Oh my god. I can't believe that I'm biting again. But seeing as this will effectively be recorded for posterity, there are a number of inaccuracies and mistruths that need to be corrected (again). (Apologies to everyone else for having to drag this out slightly further. It's beginning to feel like pulling teeth...)
Right first things first.
You dont need an in depth knowledge of your engine and engine operating principles to fly but it is my opinion that it helps. I accept that my technical knowledge isn't as in depth as it could be on this subject (as I've been saying all along with the references to 'I'm no expert'). I now certainly know more about the internal machinations of a Lycoming engine than I did at the beginning of this 'discussion'. And I've got you to thank for that, Gaseous. However, I still stand by my original (and in hindsight, grossly over-simplified) assertion that '
by and large, a FI version of the SAME engine will produce more power than the carb version'. (It certainly applies to auto engines). However, we now know that Fuel Injection is only one very small piece of that puzzle.
I didn't start the story that the R22 may well be killed off. I know. Neither did I. Heck, I haven't even mentioned the R22. (Ooops, there was the one brief mention of the R22B replacing the A and HP. Nothing to do with their use of carburettors though). All I did was try to explain why the Raven2 uses Fuel Injection.
Yourself and Headsethair have argued eloquently for the retention of the status quo (carb). Are you sure? Are you really sure? Can I suggest that you go back and read my posts again. Properly this time. Like I've already said, all I was trying to do was to explain why the Raven2 uses Fuel Injection. It seems that you and headsethair have been running with this pro/anti carb debate.
Now, if you'd asked me what I felt about this
personally, then I would've told you that I'd quite happily see all carburettors replaced with injectors. But you didn't so you presumed that I was 'pro-carb'. And I can even give you a real world example - I much prefered flying the CBi version rather than the CB model of S300. The extra power (whether real or perceived) and the use of fuel injection were only a couple of reasons. So you were more right than you realised when you said
Lighten up, we're on the same side.
(And before you accuse me of some sudden New Labour-esque U-turn, go back and read my posts again. Maybe you'll even notice that I haven't re-edited any of them after the initial posting, even if I did change my mind).
A final thought regarding carb heat - have you actually considered that there are plenty of places on this planet where carb ice is never, or at least very rarely ever, a problem? (Anywhere with very low relative humidity for starters such as the outback of Oz or even maybe somewhere like Torrance, California....
) No carb ice obviously = no need for carb heat. Why, otherwise, is there the carb heat locking mechanism on R22BIIs? (And no, this is not some pro-carb argument. Just an appreciation that we don't all live in cold and wet P******, Lancashire).
And do I think you're
Dangerous? No, probably not. You seem to be more concerned about the details than most private owners that I've come across. But once again, you mis-interpreted what I was alluding to. The characteristics that I was talking about were being stubborn, obstinate and having a 'I'm always right' attitude, even in the face of irrefutable evidence. These characteristics alone aren't necessarily dangerous but can be a pointer to more worrying practices. I just hope that you don't take this attitude with you into the cockpit...
You also said that
I try to learn as much as possible about what I do cos I think this helps reduce risks. Quite right. But the photo of your site looks pretty tight. Is this the level of risk that you're willing to accept? Or to put it another way, would a commercial operator expose themselves to a similar level of risk in a single engine machine? (These are rhetorical questions. I'm not expecting an answer. Actually, I implore you not to answer so that this thread can die the death that it deserves). (And apologies in advance if the photo doesn't show the football field size area that you might use for approaches and departures. Still quite tight for parking though).
(which is likely to be short and messy according to B73) Bit of a low blow that one. I genuinely don't want Mr AAIB to be telling me about BDKD in one of his reports. And I don't think that he will do in all honesty. But there's always room for more refresher training.
And that, I hope, is my last word on the subject!
Regards,
B73
PS I've ranked this whole thread as '1 star ...Worst' in an effort to discourage people from wasting their time reading it.