Constant speed props

"GE" wrote in message
...
Thanks for your reply, as well as the debate on my actual intentions.
"Get
with my instructor" was implying that I will be getting the proper
training
in this aircraft from a qualified CFI. I simply wanted to increase my
knowledge prior to that instruction.

No problem, and I assumed you would be doing that. The reason I didn't
handle your post with the information you asked for is because there is
a difference between generics and specifics; and for what you will be
doing, specifics are called for. The checkout in a new complex is
aircraft specific and should be treated as such. Since you didn't state
what specific aircraft you were dealing with, I would refrain from
offering advice other than pointing you to the checkout procedure.
It's my practice that whenever a question like yours comes up without
stating what airplane the question is dealing with, I opt to steer the
poster to the checkout procedure rather than get into the specifics
requested. It's a safety issue with me......a personal preference so to
speak.
Best of luck with your checkout. I'm sure you'll do fine.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

The initial poster asking these questions sounds like he might benefit
from a complex checkout, or at least a thorough checkout in this
airplane given by a competent pilot current in the aircraft!
:-)
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
"Greg Copeland" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:30:03 +0000, EDR wrote:

In article , GE
wrote:

I'm taking delivery today of my first aircraft and it had a
constant speed
prop. I have only flown fixed props thus far. I want to have as
much
understanding of the c-s prop as possible before I get with my
instructor. I
understand the basic difference in what the controls do, but I
don't really
have a good understanding of the hows and whys of flying with them.
Any
general information, explanations, and tips would be greatly
appreciated.

Go to www.avweb.com
on the left side of the screen, select COLUMNS
scroll down to find THE PELICAN"S PERCH
there are articles on fuel injection, manifold pressure, constant
speed
props, leaning, etc
Everything you ever want to know about operating a high performance
aircraft engine is in those articles.


Great link!

I started reading this
article, http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/186619-1.html, and have a
question. In the Runup section, when he starts to test for proper mag
operation, somethings seems odd there. Can someone help explain that?
He
says, "Are the mags working? The leaner the mixture, the more mag drop
you'll see on one mag, and that's normal." He then goes on to say,
"The
EGTs should rise on the first single-mag operation, stay there for the
second, then drop again on the return to BOTH. That rise is
proof-positive
the entire ignition system is working, and working well, and the
leaner
the mixture, the more diagnostic it is."

Can someone help explain the supporting logic there? If both mags are
working properly and you switch to a single mag, why would the EGT go
up?
After all, in theory, you're producing less spark and thusly, a
slightly
less effecient ignition of the fuel/air. I would of thought that EGT
would stay the same or go down *just slightly* when running off of one
mag. Likewise, if one mag is not working, I would fully expect to see
a
big EGT drop for the given problematic mag, which he does agree with.
But, he further asserts that, "If any of them fail to rise or even
drop
during single-mag operation, there is a problem with that plug, the
wire,
or the mag."

So, why would running on one mag, versus two, always cause higher
EGTs?
And why would no rise in EGT indicate a bad mag, wire or plug?

Anyone?


P.S. I cross posted because this seems like good student pilot
material
too.

Greg Copeland wrote:

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 12:30:03 +0000, EDR wrote:


In article , GE
wrote:


I'm taking delivery today of my first aircraft and it had a constant speed
prop. I have only flown fixed props thus far. I want to have as much
understanding of the c-s prop as possible before I get with my instructor. I
understand the basic difference in what the controls do, but I don't really
have a good understanding of the hows and whys of flying with them. Any
general information, explanations, and tips would be greatly appreciated.

Go to www.avweb.com
on the left side of the screen, select COLUMNS
scroll down to find THE PELICAN"S PERCH
there are articles on fuel injection, manifold pressure, constant speed
props, leaning, etc
Everything you ever want to know about operating a high performance
aircraft engine is in those articles.



Great link!

I started reading this
article, http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/186619-1.html, and have a
question. In the Runup section, when he starts to test for proper mag
operation, somethings seems odd there. Can someone help explain that? He
says, "Are the mags working? The leaner the mixture, the more mag drop
you'll see on one mag, and that's normal." He then goes on to say, "The
EGTs should rise on the first single-mag operation, stay there for the
second, then drop again on the return to BOTH. That rise is proof-positive
the entire ignition system is working, and working well, and the leaner
the mixture, the more diagnostic it is."

Can someone help explain the supporting logic there? If both mags are
working properly and you switch to a single mag, why would the EGT go up?
After all, in theory, you're producing less spark and thusly, a slightly
less effecient ignition of the fuel/air. I would of thought that EGT
would stay the same or go down *just slightly* when running off of one
mag. Likewise, if one mag is not working, I would fully expect to see a
big EGT drop for the given problematic mag, which he does agree with.
But, he further asserts that, "If any of them fail to rise or even drop
during single-mag operation, there is a problem with that plug, the wire,
or the mag."

So, why would running on one mag, versus two, always cause higher EGTs?
And why would no rise in EGT indicate a bad mag, wire or plug?

Running on one mag means the fuel air mixture burns slower... so when
the exhaust valve opens, its still burning and the flame front travels
out the valve (or so ive been told).

If you get NO change with a mag check, then the burning characteristics
arent changing, that means the mag is not dropping offline.. which means
its not groundiing out.

I seem to remember this being explained in Deakin's articles but its
been a while since I've read them.

