Carb heat: my new policy. Any comments

"Stealth Pilot" wrote in message
...

I'm with you Bob.
I once thought I'd throttle back and poke under some mist and pop out
the other side and resume. when the power came off the revs started
dropping and dropping and dropping. I bunged on full carb heat and
then full throttle and still the revs kept dropping. out the corner of
the eye I noticed a shaft of sunlight and turned toward the hole in
the mist. about 2 seconds into the sunlight and I had full power back
again. when it happens it happens quickly.

now back to the op's description of a rev drop on opening the
throttle.
my bet is that the carb has been in service for quite a while and the
leather bucket seal on the accelerator pump is knackered. it isnt
giving the full squirt of fuel on acceleration. the other possibility
is that the little jet pipe has moved out of the centre venturi
position and the squirt isnt making it up into the inlet tubing.
far better me thinks that he doesnt wank on creating new procedures
and gets the a&p's to check the carby functioning.

Stealth Pilot

Very interesting points, which I plan to keep in mind when I return to
flying.

The only thing that I can add is that the results might be more reliable if
the A&P is experienced in servicing carburetors--and possibly magnetoes as
well.

Peter
(Having seen some poor work from folks who should have known better)

On Sep 7, 5:53*am, Stealth Pilot
wrote:

I'm with you Bob.
I once thought I'd throttle back and poke under some mist and pop out
the other side and resume. when the power came off the revs started
dropping and dropping and dropping. I bunged on full carb heat and
then full throttle and still the revs kept dropping. out the corner of
the eye I noticed a shaft of sunlight and turned toward the hole in
the mist. about 2 seconds into the sunlight and I had full power back
again. *when it happens it happens quickly.

I lost the engine in the J-3 once during climb out. I had done a stop-
n-go and even though I was under full power I had picked up some carb
ice after turning off the carb heat in order to go. I got down to
about 200 feet before the power came back. Since then I've always done
stop-n-gos will carb heat on until I get a positive climb. I've not
had that problem since using that procedure. That procedure is in
conflict with the OPs. Now, it is true that a J-3 is going to freeze
up much faster than a Cherokee and somewhat faster than C-172 but it
just shows that it can happen very, very fast.

-Robert

Tman wrote:

I think I'm going to follow a new SOP. Turn the carb heat off on
mid-final. Reasoning: no carb, esp a warm one is going to ice up in 30
seconds, sets me up better for a go-around, and will prevent this
stumble business (I did test it out at altitude, and it prevents or at
least seriously mitigates the stumble).

thoughts?
T

Well that will make it easier on the crash investigators. They will see
the carb heat in the off position and mark it down to carb ice caused by
pilot error. Think of the money you will save the tax payers.

"Tman" x@x wrote in message
. ..
Flying a lot of 152s and 172s with carb heat lately. When inbound, I've I
think I'm going to follow a new SOP. Turn the carb heat off on mid-final.
Reasoning: no carb, esp a warm one is going to ice up in 30 seconds, sets
me up better for a go-around, and will prevent this stumble business (I
did test it out at altitude, and it prevents or at least seriously
mitigates the stumble).

thoughts?
T

Then again, how hard is it to shove in the carb heat knob while you advance
the throttle in a Cessna? They are right next to each other. I have always
just pushed in the carb heat knob at the same time as I advance the
throttle, not that difficult to do, even using the same hand.

Randy L.
--
Remember: Any landing that you can walk away from,
is a landing that you can be fined, sued, or prosecuted for.

On Sep 8, 9:55*am, "RandyL" wrote:

Then again, how hard is it to shove in the carb heat knob while you advance
the throttle in a Cessna? They are right next to each other. I have always
just pushed in the carb heat knob at the same time as I advance the
throttle, not that difficult to do, even using the same hand.

Bingo. Why risk carb ice just to not have to remember to push the carb
heat in?

-Robert

Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Sep 8, 9:55 am, "RandyL" wrote:

Then again, how hard is it to shove in the carb heat knob while you advance
the throttle in a Cessna? They are right next to each other. I have always
just pushed in the carb heat knob at the same time as I advance the
throttle, not that difficult to do, even using the same hand.

Bingo. Why risk carb ice just to not have to remember to push the carb
heat in?

