A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Turbo Lance II opinions



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 22nd 05, 05:31 PM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I found some readings that said the Turbo Lance has a fixed wastegate and
that there are other systems out there that have a manual wastegate that
allows the pilot to better control the turbo.

How much of this is really a factor and should I really care?


  #2  
Old August 22nd 05, 05:44 PM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

You could interpret a manual wastegate as something that you have more
control over or you could say that it just provides more workload :-). The
Turbo Lance wastegate is attacked to the throttle linkage and works pretty
well. The best system is a compensated automatic wastegate but that is
considerably more expensive and complex.

Mike
MU-2


"John Doe" wrote in message
news:R5nOe.17574$Co1.9024@lakeread01...
I found some readings that said the Turbo Lance has a fixed wastegate and
that there are other systems out there that have a manual wastegate that
allows the pilot to better control the turbo.

How much of this is really a factor and should I really care?



  #3  
Old August 26th 05, 06:31 PM
Oracle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 16:44:12 +0000, Mike Rapoport wrote:

You could interpret a manual wastegate as something that you have more
control over or you could say that it just provides more workload :-). The
Turbo Lance wastegate is attacked to the throttle linkage and works pretty
well. The best system is a compensated automatic wastegate but that is
considerably more expensive and complex.

Mike
MU-2


"John Doe" wrote in message
news:R5nOe.17574$Co1.9024@lakeread01...
I found some readings that said the Turbo Lance has a fixed wastegate and
that there are other systems out there that have a manual wastegate that
allows the pilot to better control the turbo.

How much of this is really a factor and should I really care?


On cars, the waste gate is basically a variable rate spring inside a
metered valve. As the pressure increases, the valve opens...as it
decreases, the valve closes. The valve releases excessive pressure within
the turbo, thusly preventing overboost. On cars, they are simplistic. I'm
not sure how much is different between a waste gate on a car and a waste
gate on a plane.

Having said all that, I'm 100% sure I would not own a turbocharged
anything that did not have an automatic wastegate on it.

Greg


  #4  
Old August 27th 05, 09:55 PM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Oracle" wrote in message
newsan.2005.08.26.17.31.58.160929@asdf...
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 16:44:12 +0000, Mike Rapoport wrote:

You could interpret a manual wastegate as something that you have more
control over or you could say that it just provides more workload :-).
The
Turbo Lance wastegate is attacked to the throttle linkage and works
pretty
well. The best system is a compensated automatic wastegate but that is
considerably more expensive and complex.

Mike
MU-2


"John Doe" wrote in message
news:R5nOe.17574$Co1.9024@lakeread01...
I found some readings that said the Turbo Lance has a fixed wastegate and
that there are other systems out there that have a manual wastegate that
allows the pilot to better control the turbo.

How much of this is really a factor and should I really care?


On cars, the waste gate is basically a variable rate spring inside a
metered valve. As the pressure increases, the valve opens...as it
decreases, the valve closes. The valve releases excessive pressure within
the turbo, thusly preventing overboost. On cars, they are simplistic. I'm
not sure how much is different between a waste gate on a car and a waste
gate on a plane.

Having said all that, I'm 100% sure I would not own a turbocharged
anything that did not have an automatic wastegate on it.

Greg



The difference is that the airplane wastegate should compensate for
different altitudes.

Mike
MU-2


  #5  
Old August 26th 05, 06:33 PM
Oracle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 16:44:12 +0000, Mike Rapoport wrote:

You could interpret a manual wastegate as something that you have more
control over or you could say that it just provides more workload :-). The
Turbo Lance wastegate is attacked to the throttle linkage and works pretty
well. The best system is a compensated automatic wastegate but that is
considerably more expensive and complex.


As should also add, I would imagine that a turbo-normalized engine has a
much more complex wastegate. That's obviously a guess on my part.

Greg

  #6  
Old August 22nd 05, 06:40 PM
Dave Butler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Doe wrote:
I found some readings that said the Turbo Lance has a fixed wastegate and
that there are other systems out there that have a manual wastegate that
allows the pilot to better control the turbo.

How much of this is really a factor and should I really care?


For my money, I'd care. There is a series of 6 articles on turbocharging by John
Deakin at avweb.com. Here's a link to the index of John's Pelican Perch articles:

http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182146-1.html

Scan down the list to the "Those Fire-Breathing Turbos" articles.

Dave
  #7  
Old August 22nd 05, 08:39 PM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Dave Butler" wrote in message
news:1124732805.292189@sj-nntpcache-3...
John Doe wrote:
I found some readings that said the Turbo Lance has a fixed wastegate and
that there are other systems out there that have a manual wastegate that
allows the pilot to better control the turbo.

How much of this is really a factor and should I really care?


For my money, I'd care. There is a series of 6 articles on turbocharging
by John Deakin at avweb.com. Here's a link to the index of John's Pelican
Perch articles:

http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182146-1.html

Scan down the list to the "Those Fire-Breathing Turbos" articles.

Dave


Awesome link, THANKS!


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why turbo normalizer? Robert M. Gary Piloting 61 May 20th 05 04:33 PM
Turbo prop AT-6/SNJ? frank may Military Aviation 11 September 5th 04 02:51 PM
Opinions on Cessna 340, 414 and 421 john szpara Owning 55 April 2nd 04 09:08 PM
OPINIONS: THE SOLUTION ArtKramr Military Aviation 4 January 7th 04 10:43 PM
Piper Lance Renee Purner Owning 22 November 4th 03 07:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.