Hi Guppy,
Sounds like the view of someone who has never operated a radial engine, and who has no training in operating a radial engine.
No, I have never operated a radial, but radials were covered in the ATPL groundschool course I did. Although admittedly that was donkeys years ago.
No, it's not, and if you're hand-turning the propeller to "suck in" fuel, then you're doing something stupid. Don't do that. This is why you have a starter motor.
I was taught (by an ex-RAF instructor who had flown in WWII) that it
was for 'sucking in' and to call out 'sucking in' before swinging the prop (with the fuel turned on but the mags off). Once this was done, the swinger called out 'switches on', the person in the cockpit threw the left mag and replied 'contact'. The prop was then swung again to start the engine. I was flying Austers and Tiger Moths at the time and they didn't have starter motors, they were all hand swung.
Hydraulic lock is often the result of worn valve guides, as the oil entering the cylinder doesn't drain from above the piston, but from beneath, through the cylinder head. Oil consumption has nothing to do with hydraulic lock, and has nothing to do with a worn engine.
Point taken.
Running the engine through on the starter motor is advised with some engines, but not others...
I was sure it could't be a requirement for
all radials, which seemed to be what was being suggested here; the impossibility of doing this on Beverleys and Stirlings being cases in point.
You're envisioning priming the engine and turning it through to better "prime" it, and all this does is wash protective oil off cylinder walls...it doesn't enhance the start.
Yes, but that is what was current in the UK in the 60s. It was actually in the POH for the aircraft in use at the time. I always assumed that the designers had made some kind of balance judgement that it was better to pay the penalty of fast wearing cylinder walls than repeated poor starting.
Regards,
Broomstick.