How to thread drift in 720 posts!!!

[LeadSled]

This forum does not reflect the knowledge and understanding of ALL Engineers.

Folks,
And thank goodness for that!! The more I read of yr right's efforts, the more I find it hard to believe he is really a LAME.
The many LAMEs I have known over the years are a bit like pilots, a variable lot, but many of them have been very competent and very smart people.
Tootle pip!!

[LeadSled]

Stalling, according to CASA requires about 200ft to recover, when in reality, Military flyers have a 50 ft Max requirement, and a 10ft average height loss for stall recoveries. Ultralights,
Be very careful of this one, CASA is not necessarily right, but neither are the ex-mil pilots. Concentration on minimum height loss in a stall was a major contributor to the loss of AF447, the A330 that went into the Atlantic.

Subsequently, Boeing and Airbus have revised their training material and recommendations for recovery from high angles of attack, to emphasize the importance of reducing the angel of attack adequately.

Some CASA office's FOIs will actually fail at pilot for any height loss in a stall recovery, during a base check, thus demanding a situation that greatly increases the likelihood of further loss of control of the aircraft. Also, most CASA FOIs seem to have difficulty with the idea that recovery from a high angle of attack at FL390 is different to being in the approach configuration at , say, 1500'.

Another example of needing to be very skeptical of what you are being told, an impossible situation for a starting student.

Recovery from a "minimum controllable airspeed" demonstration (assume it is the same as a stall, the difference for this argument are not worth worrying about) in a B727 takes about 7000'.

Sorry that this is off topic, but it is too important to let go by.

Tootle pip!!

[jdeakin]

As a side note, I don't know a single piston LAME who could afford to buy a seat on an APS course. Given an opportunity, I would be stoked to sit in on a course irrespective of it's location. One of the driving forces behind development of the ONLINE course.

John Deakin

[cockney steve]

A PUBLIC APOLOGY TO YR RIGHT

It would appear that i have "been saying things" about this member, and have been "bosting" (and boasting as well) about my abilities ,despite never having any Aviation engineering experience.

I am truly sorry, Yr Right. I shall, in future, refrain from commenting on any of your posts.
That way, you can continue to get rich replacing "cly"'s and I'll continue to play with my Rolls in my twilight years.

[No Hoper]

Reference knowledge of LAMEs:
In the main I would not think that the theory of LOP is of high value to the repair and maintenance of aircraft.
Engine management, methods of rotor track and balance, various other maintenance procedures are sometimes discussed quite heatedly in hangars and brew rooms where I have worked.
There have been times early in the morning after a long long day when a particular problem won't resolve according to my favored theory I will revert to someone elses and fix the issue
Cockney Steve I don't think it is a Rolls you are playing with

[yr right]

Well leadsled I sent a few PM last night and said what ive done in the industry you didn't get one and I wonder why.


Steve apology is well received thank you all I ask for is for you to take note doesn't mean you don't have a view. But if I say something as you seen I may know what im talking about.


As in life theory's that work on a class room board don't always work in real life. My experience shows me what happens it is a simple as that. And as I said to someone on this post we were doing extreme lean out on our own design fuel injection long before this subject ever came up. Difference was if it **** itself we just rolled to a stop


Now as for LBS the question was not what was it, it was what comes first POH or LBS
AS I said all maintenance on a VH rego aircraft is done IAW the LBS.
What is in the LBS is another matter


Raaf know all about stall recovery. 707 rings a bell. Like most things they knew and no better than anyone else.

[Aussie Bob]

In the main I would not think that the theory of LOP is of high value to the repair and maintenance of aircraft.

I have been thinking of this for some time. What good is engine knowledge on a fabric repair? What good is engine knowledge when you don't have a pilots license? I want my aeroplane fixed when I toddle off the the LAME's shop, when I want a treatise on the internal combustion engine, I will book into an appropriate course, which I have already done.

I have said several times on this thread I would happily use yr rights services, nothing has changed.

[yr right]

Lead sled
Im reminded of the story that I was told about a 747 captain at the Q
Story was that he sounded the horn at the nose wheel. The engineer went , placed the head set on and asked what the problem was, The captain replied with is that the mechanic, the engineer replied no it is the engineer. He replied oh what ever. The engineer competed his task and buzzed back.
And said
Is that the bus driver.
The pilot refused to push back until he got an apology
The engineer never gave one,
Ops called the pilot and said push back now or you will be relieved of your duties.
The aircraft was pushed back


Your not that captain are you by any chance,


I was told this by several engineers at the Q and believe it to be true.


