My wife getting scared

Jay Honeck wrote:
Can we agree that idle power/full power engine management will cause
more wear and tear (AKA: "Damage") to an engine than steady-state
operation?
No. Why?

I'm no thermodynamist, but I believe it's commonly accepted that
taking an internal combustion engine from steady state/low RPMs to
full power/high RPMs (as one would repeatedly do during touch & goes
and engine-out practice) is more harmful to the engine than simply
steady-state/mid-RPM power settings.

A rough analogy would be to think of drag racers versus rally car
engines. One lasts 20 to 30 seconds, the other lasts 1000 miles.

And one makes more horsepower PER CYLINDER than the rally car makes in
total!

Matt

Jay,

but I believe it's commonly accepted that
taking an internal combustion engine from steady state/low RPMs to
full power/high RPMs (as one would repeatedly do during touch & goes
and engine-out practice) is more harmful to the engine than simply
steady-state/mid-RPM power settings.


Judging from the thread, it's not that accepted, it seems.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ps.com...
Yeah, I hear ya. I just don't think an occasional simulated engine-out
practice is "needlessly".

And I still want to know *how* it harms the engine. Exactly what parts
will
be damaged, and why?

Can we agree that idle power/full power engine management will cause
more wear and tear (AKA: "Damage") to an engine than steady-state
operation?

Considering that the overwhelming majority of W&T occurs during a cold
engine start, that would be an odd conclusion. The worst W&T on an engine is
DISuse.

What's worse for your car; short trips and multiple startups, or stop and go
driving?

Shirl wrote:

My mechanic was at my hangar this morning. I was picking his brain about
this stuff. He said an airplane should be flown *at least* once a week
to keep condensation/corrosion away (and other reasons but that being
most important). He said Lycoming documentation actually states that an
engine should be preserved (pickled) if it isn't going to be flown for
10 days or more, although no one does that. I've heard of pickling in
extreme temps (cold) when not being flown *for an entire season*, but
even then, seems a lot of people just let them sit.


Your mechanic is a bit off on the pickling time frame. If the Lycoming
documentation he is referring to is Service Letter L180B (Engine Preservation
for Active and Stored Aircraft), the interval is actually 30 days of
inactivity, not 10 days.

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

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200710/1

Jay Honeck wrote:
Yep, I agree. You're the voice of experience here, which is why I'm
engaged in this thread. I *am* worried about not practicing the
procedures enough, but I just don't want to shorten the lifespan of a
very expensive engine needlessly...


Jay, I have to ask. Which do you think is going to have the greater negative
effect on your engine and/or general well being? A few simulated engine outs
every once in a while or landing 1/2 a mile short after a real engine out?

Jay, I have to ask. Which do you think is going to have the greater negative
effect on your engine and/or general well being? A few simulated engine outs
every once in a while or landing 1/2 a mile short after a real engine out?

Well, ya got me there. But, of course, the odds of a real engine out
are (thankfully) quite small.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
Jay, I have to ask. Which do you think is going to have the greater
negative effect on your engine and/or general well being? A few
simulated engine outs every once in a while or landing 1/2 a mile
short after a real engine out?

Well, ya got me there. But, of course, the odds of a real engine out
are (thankfully) quite small.

That's the point. We practice lots of things that have pretty small odds of
actually happening. If things happen every flight or every 5th flight we
don't have to practice them because we do them.

Jay Honeck wrote:
Jay, I have to ask. Which do you think is going to have the greater negative
effect on your engine and/or general well being? A few simulated engine outs
every once in a while or landing 1/2 a mile short after a real engine out?

Well, ya got me there. But, of course, the odds of a real engine out
are (thankfully) quite small.

Yeah, I used to say that, too!

Shirl

Shirl,

Well, ya got me there. But, of course, the odds of a real engine out
are (thankfully) quite small.

Yeah, I used to say that, too!


They still are, even thought you've experienced one.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Jay:
Well, ya got me there. But, of course, the odds of a real engine out
are (thankfully) quite small.
Shirl:
Yeah, I used to say that, too!

Thomas Borchert wrote:
They still are, even thought you've experienced one.

Yes, that's true.
What I meant was that no one should take comfort that "the odds of a
real engine out are quite small" or use that as justification for never
practicing the engine-out drill, because even small odds mean that they
happen to *someone*.