Turbo 182: correct mixture for final approach at high altitude?

Peter Duniho wrote:
What actual model engine does the TB-21 have? Just knowing that it's a
TIO-540 doesn't give us enough information to compare with our own engines.

TIO-540-AB1AD

--
David Rind

Jeff wrote:
maybe a stupid question, but if its going to quit on you when you go full
rich on landing, then dont it also risk the chance of quitting if you go
full rich on a go around?
unless its just the high power that keeps it running and idle is what
kills it.

Your guesstimation is correct! The higher power can deal with the
enrichened mixture, and your balked landing (go around) will succeed.

Notice that I said below to increase the power, then the mixtu

Of course, if you do a balked landing, you MUST push the mixture
full in after you increase the power for the go around.

Best regards,

Jer/

wrote:

Yes. The mixture was too rich.
This is a common problem with big-bore engines when operated
above 3000 MSL.

What we teach at Colorado Pilots Association is to set the
mixture to 15 GPH as you enter the pattern at (near) cruise
power. That way the engine continues to run on the ground. :-)

Of course, if you do a balked landing, you MUST push the mixture
full in after you increase the power for the go around.

Barry Klein wrote:
We took a newer 182 turbo to a 7000' elevation airport yesterday and
the engine quit at the end of the landing roll. I'm sure the mixture
was way too rich. It restarted without incident, glad we were on the
ground! We had the mixture set about 100 deg rich of peak TIT for
cruise at 9500. How should we have found the correct mixture setting
for power-off final approach, when the turbo is basically adding no
boost and we are at high density altitude? This is not addressed in
the POH. It does say full rich on takeoff regardless of airport
elevation. Later that day, when taxiing for takeoff, we set 1200 rpm
and leaned for peak rpm, mixture knob was out 1.5-2 inches to achieve
this.

When we returned home to 800' elevation, we checked the idle speed at
full rich, it was about 500 rpm, is this too low?

Thanks,
Barry

Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction and mountain flying are my vocation!" Eberhard

--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jer'at'frii.com WEB http://www.frii.net/~jer
C-206 N9513G, CFII Airplane&Glider, FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot, BM218 HAM N0FZD, 197 Young Eagles!

you would think that since its a turbo airplane, cessna would expect it to be
used at high altitude airports so they would have made it so it would not cut
out on landing.

wrote:

Jeff wrote:
maybe a stupid question, but if its going to quit on you when you go full
rich on landing, then dont it also risk the chance of quitting if you go
full rich on a go around?
unless its just the high power that keeps it running and idle is what
kills it.

Your guesstimation is correct! The higher power can deal with the
enrichened mixture, and your balked landing (go around) will succeed.

Notice that I said below to increase the power, then the mixtu

Of course, if you do a balked landing, you MUST push the mixture
full in after you increase the power for the go around.

Best regards,

Jer/

wrote:

Yes. The mixture was too rich.
This is a common problem with big-bore engines when operated
above 3000 MSL.

What we teach at Colorado Pilots Association is to set the
mixture to 15 GPH as you enter the pattern at (near) cruise
power. That way the engine continues to run on the ground. :-)

Of course, if you do a balked landing, you MUST push the mixture
full in after you increase the power for the go around.

Barry Klein wrote:
We took a newer 182 turbo to a 7000' elevation airport yesterday and
the engine quit at the end of the landing roll. I'm sure the mixture
was way too rich. It restarted without incident, glad we were on the
ground! We had the mixture set about 100 deg rich of peak TIT for
cruise at 9500. How should we have found the correct mixture setting
for power-off final approach, when the turbo is basically adding no
boost and we are at high density altitude? This is not addressed in
the POH. It does say full rich on takeoff regardless of airport
elevation. Later that day, when taxiing for takeoff, we set 1200 rpm
and leaned for peak rpm, mixture knob was out 1.5-2 inches to achieve
this.

When we returned home to 800' elevation, we checked the idle speed at
full rich, it was about 500 rpm, is this too low?

Thanks,
Barry

Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction and mountain flying are my vocation!" Eberhard

--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jer'at'frii.com WEB http://www.frii.net/~jer
C-206 N9513G, CFII Airplane&Glider, FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot, BM218 HAM N0FZD, 197 Young Eagles!