Cheers


now when I wont to fly some where I get a pilot to take me, I don't ask him to fix it but.

[yr right]

I think in the main that most shops arnt out to rip or do unnecessary work, I have work at a place like that and I well lets say didn't stay long as I left. The place had a bad name and since had a name change.
Its not good for business really it takes a lot of time to do a cly change and if your aircraft is at the back of the hangar awaiting parts its taking up space that something else may be good be used for.
This idea that LAME wont to spend al your cash replace parts cause we is really not true.


cheers

[rnuts]

Can someone please act as translater for yr right's posts.
It's killing me !!:ugh:
I find understanding quantum physics easier !!

[Jabawocky]

Jaba,

Please confirm to all of us, UTR's enquiry that you are not posting under the name of 'yr right'. Thanks mate.

Definitely not.

I am in Wanaka, btter things to do right now! :ok:

[Creampuff]

it will be at its hottest as it passes though to get to lop buy that time its already started to be damaged,
Hows that didn't see that coming did you.Actually, quite a lot of people saw it coming because there are lots of people who’ve made the same mistake as you.

As Ultralights has pointed out, if you are correct it inevitably follows that the way in which you say engines must be run must do damage.

I have in front of me a POH that says: “Lean the mixture and note the point on the indicator that the temperature peaks and starts to fall.” By your own logic, the engine has already started to be damaged by operating it in accordance with the POH.

As it turns out the POH then ‘mandates’ operation at a setting that the data demonstrates is near the most likely to cause damage: “CRUISE (LEAN) MIXTURE – Increases[sic] the mixture until the EGT shows a drop of 25 degrees F below peak on the rich side of peak.”

I was quickly coming to the conclusion that you are a pig-ignorant old fool, but then I realised that it’s almost impossible for someone with your claimed experience to be so unwise. My guess is that you’re actually an apprentice or son (or both) of someone with lots of experience, and you’ve picked up enough knowledge to be very dangerous but far from wise.

[yr right]

Sorry should not post so early or late
Cheers

[Ultralights]

how can we know at what temperature the actual PEAK EGT is? when this measurement is taken some distance down the exhaust pipe, is the probe 1 inch from the valve? 2 inches? 3? each location will give a considerable difference in temperatures..

[43Inches]

The captain replied with is that the mechanic, the engineer replied no it is the engineer. He replied oh what ever. The engineer competed his task and buzzed back.

Only Australia, NZ, India and Canada refer to aircraft techs as "engineers", I thought Technician was the US (mechanic certificate) and European qualification. Maybe he thought he was in the US or Europe?

Its a bit like US (also Canada and NZ) train drivers calling themselves engineers. In India the qualification is a Loco Pilot.

[yr right]

Puff I never sent you what Ive done you shown by your words the reason why. Dangerous you think read what I have posted and then repeat it. No one engine failure not one in flight shut done. At the risk of repeating my self I see what happens and mess left behind on the hangar floor. Unfortunaly what is shown in a class room floor dosent always related to what happens in real life. So why then do I see so many burnt valves with people that try it. More so what is a normal failure.
More science now.
Cheers

[Old Akro]

While the notion that a valve rotates is a commonly accepted notion, it is not supported by the engine monitor data

Really?

http://www.fev.com/fileadmin/fev-resources/Publications/Multidisciplinary_Services/2010-01-1096_Optimizing_Valve_Rotational_Speed_Using_Taguchi_Techniq ues.pdf


I was lazy and just asked my friend google and picked the first paper I found. But you can follow through the references if you like. These date back to 1951.

The best engine guys in the world are Ricardo plc (English HO), AVL (Austrian HO) and FEV (German HO). These guys do most engine development in the world, although they can be very discrete about clients. Their clients frequently claim work done by these companies as their own. One of my fiends worked for FEV in Detroit with one of the US big 3 who were claiming the FEV work as their own. If you go to the Ricardo library in Shoreham you can see some of the lengths they go to in order to protect the identity of clients who request it.

Ricardo is head-quartered on the same Estate in Shoreham where Sir Harry Ricardo lived when he invented the Octane rating. Go there and you will see 50 engine test cells running 24 hours / day. I believe AVL has more. Even sleepy Orbital in Perth has a dozen.

The best engine test cell hardware & software is made by these 3 who sell engine test cells to the car manufacturers.

20 years ago (or more) even Gibson Motorsport with their 2 dyne facility in the back of the race workshop in Dandenong was doing intra cylinder pressure logging of their race engines (I have the sensor they used) and some work on combustion photography.

Go to Engine Test Expo in Stuttgart in June and you'll see rows of companies specialising in engine test sensors to study things like this. Its a whole industry.