Dave

Greg,

All the explanations you got are good. Now for the carb heat check.
What happens to the EGTs?

FWIW, a while ago I had a too high RPM drop on the mag check with our
Lyc O-360. A look at the engine monitor showed one cylinder's EGT going
very high. This points strongly to one plug being fouled. A little time
of running the engine at high rpm and very lean on the ground cleared
the problem, which could also clearly be seen on the engine monitor.
These things are worth their weight in gold, even on the simpler
engines.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"EDR" wrote in message
...
In article , GE
wrote:

I'm taking delivery today of my first aircraft and it had a constant
speed
prop. I have only flown fixed props thus far. I want to have as much
understanding of the c-s prop as possible before I get with my
instructor. I
understand the basic difference in what the controls do, but I don't
really
have a good understanding of the hows and whys of flying with them. Any
general information, explanations, and tips would be greatly
appreciated.

Go to www.avweb.com
on the left side of the screen, select COLUMNS
scroll down to find THE PELICAN"S PERCH
there are articles on fuel injection, manifold pressure, constant speed
props, leaning, etc
Everything you ever want to know about operating a high performance
aircraft engine is in those articles.

While I would agree that John Deakin is worth reading, people who are new to
high performance engines and constant speed propellers should be aware that
Deakin has many views that are highly controversial, to say the least,
especially when it comes to his religious crusade to get everyone to run
their engines lean of peak (which, of course, has spawned a full-scale
counter-reformation movement that tries to get everyone to run their engines
rich of peak).

EDR will eventually be converted to one side or the other and will run his
own airplane the way he sees fit, much to the disgust of those pilots that
will think he has gone over to the dark side.

If you are renting an airplane, though, run it the way the owner/operator
wants it treated, which is invariably in accordance with the manufacturer's
operating instructions.

On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 08:22:05 -0700, C J Campbell wrote:


"EDR" wrote in message
...
In article , GE
wrote:

I'm taking delivery today of my first aircraft and it had a constant
speed
prop. I have only flown fixed props thus far. I want to have as much
understanding of the c-s prop as possible before I get with my
instructor. I
understand the basic difference in what the controls do, but I don't
really
have a good understanding of the hows and whys of flying with them. Any
general information, explanations, and tips would be greatly
appreciated.

Go to www.avweb.com
on the left side of the screen, select COLUMNS
scroll down to find THE PELICAN"S PERCH
there are articles on fuel injection, manifold pressure, constant speed
props, leaning, etc
Everything you ever want to know about operating a high performance
aircraft engine is in those articles.

While I would agree that John Deakin is worth reading, people who are new to
high performance engines and constant speed propellers should be aware that
Deakin has many views that are highly controversial, to say the least,
especially when it comes to his religious crusade to get everyone to run
their engines lean of peak (which, of course, has spawned a full-scale
counter-reformation movement that tries to get everyone to run their engines
rich of peak).

EDR will eventually be converted to one side or the other and will run his
own airplane the way he sees fit, much to the disgust of those pilots that
will think he has gone over to the dark side.

If you are renting an airplane, though, run it the way the owner/operator
wants it treated, which is invariably in accordance with the manufacturer's
operating instructions.

Timely posting! That was going to be my next post. It bothered me how
lean he was suggesting the engine should be run. I guess that answers
that.

As usual, great advice!


Cheers!

Greg,

It bothered me how
lean he was suggesting the engine should be run.


I am really interested: What exactly bothered you? What points in his
line of reasoning could you not follow? What part of his data did you
find lacking?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On Fri, 25 Jun 2004 10:35:14 +0200, Thomas Borchert wrote:

Greg,

It bothered me how
lean he was suggesting the engine should be run.


I am really interested: What exactly bothered you? What points in his
line of reasoning could you not follow? What part of his data did you
find lacking?

Well, keep in mind that it was the first article of his that I read. It
presumed that I had already been introduced to the LOP concept. I had
not. In fact, for some engines that I used (r/c nitro and car engines),
too lean is a great way to completely destroy an engine. Thusly, it did
bother me to see him talking about leaning an engine beyond where I would
normally expect it be richened back up.

Since that comment, I have continued to read many more of his articles. I
Think he makes many excellent points and has a powerful argument. Am I
completely sold on the notion? Nope. Am I interested enough to learn
more about it? Absoluetely. In fact, I pushed a pointer of his articles
to a pilot friend of mine (my father). It should make for some
interesting conversations. I'll be interested to find out if he's
even heard of the concept before, as he's been flying before I was born.

Cheers!

Greg

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
While I would agree that John Deakin is worth reading, people who are new
to
high performance engines and constant speed propellers should be aware
that
Deakin has many views that are highly controversial, to say the least,

Does her or doesn't he provide copious data to support his position, and
doesn't he also provide copious data to show that it's the contrary postion
that's full of it?

especially when it comes to his religious crusade to get everyone to run
their engines lean of peak (which, of course, has spawned a full-scale
counter-reformation movement that tries to get everyone to run their
engines
rich of peak).

See above.

C,

If you are renting an airplane, though, run it the way the owner/operator
wants it treated, which is invariably in accordance with the manufacturer's
operating instructions.


I don't know. If there's a better way, why not embrace it. Most rentals I
know can't run LOP anyway, so the point is kind of moot.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)