![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() bodean Probably one rational behind keeping engine warm is that if you go to idle and glide a long time the engine will cool down. You then slap on full power and the cylinders are hit with a high temperature all of a sudden. By keeping 1500 rpm and putting down partial flaps you simulate aircraft performance with engine out for practice (and MAY reduce your possibility of engine problems???) However from posts on NG you see a number who just pull back to idle to sim engine out practice with no problems. Of course idle engine will not duplicate aircraft performance with dead engine. 1500 rpm and the appropriate amount of flaps will give you very close to actual performance if you lose the engine so you are practicing like you will fly (a good thing) with dead engine. I'm assuming you shoot for the middle of the field (landing area) until you see you have it made and then slip off the excess altitude? An ADVANCED method to lose the excess altitude is to slow the bird down (behind the power curve) and pick up a high sink rate leaving enough altitude to dump the nose to pick airspeed back up so you can flare? Don't try this unless you know what you are doing. So, youse kind of pays ur money and takes ur chances ![]() Big John On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 22:38:53 -0500, BoDEAN wrote: In small high wing planes (Ie 172, 152, 150) do you do/teach pulling throttle all the back to idel? I've been told bring it to 1500 RPM, 1 notch of flaps. Not as hard on the engine |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Big John wrote
Probably one rational behind keeping engine warm is that if you go to idle and glide a long time the engine will cool down. You then slap on full power and the cylinders are hit with a high temperature all of a sudden. That's probably the best rationale I've ever heard for 1500 RPM and one notch of flaps. We all worry about shock cooling, but letting the engine cool off and then pouring on the coals is a recipe for shock heating. I might rethink the way I do this... Of course idle engine will not duplicate aircraft performance with dead engine. No it won't. It's also a great recipe for icing up the carb. For both those reasons, I usually pull the mixture to idle. That way you get a true windmilling engine, and since no fuel is evaporating in the carb there's no risk of ice. 1500 RPM is still very low power, and the chance for carb ice is still there. Not sure whether I'd rather worry about shock heating the cylinders or icing up the carb. So, youse kind of pays ur money and takes ur chances ![]() Yup. Michael |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I was taught that way. Full rich, carb heat, switch tanks, switch mags.
Unfortunately my only fully dead engine episode needed the opposite solution. I didn't have time to figure it out, if I would have been smart enough in the first place. The carb float had sunk and the engine flooded on power to idle reduction. I didn't know it. When I needed the power, no power. Full rich - wrong. Switch mags - so what. Other tank - who cares. Carb heat -wrong. If only I had pulled the mixture to lean and full throttle. Probably wouldn't have helped - too low - the whole thing was under a minute to touchdown. In article , (Andrew Sarangan) wrote: (Dan Thomas) wrote in message . com... (Michael) wrote in message . com... Big John wrote Probably one rational behind keeping engine warm is that if you go to idle and glide a long time the engine will cool down. You then slap on full power and the cylinders are hit with a high temperature all of a sudden. That's probably the best rationale I've ever heard for 1500 RPM and one notch of flaps. We all worry about shock cooling, but letting the engine cool off and then pouring on the coals is a recipe for shock heating. I might rethink the way I do this... Of course idle engine will not duplicate aircraft performance with dead engine. No it won't. It's also a great recipe for icing up the carb. For both those reasons, I usually pull the mixture to idle. That way you get a true windmilling engine, and since no fuel is evaporating in the carb there's no risk of ice. Carb heat should be the first thing applied when the engine "quits." Carb icing is the most common cause of engine failure, and if the pilot is a bit slow in pulling it, there won't be any heat left to remove the ice. As it is, he'll be lucky to regain power. Some folks aren't aware of decreasing RPM or manifold pressure until things get real quiet. Pulling mix to idle cutoff has caused several accidents in Canada, and it's no longer part of the simulated forced approach. Dan Do you have the details of these accidents, or where one might find them? It would be interesting to know the exact cause of the accident. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Unfortunately my only fully dead engine episode needed the opposite solution. [...] The carb float had sunk and the engine flooded on power to idle reduction. One size never fits all. I didn't have time to figure it out, if I would have been smart enough in the first place. What would it have taken to figure it out in flight? (other than time to try all the other combinations that are not in the first response? Jose -- (for Email, make the obvious changes in my address) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
At that point in my experience, I would never have figured it out.