Its only aviation that is still discovering these concepts. In fact, its probably really only MCI & Lycoming because as John Deakin points out P&W pretty much had it figured out several decades ago.

One of the real problems with aircraft engines is that valve seat design has not kept up with modern technology. I'm convinced that a significant part of the Continental disease is just poor, old fashioned valve seat design & valve metallurgy. My hypothesis is that a lot of the valve seat recession that is seen with Continental cylinders and blamed in mixture practices is just poor seat profile and poor valve head metallurgy.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Been helping my son get through his LAME quals...actually sat props and engines with a good pass. I am at a loss to remember anywhere in the engines subject on operational issues lean or rich. Studying for basic at moment and still haven't come across operations lean or rich...curiosity must ask me....where in the literature does the LAME learn about operations lean or rich?

[No Hoper]

Old akro, in fact aero engines have rotator caps on the valve stem.

[Trent 972]

rnutsCan someone please act as translater for yr right's posts.
It's killing me !!
I find understanding quantum physics easier !!
yr right has previously publicly stated on this board that he is dyslexic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyslexia).Dyslexia, or developmental reading disorder,[1] is characterized by difficulty with learning to read fluently and with accurate comprehension despite normal or above-average intelligence.
Now that you are also aware, you might show a little bit more human compassion and understanding. :ok:

[Walter Atkinson]

Old Akro:

Thank you for posting that link. It's a very interesting and well done study.

In this study, Note:
1) at RPMs under 3000, no valve rotation was noted.
2) the components used to aid in this rotation are not part of the aviation engine.

We have tried to verify valve rotation via engine monitor data on a leaking valve. What we have found is that the leaking is not consistent with valve rotation as is assumed to be occurring. As I said, the jury is out, based on the data we have seen, that the valves rotate in an aviation engine at any consistent rate--if they are rotating at all. The assumption that aviation valves are rotating at higher than 15rpm as considered desirable in this study is simply not supported by the data.

There is more to study, for sure.

[Old Akro]

Walter

I've read a few papers on valve rotation and I thought this one was the most descriptive about the mechanism being the valve spring through the torsional rotation of the spring wire.

Since valve springs are tuned to have a natural frequency above redline to prevent valve bounce, I assumed that a valve spring designed for a low speed engine would - through either lower tension or lower natural frequency - involve valve rotation at lower speeds.

As an aside, my 1985 Alfa GTV6 gets valve bounce about 200 rpm part redine. Its an effective rev limiter and hilarious! It happens reliably if I try and eek another couple of km/h out of 3rd gear before the braking marker on the back straight at Winton.

The question is, do valve's burn because they don't rotate or do burnt valves stop rotating?

After you give me that answer, I have another question involving chickens & eggs.

[Andy_RR]

rnuts
yr right has previously publicly stated on this board that he is dyslexic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyslexia).
Now that you are also aware, you might show a little bit more human compassion and understanding. :ok:

Humans aren't born with wings, but they still fly. There's plenty of electronic tools to help correct the foibles of humanity, but sadly no technological cure for Ludditism.

[Creampuff]

If mixture and engine management are parts that are wrong, what other BS is there that is also wrong. However we have no say in what is taut, CASA, the Sylabus, the CFI, the ops manual all dictate..tho shalt teach as is written in the book.One of the chronic problems is that the regulator insists on recruiting ‘experts’ from the industry who then proceed to perpetuate the OWTs (folklore) they were taught, unhindered and untroubled by what the data actually show and the rules actually mean.
‘
Reforming’ the rules and administering them is merely an opportunity for these ‘experts’ to embed the folklore more deeply.

If some expert has decided that any and all cylinder damage is caused by ‘excessive leaning’, every example of cylinder damage ‘proves’ it. That ‘expert’ will of course passionately champion the cause of outlawing of ‘excessive leaning’.

Remember the good ol’ days of stomach ulcers? They were ‘caused’ by ‘spicy food’ and ‘stress’. It was ‘proved’ because every time a doctor asked someone with an ulcer: “Are you under a lot of stress or do you eat spicy foods?”, the answer was always: “Yes, as a matter fact I am. How did you know?”. And, if the person relaxed and stopped eating spicy foods the symptoms of stomach ulcer went away. That ‘proved’ the cause.

But then someone did some proper research and proper testing and found out that, in fact, stomach ulcers are usually caused by an infection with a bacterium called H. pylori. Treat the infection by killing the bacterium and – surprise, surprise – the patient could eat spicy food and endure ‘stress’, which actually meant ‘live normally’.