Hey do the cessna turbo's come standard with a intercooler and automatic
wastegate or do you have to get an after market one (if you decide to get
it at all)


John Harper wrote:

FWIW here's my TR182 experience. Of course the engine in
a TR182 is a very different beast from a T182T (carburetted
rather than injected, and turbo-normalized only, never boost above
31").

Full rich for takeoff, regardless of altitude, at 31" MP.
Lean to around 18 GPH (1350 or so TIT) with power reduction
to 25" at around 1000 AGL.

Lean to 1450 TIT for cruise.

Descend without further adjustment - TIT remains steady.
I've never experienced rough running in this situation.

Full rich as part of GUMPS check prior to takeoff, in
case of go-around.

John

"Barry Klein" wrote in message
om...
We took a newer 182 turbo to a 7000' elevation airport yesterday and
the engine quit at the end of the landing roll. I'm sure the mixture
was way too rich. It restarted without incident, glad we were on the
ground! We had the mixture set about 100 deg rich of peak TIT for
cruise at 9500. How should we have found the correct mixture setting
for power-off final approach, when the turbo is basically adding no
boost and we are at high density altitude? This is not addressed in
the POH. It does say full rich on takoff regardless of airport
elevation. Later that day, when taxiing for takoff, we set 1200 rpm
and leaned for peak rpm, mixture knob was out 1.5-2 inches to achieve
this.

When we returned home to 800' elevation, we checked the idle speed at
full rich, it was about 500 rpm, is this too low?


Thanks,
Barry

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
you would think that since its a turbo airplane, cessna would expect it to
be
used at high altitude airports so they would have made it so it would not
cut
out on landing.

And yet, this is a common enough issue, with many different makes and models
of turbocharged aircraft.

Why single Cessna out? There's all sorts of inconveniences related to the
technologies used in "modern" aircraft. One of them happens to be the
likelihood of engine stoppage if the mixture is set to full-rich at high
density altitudes. This isn't unique to Cessna, and it seems to me it's
along the lines of "Doc, it hurts when I do this..." joke. Since it "hurts"
when one does that, one just doesn't do that.

Simple enough, IMHO. The main problem is that, for some reason, pilots who
are introduced to turbocharged aircraft are often not told about the need to
avoid full-rich mixture settings at high density altitudes. This was true
of me (I found out myself the hard way...only took two high altitude
landings for me to figure it out though ), and it's apparently true of
other pilots as well.

Pete

In article , Peter Duniho
wrote:

Simple enough, IMHO. The main problem is that, for some reason, pilots who
are introduced to turbocharged aircraft are often not told about the need to
avoid full-rich mixture settings at high density altitudes. This was true
of me (I found out myself the hard way...only took two high altitude
landings for me to figure it out though ), and it's apparently true of
other pilots as well.

The real problem is, most pilots are flat-landers.
There just is not the opportunity to train pilots in the real world
environment until they actually get there.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...
The main problem is that, for some reason, pilots who
are introduced to turbocharged aircraft are often not told about the need to
avoid full-rich mixture settings at high density altitudes. This was true
of me (I found out myself the hard way...only took two high altitude
landings for me to figure it out though ), and it's apparently true of
other pilots as well.


This is not isolated to pilots of turbocharged aircraft. Every
summer I see flatland pilots in the high country blindly following a
"mixture - rich" item on a landing checklist and killing the engine on
rollout. A go-around attempt will usually result in a belch of black
smoke and a close encounter with pine trees if they're lucky, bent
metal if they're not.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

I am glad this isnt an issue with the turbo arrows.





Simple enough, IMHO. The main problem is that, for some reason, pilots who
are introduced to turbocharged aircraft are often not told about the need to
avoid full-rich mixture settings at high density altitudes. This was true
of me (I found out myself the hard way...only took two high altitude
landings for me to figure it out though ), and it's apparently true of
other pilots as well.

Pete

"EDR" wrote in message
...
The real problem is, most pilots are flat-landers.
There just is not the opportunity to train pilots in the real world
environment until they actually get there.

One need not witness the engine stopping to learn to not land with the
mixture full rich at high density altitudes. If I had been taught, when I
got checked out in my first turbocharged airplane, to not land with mixture
full rich at high density altitudes, I'm sure it would have only taken ONE
engine stoppage for me to figure out what was wrong. I might have avoided
it altogether.

My point is that it doesn't sound like anyone is even bothering to mention
this. It's not just a matter of poor retention due to lack of first-hand
experience.

Pete