-Robert

We have a similar thing going on right now in the Warbird community.
After the McKitrick go around torque roll mort in his P51 last year, we
have one very respected member of our community advocating making
approaches in the P51 Mustang using cruise settings on the prop instead
of the normal 2700RPM (Meto) setup used by pilots flying approach in
this airplane.
His theory is that on a go around, where torque is a huge issue on the
Mustang if power is misused, keeping the prop in cruise won't hurt the
engine if it's over boosted unintentionally and will deny the extremly
high torque moment associated with the application of too much power too
quickly.
He maintains this "safety valve" will help save lives.
I have a great respect for this pilot's opinion.....normally!
As someone involved in the Mustang community as a safety adviser, I find
his "theory" "interesting" to say the leat but I'm against it.
Doing this flies in the face of the normal Dash 1 approved go around
setup for the 51 which is to run the prop up to 2700 and DON'T ham hand
the throttle if needed! It as well inserts a "crutch" for pilots flying
this airplane that should NOT be needed. Proper checkout and proper
handling of the airplane is the right approach to saving lives in the
Mustang, NOT altering the way the airplane is normally flown to give
those pilots flying it a "safety valve".

I see a similarity in the approach to the two issues, the other being
the use of carb heat here.

--
Dudley Henriques

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...

We have a similar thing going on right now in the Warbird community. After
the McKitrick go around torque roll mort in his P51 last year, we have one
very respected member of our community advocating making approaches in the
P51 Mustang using cruise settings on the prop instead of the normal
2700RPM (Meto) setup used by pilots flying approach in this airplane.
His theory is that on a go around, where torque is a huge issue on the
Mustang if power is misused, keeping the prop in cruise won't hurt the
engine if it's over boosted unintentionally and will deny the extremly
high torque moment associated with the application of too much power too
quickly.
He maintains this "safety valve" will help save lives.
I have a great respect for this pilot's opinion.....normally!
As someone involved in the Mustang community as a safety adviser, I find
his "theory" "interesting" to say the leat but I'm against it.
Doing this flies in the face of the normal Dash 1 approved go around setup
for the 51 which is to run the prop up to 2700 and DON'T ham hand the
throttle if needed! It as well inserts a "crutch" for pilots flying this
airplane that should NOT be needed. Proper checkout and proper handling of
the airplane is the right approach to saving lives in the Mustang, NOT
altering the way the airplane is normally flown to give those pilots
flying it a "safety valve".

I see a similarity in the approach to the two issues, the other being the
use of carb heat here.

--
Dudley Henriques

Geeez Dudley, how the hell did you get from dropping carb heat on short
final, to an essay like this in only two posts?

Put the O2 mask back on.

Lonnie wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
We have a similar thing going on right now in the Warbird community. After
the McKitrick go around torque roll mort in his P51 last year, we have one
very respected member of our community advocating making approaches in the
P51 Mustang using cruise settings on the prop instead of the normal
2700RPM (Meto) setup used by pilots flying approach in this airplane.
His theory is that on a go around, where torque is a huge issue on the
Mustang if power is misused, keeping the prop in cruise won't hurt the
engine if it's over boosted unintentionally and will deny the extremly
high torque moment associated with the application of too much power too
quickly.
He maintains this "safety valve" will help save lives.
I have a great respect for this pilot's opinion.....normally!
As someone involved in the Mustang community as a safety adviser, I find
his "theory" "interesting" to say the leat but I'm against it.
Doing this flies in the face of the normal Dash 1 approved go around setup
for the 51 which is to run the prop up to 2700 and DON'T ham hand the
throttle if needed! It as well inserts a "crutch" for pilots flying this
airplane that should NOT be needed. Proper checkout and proper handling of
the airplane is the right approach to saving lives in the Mustang, NOT
altering the way the airplane is normally flown to give those pilots
flying it a "safety valve".

I see a similarity in the approach to the two issues, the other being the
use of carb heat here.

--
Dudley Henriques

Geeez Dudley, how the hell did you get from dropping carb heat on short
final, to an essay like this in only two posts?

Put the O2 mask back on.



Well hello again Maxie. Never get tired of seeing your deeply incisive,
informative and thoughtful posts. What's the deal with all the name
changes though. Can't seem to make any sense out of why you bother doing
it. Why not just post with the Maxwell moniker. Just wondering??
:-))


--
Dudley Henriques