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

Cessna 340 High Altitude Operations (Please Help)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 31st 11, 02:58 AM
UIO Spotter UIO Spotter is offline
Junior Member
 
First recorded activity by AviationBanter: Jan 2011
Posts: 2
Default Cessna 340 High Altitude Operations (Please Help)

Dear Colleagues.

My name is Stefano Rota. I am from Quito, Ecuador. I am a commercial pilot, I did all my flight school in ICARO FLIGHT ACADEMY www.learn2fly.aero here in Quito. Currently, i have a chance of flying as a PIC a Cessna 340 for a friend of mine, based here in Quito. I used to fly this as a copilot but I didnt know that much back then and last, I was just being an assistant for COMS etc.

Any way, the fact is this is an airplane which I am aware is not adequate for operating at this altitude (Takeoffs) and I want to get some things clear before we start. So if possible I would like to receive a few tips, from people who have operated C340 or similar C421, C414 at different elevations. The airplane is getting maintenance done in TAMIAMI and were gonna ferry the plane down with the instructor, and do a few flight here in the highland as the airplane handles totally different.

Quito, is the capital, airport based at 9,228 FT. Yes, you saw right, NINE THOUSAND FEET. Now. I have been reading the POH and the procedures and all, and I have a doubt. This C340 has two Continental 6 Cyliner 310HP engines. In my flight school we used to fly Cessna 172's with 210HP engines, and for example we used to reduce the mixture for startup, basically to ZERO. On the run up we would regulate it based on RPMS, etc, and in takeoff we would get 12gph. And then we would never touch it again.

NOW, on the 340, I was reading the manuals and the takeoff procedures say MIXTURE RICH. Now. I have some doubt. As we are taking off from 9 thousand feet I find it hard to believe the mixture needs to be rich! And based on my experience thats not right. The books don't say anything regarding high altitude takeoffs so Im lost. Is it correct to take this plane off with the mixtures rich regardless of the altitude? In the MAXIMUM CLIMB checklist you see the following

1. Power 2700 Full Throttle Below 20,000FT
2. Airspeed 108
3. Mixtures FULL RICH BELOW 20,000FT
LEAN AS REQUIRED ABOVE 20,000FT

........

This is the only LIST or thing I could see regarding Maximum Climbs etc, but I will keep on looking. So, whats your take on this guys? I believe id be killing my performance with the engines at that rate of fuel flow. But thats why I am asking. We used to take it off like that, we had a long takeoff roll, but it had a good rational climb. But tell me what you think

Thanks in advance, and please, let me know, and I will have more questions. Thank you.

Stefano Rota
  #2  
Old February 1st 11, 10:54 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Scott Braddock
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default Cessna 340 High Altitude Operations (Please Help)

On 1/30/11 4:58 PM, UIO Spotter wrote:
/snip/
NOW, on the 340, I was reading the manuals and the takeoff procedures
say MIXTURE RICH. Now. I have some doubt. As we are taking off from 9
thousand feet I find it hard to believe the mixture needs to be rich!
And based on my experience thats not right. The books don't say
anything regarding high altitude takeoffs so Im lost. Is it correct to
take this plane off with the mixtures rich regardless of the altitude?
In the MAXIMUM CLIMB checklist you see the following

1. Power 2700 Full Throttle Below 20,000FT
2. Airspeed 108
3. *Mixtures FULL RICH BELOW 20,000FT
LEAN AS REQUIRED ABOVE 20,000FT*
.......

This is the only LIST or thing I could see regarding Maximum Climbs etc,
but I will keep on looking. So, whats your take on this guys? I
believe id be killing my performance with the engines at that rate of
fuel flow. But thats why I am asking. We used to take it off like
that, we had a long takeoff roll, but it had a good rational climb. But
tell me what you think

/snip/

Stefano,

The big difference here is that the 340's engines are turbocharged, and
have altitude compensated fuel injection pumps. The engine in the 172XP
you flew did *not* have either of those features. To make a long story
short, Cessna's published leaning procedures are correct, i.e full rich
below 20,000 ft., for full power takeoffs and climb. This is because the
turbochargers will provide the engines with Sea Level manifold pressures
up in to the 12-15,000 ft. range, and the injection pumps will
automatically lean for best full rich performance above those altitudes.

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane
  #3  
Old February 2nd 11, 05:43 AM
UIO Spotter UIO Spotter is offline
Junior Member
 
First recorded activity by AviationBanter: Jan 2011
Posts: 2
Default

Scott, you made my day! THANK YOU! Finnaly some one took the time to give me a logical explanation. I for some reason never thought of the turbochargers! Makes so much plain sense! Thanks and I owe you big time!
  #4  
Old February 8th 11, 07:58 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 84
Default Cessna 340 High Altitude Operations (Please Help)

On Feb 1, 9:43*pm, UIO Spotter wrote:
Scott, you made my day! THANK YOU! Finnaly some one took the time to
give me a logical explanation. *I for some reason never thought of the
turbochargers! Makes so much plain sense! Thanks and I owe you big time!

--
UIO Spotter


In order to get book performance, you will need to verify that you are
getting
correct manifold pressure and fuel flow on every takeoff. If the
system is
not in good repair, it could easily not give takeoff power at 9000'.

Takeoff distance will still be quite a bit longer than lower
elevations. And
you need to use accurate speeds for landing... it will look really
fast out
the window.

We practice at Leadville, CO elevation 9927' 6500 feet length.

Bill Hale Loveland CO BPPP instructor
  #5  
Old May 24th 11, 10:03 AM
SophiaEnman SophiaEnman is offline
Banned
 
First recorded activity by AviationBanter: Apr 2011
Location: Mali
Posts: 13
Send a message via ICQ to SophiaEnman
Default

Prodam assign be forthright database - 130 000 lines in it, - puzzle countries - CA,US,DE,DENMARK,IT,UK,EST,LH,CZ, and other EU,+ TW,Thailand and other. Valid -5-30%.
Can plain you to Team Viewer, can wor auspices of Garant (escrow). Lowest order 5000 lines - fee - 0,07$ per line. if fellowship more than 10k lines then 0,05$ per line.
All derive 130000 cc - 10000$ . Contacts email: skype:ccseller icq:603948540

Prodam credit card database - 130 000 lines in it, - mix countries - CA,US,DE,DENMARK,IT,UK,EST,LH,CZ, and other EU,+ TW,Thailand and other. Valid -5-30%.
Can show you through Team Viewer, can wor through Garant (escrow). Minimum order 5000 lines - price - 0,07$ per line. if order more than 10k lines then 0,05$ per line.
All base 130000 cc - 10000$ . Contacts email -
skype:ccseller icq:603948540
 




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
High altitude Helicycle Stu Fields Rotorcraft 8 August 18th 09 08:41 PM
High altitude flutter - Vne bildan Soaring 58 January 8th 09 09:04 PM
High Altitude Linnies TTaylor at cc.usu.edu Soaring 4 August 4th 06 10:47 PM
High altitude & RPM abripl Home Built 1 September 1st 05 12:12 AM
High Altitude operations (Turbo charge???) Andre Home Built 68 July 11th 03 11:59 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.