Almost all piston aero engines come off the production or overhaul line with an ‘ulcer’. The ulcer is an induction/fuel system that results in each cylinder reaching peak EGT at different points on the lean curve. The symptoms of this ulcer are ‘rough running’ and ‘lean misfire’ when the mixture is leaned.

One way to ‘treat’ the ulcer is to deal with the symptoms. Keep the mixture very rich – that is, avoid the lean mixture ‘spicy foods’ and ‘stress’ that ‘cause’ the ‘rough running’ and ‘lean misfire’.

However, the best way to ‘treat’ the ulcer is to deal with the cause: Fix the induction and fuel system so that each cylinder reaches peak EGT at around the same point on the lean curve. Then – surprise, surprise – the engine can then eat spicy food and endure ‘stress’ – which actually means “operate normally”.

[Brian Abraham]

Those who promote the LOP is bad argument need to explain why it is that certain aircraft do have it as an approved procedure in the POH. The Chieftain and Beech Baron (B58) are just two. If the procedure is bad, bad, as the luddites suggest, then they need to explain why the engine manufacturer, the aircraft manufacturer, and the FAA, and in our country, CASA, accept the procedure and attendant legal ramifications.

Answers on a postage stamp please.

Just saw your post re ulcers Creampuff and reminds one of a joke. Scotch and ice, rum and ice, gin and ice, all make you drunk. Ice is common to all, therefore ice makes you drunk.

[Creampuff]

yr right has previously publicly stated on this board that he is dyslexic.Poor pet.

Amazingly, he seems quite capable of carefully constructing coherent sentences when he wants to be insulting:In Australia we would call you a ******** take it which ever way you like.you are a dill. the world is flat elvis is still alive and labour is good for the economy I take your comments like the toilet paper they written on. I would not piss on you if you where on fire and in the gutter.Or perhaps he's hired a ghost writer, Trent? :*

[Sunfish]

Apparently the new Rotax 912 iS electronic injected engine is programmed to run LOP at anything below 97% power. The ECU uses data from individual cylinder EGT's and a knock sensor as part of its decisionmaking.

[No Hoper]

If Trent is the Trent I know of he is on thin ice slinging off about others maintenance practices.

[LeadSled]

Your not that captain are you by any chance,yr right,
Not only was I not that Captain, I simply do not believe the story.

Some of the smartest LAMEs I have come across were to be found on Qantas International's outstations. Not all Qantas stations have Qantas maintenance personnel, mores the pity.

That does not change the fact that I have knocked back aircraft that were not, as far as I was concerned at the time, fit for service. That experience has not been limited to airline aircraft, some of the worst defects I have picked up, doing a daily, have been in flying school aircraft. Defects that would have been life threatening. Something that you clearly do not understand (and it is a matter of law) is the matter of the rights and responsibilities of the pilot in command. CAR 233 is very clear, if the PIC decides the aircraft is not serviceable, that is it, the MR will be endorsed, and the aircraft will not go anywhere until the PIC is satisfied.

That is the last line of defense, not the LAME.

Creampuff has detailed the law, as far as maintenance elections are concerned, that results in the log book statement. That election can be changed at any time, by the registered operator, so the log book statement is hardly the be all and end all of maintenance.

As for "engineers", as far as the AQF (whatever it is called this week) an AME/LAME has trade qualifications, which do not meet the level to be called a profession. Likewise, holding a pilots license of CPL or above does not qualify as a "professional" qualification, notwithstanding that many pilot training courses result in a Bachelor of Aviation, or something similar.

Tootle pip!!

[rnuts]

Trent 972
You're right. That didn't come across as intended.
You, yr right and anyone who took offence. I do apologise.

[Trent 972]

:D Good on you for being the 'Bigger Man', rnuts. Not that I was offended. I just thought it a pity if yr right was dismissed for reasons other than his arguments.
If only Creampuff could be half the man. Sadly, I find him to be a FWOTHO.

Edit.
Not me No Hoper. I'm just a driver with 19,000+hours of the same hour over and over again!
I wasn't aware that I had slung off about any maintenance practices???
Maybe you are a little confused.

[No Hoper]

Apologies to you Tremt, I am just sick up and fed of people playing the man on a professional site. Although as Leadsled suggests we are lillying the gild by calling ourselves such

[yr right]

Yes i have a learning difficulty. Do and have I said I have yes. Do I care what you think. No. Dose it make me a better engineer. Yes cause I have to work a **** load harder.
But what I have lost in some areas I more than made up for in others
Cheers

[Creampuff]

And I’m a wheelchair-bound, acne-stippled geek from Hicksville USA. I’m scared of flying and I don’t like getting my hands dirty.

