and all, but Honda had enough experience building engines they were able to build a jet engine. Toyota doesn't have near the experience Honda has with engines.

Actually, Mitsubishi has more experience than Honda building Jet engines. (Zero fighters were also built by them)

Well, I was talking about Honda and Toyota. I mean, what doesn't Honda build engines for?

mitsubishi's recent experience was mostly in TURBOPROPS. jets of a sort, but not pure jets.

and in ww2, the Zero was indeed a most formidable machine. japan's air forces eventually took a beating ONLY because they had nowhere the resources we did.
followup models to the Zero were slow to see production in volume. and the attrited skilled pilots were NEVER replaced in sufficient numbers by flyers of equal skill.
unskilled pilots, too few in number, in suddenly obsolete machines could only end in disaster for the japanese air arms.

not the fault of builders or flyers. simply a result of the GREAT OVERWHELMING DISPARITY in industrial and manpower resources.

No one builds better Jets than the USA :-)

That is actually quite true, in particular when it comes to military aircraft. Of course, the caveat is that we spend significantly more than anyone else on such things- B-2 bombers are $2 billion dollars each, F-22 Raptors are $200 million as I recall (both of these aircraft still have large parts of them that are classified. The F-22 apparently has some unbelieveably highly-advanced radar system)

The general statistic is that the U.S. military posseses technology that is between 30-40 years more advanced than what the populace knows about.

I was watching a show just yesterday I think it was about Lockheed Martin's Skunkworks. I believe it was the director blatantly stated that "We have technology that is not imaginable even 50 years from now."

On more thing. This isn't just limited to the military. The best Aerospace engineer on earth is Burt Rutan. When I was young by parents owned a (I think it was a 6-seat) Cessna and my father used to give me lectures on Aerodynamics and Aeronautics. I remember him talking about Burt Rutan.

Than you for you intelligent comments.

cdoke....you'll probably have Eurofighter fanboys all over you for that comment.

"We have technology that is not imaginable even 50 years from now."

That is a pretty bold statement. Obviously they have already developed time machines and teleporters.

HERE WE GO...


This is somthing I am actually quite familiar with, as I work for the FAA as well as being a pilot.

However why this post is on a car sight, I'm not sure.

The engines they are producing are for what is refered to as VLS's or Very Light Jets. These are the new small business jets/personal jets that are being flight tested and approved (right now Cessna's Mustang is the only one approved by the FAA). The reason around this market is that as more and more people travel the your main hubs are becoming increasingly congested and if you are making a short flight, why should you drive the better part of an hour to get to an airport to fly for an hour, to get back on the ground and again drive for an hour to your destination...when you can fly point to point.

I wont get into the technical aspect of this however the market for VLJ's is booming right now. The concept being why pay 2 million for a 6 seat turboprop, when you can buy a Jet that fly's 100+ knots faster at a higher altitute for the same cost. Some of these jets only come with one engine vs a 2 engine turboprop. Which cuts down on maintenece cost as well as fuel costs, buy a ton.

Now to tie into this post...VLJ's have come around for 3 major reasons.

1. New manufacturing processes (carbon fiber is a wonderful thing in the aviation world like it is in the car world)

2. The mass marketing of the FADEC control system. Think of planes as cars built in the early 1900's where you had to adjust the mixture and check the magnetos and all that wonderful fun crap. FADEC eliminates that and makes flying a plane as easy as driving a car...in the physical sence.

3. And here is the tie in...the new generation of engines. There are only 3 major civilian Aviation jet engine manufacturers (GE, Pratt & Whittney, and Rolls-Royce. P&W dominates the VLJ market, with most Aircraft manufacturers useing their engine. Honda saw a market that was basically untouched and not only developed its own engine...but its own jet as well. Honda quality being good...the aircraft should be reliable as well. Toyota sounds like they want in on the market too (though this is the first I've heard of it) which is probabaly a good decision as well as a benifit to me as a pilot. A large portion of cost is tied up in the engines. The more companies that produce engines, the lower the cost due to competition. The lower the cost of the engine, the lower the cost of the jet. And I the consumer win.

