Jabawocky,
I think we might be getting lost in the translation somewhat, please forgive me the quote function is U/S so I’ll use italics instead.
"That statement is likely trip off a whole new round of incorrect myth and confusion for some low time/experience pilots. (no more than the myths they get taught at flying schools all over the country"
Yeah yeah, but still not good to use others failings to justify yours, but I take the tongue in cheek delivery.
"It is imperative to apply sound scientific principals in your above comparison and that means you must have exactly the same configuration bar one change, the power output. Same AoA same mixture same OAT same altitude same IAS same cooling configuration. No, not really. The statement was that I can have higher power being proceed and lower CHT, which given the higher density of cooling air and equally appropriate low ICP's is very real. However I will explain in more details below**"
Well it certainly read that way, and here it is……….. "It is a commonly held belief that the higher the power higher the CHT. this is not true. I could forgive some newbie for taking that at face value because it is pretty much a standalone statement although later qualified by how you did it.
The point is if no other parameter changes except power is increased then a higher CHT will follow, these engines are after all heat engines by principal. Therefore it IS a correct belief in its purity.
“Certainly using the full mixture spread capability you can do many things with temperature including increasing power whilst reducing CHT and EGT, but this is not the same as saying it is not true that the higher the power the higher the CHT.
Help me here, this does not make sense. How can I use mixture to increase power AND reduce CHT under the constant parameters of flight? The EGT absolute value is of no concern and not relevant”
Perhaps I mislead you, I am not suggesting here that power was increased with mixture alone just that the full ROP/LOP spectrum was available, what I was eluding to was that with a throttle or RPM derived power increase you can then manipulate the mixture setting from a ROP setting to a LOP setting and achieve higher power with a reduced CHT. For example (and telling you nothing here) increase power by say 4” of MaP and from a setting of 25 ROP then reduce mixture to 35 LOP and you will likely be in the paddock of increased power and reduced CHT. The EGT inclusion was for illustrative purpose, of course it is irrelevant unless you are sitting on a highly strung turbo system.
The original point I was making was that yes it is possible to increase power AND see a reduced CHT, but I see this as vastly different to your opening statement claiming it is incorrect to believe that increasing power will increase CHT. It might be obvious to those in the know what the point is you are making but a new mind trying to unlearn and relearn the true principals of combustion needs to be handled carefully.