In what way, precisely, do anyone’s handicaps affect the temperature of valves at various points on the lean curve?

In what way, precisely, do 19,000+ hours in some pilot’s logbook affect the temperature of valves at various points on the lean curve?

It’s been said before: A person without data is just another person with an unsupported opinion. That goes for everyone: People in wheelchairs, people with dyslexia and skygods with fat logbooks.

No amount of burnt valves and stuffed cylinders count for data, unless….

Unless there is objective evidence to show what burnt the valves and stuffed the cylinders.

Data collected from millions of hours of piston aero engine operations show at what mixture setting valves and CHTs on a piston aero engine are hottest. Nobody’s hours in command or years on the bench makes a schmick of difference to the validity and implications of that data.

If that hurts: Boo hoo.

[Progressive]

Leadsled,
For probably he first time I agree with Yr Right, in terms of maintenance the required schedule is dictated by the log book statement. The owner may elect to change the schedule of maintenance whenever he likes: however this change in schedule is not formalized until the logbook statement is amended. The 100 hourly is required to be signed of "IAW the logbook statement".

As for this statement:
As for "engineers", as far as the AQF (whatever it is called this week) an AME/LAME has trade qualifications, which do not meet the level to be called a profession. Likewise, holding a pilots license of CPL or above does not qualify as a "professional" qualification, notwithstanding that many pilot training courses result in a Bachelor of Aviation, or something similar.

LAME technically qualifies as a para-professional qualification, trade qualifications are for an AME (CERT IV) (hence the required diploma level qualification for LAME). Interestingly the Diploma in Aeroskills (LAME qual) involves more teaching hours (and thus knowledge) than any other diploma level qualification in Australia, and more than many Bachelor degrees.

[Creampuff]

The 100 hourly is required to be signed of "IAW the logbook statement".Hi progressive.

Do you have a CAR reference for that assertion?

CAR 42ZE says: 42ZE Certification of completion of maintenance on aircraft in Australian territory

(1) A person who carries out maintenance on an Australian aircraft in Australian territory must ensure that completion of the maintenance is certified in accordance with:

(a) if the person has an approved system of certification of completion of maintenance—that system; or

(b) if paragraph (a) does not apply—the CASA system of certification of completion of maintenance.The ‘CASA system of certification of completion of maintenance’ is in Schedule 6 of the CARs. The phrase ‘log book statement’ does not appear anywhere in Schedule 6.

Schedule 6 para 4.6 says: “A person must not make a final certification (under Schedule 6) unless the person is satisfied that … (a) all maintenance required to be carried out on the aircraft has been carried out…

Those requirements are driven by the schedule of maintenance and the approved maintenance data. I realise that the LAME will usually have only the ‘log book statement’ on which to rely to determine what the schedule of maintenance for the aircraft may be, but it’s still regulatory cart, not horse.

I have no doubt what the practice is. But, like many things in aviation in Australia, the practice may merely be a perpetuation of an OWT, including by CASA.

[LeadSled]

LAME technically qualifies as a para-professional qualification, trade qualifications are for an AME (CERT IV) (hence the required diploma level qualification for LAME). Interestingly the Diploma in Aeroskills (LAME qual) involves more teaching hours (and thus knowledge) than any other diploma level qualification in Australia, and more than many Bachelor degrees.

Progressive,
Creampuff has dealt with the issue of the standing of the log book statement.

The above may well be true, but, interestingly, the present setup is far lower teaching hours than a number of other countries, and you may be aware of the current criticism of the product of the present system.

Likewise, it is not unusual for unskilled person or tradesmen to earn far more then "professionals".

None of that has any bearing on the industrial classification, which come from the industrial relations system.

Tootle pip!!

[yr right]

Difference is when we **** up will kill people and as such every time a sign a piece of paper I take full responsibility for my actions and overs under. A dr takes one out at a time we can take multiple and we get paid **** for the privilege. So tootie up yr arse sorry.
Cheers

[43Inches]

A doctor can kill millions if they stuff up, that's what happened before doctors were professional and epidemics such as the plague abound. If they intentionally create a bug that is resistant they could cause the deaths of millions. I think they are worth all the credit and dollars they can get considering the ethics that control the worldwide medical profession.

Every time a planes flies, ship sails, train departs a bus pulls off the corner a number of people have direct control over whether the number of individuals inside survive the day. All these vehicles have the chance of being in a position that would ensure all inside do not make it to the next day. We all do our best to make sure this does not happen.