I had never heard of such an occurence. Dumb luck might have saved the day, assuming I had plenty of time to remember to do everything, like turn the fuel off. But if I had followed what is the "proper" off field landing check, I wouldn't have turned off the fuel early enough to have a positive effect. Since then there have been multiple times that haven't fit any past learning or knowledge. It's called the school of hard knocks. Fortunately they haven't hurt anybody or any thing. Today's young instructors have a long way to go (at least 20 years) before they get good. Variety counts for a lot more than hours and ratings. In article , (Teacherjh) wrote: Unfortunately my only fully dead engine episode needed the opposite solution. [...] The carb float had sunk and the engine flooded on power to idle reduction. One size never fits all. I didn't have time to figure it out, if I would have been smart enough in the first place. What would it have taken to figure it out in flight? (other than time to try all the other combinations that are not in the first response? Jose |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You are still talking to us, so it was a 'good' landing...
Mine was when a piston knocked a hole through the side of the jug and proceeded to pump the oil overboard... Since then I prefer to fly twins... denny "d b" wrote in message ink.net... I was taught that way. Full rich, carb heat, switch tanks, switch mags. Unfortunately my only fully dead engine episode needed the opposite solution. I didn't have time to figure it out, if I would have been smart enough in the first place. The carb float had sunk and the engine flooded on power to idle reduction. I didn't know it. When I needed the power, no power. Full rich - wrong. Switch mags - so what. Other tank - who cares. Carb heat -wrong. If only I had pulled the mixture to lean and full throttle. Probably wouldn't have helped - too low - the whole thing was under a minute to touchdown. In article , (Andrew Sarangan) wrote: (Dan Thomas) wrote in message . com... (Michael) wrote in message . com... Big John wrote Probably one rational behind keeping engine warm is that if you go to idle and glide a long time the engine will cool down. You then slap on full power and the cylinders are hit with a high temperature all of a sudden. That's probably the best rationale I've ever heard for 1500 RPM and one notch of flaps. We all worry about shock cooling, but letting the engine cool off and then pouring on the coals is a recipe for shock heating. I might rethink the way I do this... Of course idle engine will not duplicate aircraft performance with dead engine. No it won't. It's also a great recipe for icing up the carb. For both those reasons, I usually pull the mixture to idle. That way you get a true windmilling engine, and since no fuel is evaporating in the carb there's no risk of ice. Carb heat should be the first thing applied when the engine "quits." Carb icing is the most common cause of engine failure, and if the pilot is a bit slow in pulling it, there won't be any heat left to remove the ice. As it is, he'll be lucky to regain power. Some folks aren't aware of decreasing RPM or manifold pressure until things get real quiet. Pulling mix to idle cutoff has caused several accidents in Canada, and it's no longer part of the simulated forced approach. Dan Do you have the details of these accidents, or where one might find them? It would be interesting to know the exact cause of the accident. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Michael" wrote in message That's probably the best rationale I've ever heard for 1500 RPM and one notch of flaps. We all worry about shock cooling Actually, no we do not all worry about shock cooling. Neither do we all worry about shock heating. Many highly respected pilots and mechanics believe that shock cooling and shock heating are myths, at least for modern aircraft engines. The manufacturers have also said that shock cooling and shock heating should not be a problem -- of course, maybe they like to sell replacement engines. :-) I seriously doubt that shock cooling is much of a problem on training aircraft, at least. These airplanes are subjected to all kinds of supposed mistreatment, but their engines almost always make it to TBO. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"C J Campbell" wrote
Actually, no we do not all worry about shock cooling. Neither do we all worry about shock heating. Many highly respected pilots and mechanics believe that shock cooling and shock heating are myths, at least for modern aircraft engines. First - we do not fly behind modern aircraft engines, at least in trainers. Those engines are warmed-over 1950's (at best) technology. Second, maybe those who are not worried about it should be. I know a Bonanza pilot who didn't worry about it. He would routinely cut the power way back for a rapid descent. I attempted to get him to stop, but he just wasn't worried about it. Then he lost a jug on takeoff. He's more careful now. The manufacturers have also said that shock cooling and shock heating should not be a problem -- of course, maybe they like to sell replacement engines. :-) The manufacturers haven't had any engineering expertise worth mentioning. And I bet what they like to sell are not replacement engines (few people buy one) but replacement jugs. The bottom end never really gets hot enough to be concerned, but the jugs sure do. I seriously doubt that shock cooling is much of a problem on training aircraft, at least. These airplanes are subjected to all kinds of supposed mistreatment, but their engines almost always make it to TBO. How many of them make it to TBO without replacing a jug here and there? None that I know of. Michael |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ROP masking of engine problems | Roger Long | Owning | 4 | September 27th 04 07:36 PM |
Proposals for air breathing hypersonic craft. I | Robert Clark | Military Aviation | 2 | May 26th 04 06:42 PM |
What if the germans... | Charles Gray | Military Aviation | 119 | January 26th 04 11:20 PM |
Real stats on engine failures? | Captain Wubba | Piloting | 127 | December 8th 03 04:09 PM |
Corky's engine choice | Corky Scott | Home Built | 39 | August 8th 03 04:29 AM |