So go ahead Toyota, build away. Maybe some day VLJ's will come down in cost enough so that they don't cost as much as most mansions.

Oh and for those who read this entire thing. Congratulations, if I could send you a cookie I would, but you see I can't afford it because I'm saving for a VLJ...only 2486 years to go and I'll have enough for my initial deposit!!!

I hope not. Honda/Acura seems to be short changed in terms of engineering resources since HondaJet. Honda/Acura still has 5-speed automatics and SOHC V6's but they may actually sell a HondaJet in 2 years and maybe make a profit in 10 years.

LOL! i 'spose that's EXACTLY the reason bmw hasn't made ANY aircraft engines since ww2. or was it ww1? yet their logo "brags" about their aircraft engine heritage, being a stylized prop.

well at least when bmw or mb engines fail (with FAR HIGHER frequencies than honda or toyota engines), you won't have to worry about FALLING OUT OF THE SKY anymore! LOL!

XYZZ, who is it that owns Rolls Royce? Oh yeah, that's right-- it's BMW. Um, don't you recall that record profit windfall last year from earnings in the aircraft division of Rolls Royce?

I hate to point this out, but...

BMW owns Rolls Royce motorcars- they do NOT own Rolls Royce plc, the manufacturer of aircraft engines. The situation is similar to that of Volvo.

This tidbit of information is what created an interesting mess for VW. Vw bought the rights to the Spirit of Ecstasy and the shape of the Rolls Royce grill when they acquired Bentley, but the rights to the name "Rolls Royce" were the property of Rolls Royce plc.

mscottc1, so what's your point? Toyota are planning to build entire airplane. Not just an engine. Also BMW owns doesn't mean they build them either.

I could say Hyundai's Oil tanker building business, computer electronics etc. would make entire european car makers combined look pretty small in comparison in total volume of manufacturing and rate of expandability etc.

Point is that, just b/c a company owns a stake doesn't mean a jack shit. Honda is building in partner w/american jet company but Toytoa is planning to build completely there own jet. That's a huge leapfrogging, my son.

@mscottc1

I might be wrong but BMW does not own the RR aircraft engine division. They own the Rolls-Royce Motor Cars.

From the RR wikipedia:

"In 1990 BMW and Rolls-Royce established the BMW Rolls-Royce joint venture to produce the BR700 range of engines for regional and corporate jets, the most recent of which is the newly announced BR725. BMW subsequently withdrew from the company, and Rolls-Royce took full control of it in 2000, renaming it Rolls-Royce Deutschland."

i stand corrected- although my point remains, fanboys & haters alike (refering to toyota) should realize airpllanes & cars are like apples & oranges.

aircraft and cars DO have in common, the need for RELIABLE engines. far more in aircraft. as i implied above, on the ground a failed engine just means you coast to a stop.

in the air, you FALL OUT OF THE SKY!

and the fact remains, bmw stopped making aircraft engines MANY DECADES ago. yet they hang on to the stylized PROPELLER as their logo.

bmw also cannot compete at honda's level, in making high output MOTORCYCLE engines.

honda is arguably THE premier engine company on the planet. with toyota hot on their heels.

maybe when the germans learn to make RELIABLE electronics, AND engines, they can compete at the same level. and a few decades later, they mite even make jet engines too. but as of right now, they are NOT on the same level.

this was intended as response to Stoolchecker. missed hitting proper 'reply'

this was intended as response to Stoolchecker. i THOT i missed hitting proper 'reply' link, but this SERVER is screwed up.

I believe that Honda is getting lots of help form the US on the Honda jet project from companies like GE and other American aerospace companies. Every county has their strengths and weaknesses and I know our aerospace industry is #1 in the world today. I wish I could say the same about out auto industry.

That's one thing Toyota's copying. Usually its the other way around. But Honda rocks!

The way this jet was developed is inspiring. Read up on it. They would't let the guy fail. Well done Honda!