[Creampuff]

Diiing … Dongggg…

Ladies and gentlemen, as you can see the LAME has switched on the ‘SEATBELT’ sign.

There is some rough looking weather ahead and the LAME is reviewing the METARs and NOTAMS, and doing some fuel calculations, to see if we can fly around it and maybe to somewhere else. The LAME’s also checking in with the air traffic control LAME.

I got my pilot’s licence from a Wheetie’s box so, like you, I can’t do much but sit back and relax and watch the last line of defence do his thang.

Thank you for flying LAME!

[yr right]

Yes accidents more than likely caused by the pilot. First thing that is taken is the maintenance log.
Cheers

[Weheka]

This thread....has it all...:D

[yr right]

Mmmm Ludditism
We'll I had to look it up. Wow word of the week. We'll that's not me. As I'm tech up big time with what I look after here they even got TV screens in them.can't seam to tune them in but. Going to dick smith tomo sure can get a better cord there Don't think the engines any good but as they don't seam to have much compression. Think the rings are shot. And btw lop old as so it's not in it ethier.

Cheers

[yr right]

Oh btw. It's not just valves that rotate it was the seat that rotates I think you will find I said.
Cheers

[No Hoper]

Whilst maintenance is certified under schedule 6 or the system nominated by the registered operator or owner if private the maintenance required is stipulated in the logbook statement for non RPT aircraft. Although most operators are using MP through Avtrack or such like

[yr right]

Yes no hooper that true however it's tracked it still has to follow the lbs.
cheers

[Hempy]

Your 'friend' has 2 choices, 'assume the position', build some hours and shoot through when something better turns up, or talk to the boss about his/her concerns and get a job at Maccas. Toss a coin, if you dont like the way it lands you know the answer.


^ see what I did there?

[LeadSled]

yr right,
Your erudition and your inventiveness and flexibility with the English ( I thinks that is what you are using) language is exceeded only by your inflated idea of your position in the big scheme of things.

----- it was the seat that rotates I think you will find I said.

Words fail me!!

Indeed, inadvertently, you make an excellent case for owner maintenance for small private aircraft, extending what is already available to Experimental Amateur Built and RA Oz aircraft, as Canada did many years ago.
Tootle pip!!

[yr right]

Im sorry what don't you think that seats rotate ?


And know I don't think im anything special at al btw.

[yr right]

Waiting leady or are you doing a quick Google search

[Tankengine]

I am interested in the seat rotation thing.
None of the engines I have built could possibly have this happen, however with hardened seats inserted I suppose it is possible. Wouldn't the seat fall right out into the valve?:confused:
Bad machining I would have thought.:uhoh:

[yr right]

Negative do some research on it prove me wrong ill give you a glue larger radials use them. Leadsled would know that by now, but


Cheers

[yr right]

oh buy the way its a true story as told to me by an ex fe who was on the deck when it happened.
Cheers

[No Hoper]

Reference last line of defense:
The B1900 that had the elevator rigged with insufficient nose down travel that crashed on takeoff after several previous successful flights was a combination of maintenance error and miscalculation of loading weight and balance.
As maintainers we have a duty of care that continues after the aircraft leaves the hard, pilots also have a duty of care for the passengers and aircraft.
Double check everything you do gentlemen whether pilot or mechanic

[yr right]

Indeed, inadvertently, you make an excellent case for owner maintenance for small private aircraft, extending what is already available to Experimental Amateur Built and RA Oz aircraft, as Canada did many years ago.
Tootle pip!!


So that statement sounds to me like


A person that represents them self in court has a fool for a client.


If that happens im happy for them to do that, I would just like to know which planes they are is I don't get implicated in the inquest


Cheers

[Jabawocky]

Valve seats rotating? :eek:

They do.





When they fall out, they rotate A LOT, but not for long. :}

[yr right]

Oh Jaba
So much learning yet to be done lol


Yes they do rotate on some engines and designed that way but ill let you all do some reseach get the data etc
I have some good pics of the results of TSIO 540 that dropped a seat but I cant post pics for some reason on this site,
Cheers

[yr right]

oh here is another one not many people may know some engines didn't even have valves shock horror no say it cant be true please let the learning stop lol
Cheers

[Old Akro]

I presume you refer to this l-o-n-g withdrawn AD. Its not even on the FAA site anymore.

http://www.regles-osac.com/OSAC/br.nsf/b2916504c56ce9d0c12566c0005a60d0/b34905076448b24ec1256b3e003aa10d/$FILE/BR2002_02_A_.pdf

[yr right]

No not referring to an ad at all. The seats rotate and are still being used in one engine that is being made new today. Come on or word of the week may be used against you. Pmsl.
Cheers

[mendi63]

Are you referring to sleeve valve engines e.g. Bristol Hercules, Centaurus and others?

[yr right]

Yer sleeve valve engines. Also known as whispering death as you didn't know they where there till they had past. But that's not the seats.
Cheers

[Walter Atkinson]

**do valve's burn because they don't rotate or do burnt valves stop rotating?**

Are we assuming that the two are related? I'm not convinced.

I ran an exhaust valve that had 5/80 compression for hundreds of hours to prove that it wasn't leaking while running--only while static.

There is so much we don't' know.

As a savvy philosopher once said, "We can only be certain of that we do not fully understand."

Two things are for sure:

1) Yr Right will not/can not answer my questions,
and,
2) Valve seats rotating in our GA engines has taken this thread to another level.


I'm stuck in Mr. Peabody's "Way-back Machine" for sure.

[UnaMas]

FFS just let this thread die.

You are all equally stupid.
Sorted

[Creampuff]

I'll let you in on a secret, UnaMas: You don't have to read this or any other thread.

You can leave us mental midgets to our trivia. :ok:

[aldee]

Lots of intelligent people behind most of the posts in this thread, but I have had to clean the BS / F-wit filter regularly:p:

Some content has me wondering if "DAMP" & "fit and proper person" screening is failing us mind you :confused:

[No Hoper]

Well said Creampuff, another child wandering
Into adult discussion. Had discussion recently with engineer that was working on Cessna 210'with 6 melted pistons.
The engineer commented that the operator was operating the engine at an incredibly low fuel flow believing he was following the LOP regime
Thoughts?

[yr right]

Gee no hooper sounds like what I was talking about the exactly the same. Now Walter I will answer your question later tonight when I finish work here today. For the record now. Is there such a thing as rotating valve seats yes or no. I just wondering if I have to go and find the p# for you. Now this engine is in use here in aust and is stc into another airframe and make what's a great aircraft even better.
Cheers

[Ethel the Aardvark]

Hi Walter, I hope you are not suggesting to do away with compression testing.
I recently experienced an O540 with 1 cyl at 20/80, pilot did not notice a thing
but it sounded like an old chafe cutter! Experiments are not always cut and dry.

I believe you and your followers regarding LOP but I have my doubts about the consistent human accuracy factor in pulling that big red knob.

[No Hoper]

Hi Ethel
Correct you are about compressions although flying a Fletcher (IO 720), pilots could tell when low on compression and were invariably right
Reference the leaning again I feel you have highlighted the major issue

[LeadSled]

yr right,
Go find yourself some diagrams of a sleeve valve engine, ( such as Bristol radial aero engines or Willys cars, to name two) there are NO valve seats. Likewise the rotary valve car cylinder head built here in Australia in the late 1950 to early 1960's had no valve seats.

I do not believe there is any such thing as a poppet valve with a rotating seat. If you claim otherwise, facts please, not more bluster and assertions.
Tootle pip!!

PS: It was the Beaufighter that as known as the Whispering Death, there is nothing quiet about a Bristol Hercules or Centaurus on full song ---- and before you ask, I do have direct experience of the Centaurus personally, I am not speaking theoretically.

[LeadSled]

oh buy the way its a true story as told to me by an ex fe who was on the deck when it happened. yr right,
I still do not believe the story. If your F/E was actually there, he should be able to name names, airline etc ---- prove your story.
In any event, it does prove that it couldn't have been me, as all but about 100 hours of my heavy command time was on aircraft where we had dispensed with the F/E as dead weight.
And just to add a little more information for you, in my airlines, pilots have always been required to be capable of covering the F/E duties on turbine aircraft, the reverse is not so. Indeed, with the introduction of jets, many airlines, world wide, replaced the F/E with a pilot.
Tootle pip!!

[yr right]

Oh it's really let's just wait for Walter to answer hey.
Cheers

[LeadSled]

yr right,
Seriously, your are not comparing your level of knowledge with somebody of the training, qualification and experience of somebody like Walter Atkinson (or John Deakin) are you ????
In my opinion, that make you a presumptuous prat, at the very least.
And, once again, you do not answer questions that would prove your claims.
Tootle pip!!

[Weheka]

I used to use lop whenever I had the chance, which wasn't often, had gamis, UBG16 and it seemed to work as advertised.

Mostly though in my line of work I liked the fuel flow needle to be nudging into the MP side of the gauge, at take off, and also plenty rich in the climb. All my engines (520s), went to TBO with no major problems other than the odd factory AD.

I would fully support Walter and Jabba and co in their lop ideas, for the average pilot, done properly with the right set up and gear it's a no brainer. A lot of people simply can't be bothered, or can't justify the set up costs, and just run plenty of fuel, nothing wrong with that either.

"And btw lop old as so it's not in it ether."
Unless iv'e misread that, I think even hard working engineers, (mechanics) at the coal face may even be having another think on the subject?;)

[yr right]

Lead sled
I sent you a PM and you didn't even respond to it.
Now next time aircrash investigation is on and they show a pilot doing dumb things that a f/e would have stopped them from doing. Its a well known fact that the F/E stopped a lot of accidents and although being replaced by a computer the outcomes have shown what a mistake it is
. Now as for name I can give you name and airlines and names place events federal police investigator's names to the act that I sent you. I can back up everything I say. What cause you drive a 747 you are a world class expert now on everything to do with maintenance. The average pilot can write on a pin head with an artline texta with a 1/4" nib what they now about maintenance.


Now all I said was whispering death nothing else I know very well what aircraft it was.
Sleave valve so where have I mention anything about valve seats in a sleave valve engine not once I just said that not many people would even know what they where.


Now as for rotating valve seats yes they are in engines that are made today and can be brought new.
I can name them and get a part number and I will.


What walter cant speak for him self now I think will ill let him say what it is a yes or a no what do you think.


Ive done more in aviation than what you will ever do. Even if I stop now you will never catch up.


Sorry for being so blunt


tootie


Cheers

[yr right]

Think some people need to read this.


http://www.casa.gov.au/ADFiles/enggen/eng/ENG-004.pdf


Cheers


BTW an AD is LAW and must be complied IAW the AD

[Lumps]

Yr right, which engine is currently being made with rotating valves seats? You can't say because...? It's just an engine & I'm curious

[Hempy]

Ive done more in aviation than what you will ever do. Even if I stop now you will never catch up.

Bahahaha well to be fair you've written more shlt than just about anyone, including LeadSled!

[Creampuff]

AD/ENG/4: A revelation. So now yr right has proved him or herself to be a troll...

... Had discussion recently with engineer that was working on Cessna 210'with 6 melted pistons.

The engineer commented that the operator was operating the engine at an incredibly low fuel flow believing he was following the LOP regime
Thoughts?I won't give you my thoughts. I will give you what I know.

If this operator and aircraft exist (which they don't), the cause of the 'melted pistons' (which don't exist) is that the engine was being run not rich enough rich of peak or not lean enough lean of peak.

You are liars. Please sue me. :ok:

[yr right]

You think hempty that's ok if you think that I don't really care. If you don't like what I wright don't read it. Buts that your opinion and you can have it. Don't see you putting up much but.
Cheers

[yr right]

Mmm no wonder your engines run to o/h if you let your engine run at 5/80 with an exhaust valve leak. Which btw is not permitted by casa lyc or tcm. Wtf are you saying. I can't believe you would do that.

Troll not me I really don't even know exactly what that means. And seaming we are both on opposite sides of the country. I relized today that he must have been at the shop that done it. I know the shop and the people that run it. Sorry. For that. Small industry here in aust.

Cheers

[Hempy]

You think hempty that's ok if you think that I don't really care. If you don't like what I wright don't read it. Buts that your opinion and you can have it. Don't see you putting up much but.
Cheers

Nah mate, not putting much up, I don't know much about a lot if this, particularly LOP, so I'm happy to sit back and be educated. You know, learn something? (even if it is 'difficult')
You seem to profess to know more and have done more than Jabba and LeadSled and others, yet unlike those people who have proven histories in the industry, you just seem to be all gob. If you've been around for so long and have done so much in the industry, surely lots of people here must know you, no? Maybe they can shed some real evidence on what you've done in the industry, because your posts are making you look more and more like a wannabe 15 year old without any proof mate. Credibility zero.

[yr right]

Maybe people here no me. I no a couple of people on here that no me. Since this post has been going I have had 3 jobs offers. Not saying what I said here has but I'm known. Why cause I do good work. What so I'm not allowed to have a different view on what's being said. Instead of being a complete sheep and following. Like I said I was ask to coment so I have. What I said is what I see.

Cheers

[yr right]

Incase you haven't noticed I'm not selling anything.

Ta

[yr right]

All I've done is give a balance view. And funny they don't answer a lot of question either. Ie cly heads that water cooled mmm
Cheers

[cockney steve]

Sleeve valve was commonly known in the Automotive-world , as "the Silent Knight" as the Patentee was Knight.
Among others, engines thus equipped, were used by Daimler, which were used for many years as the Royal car of choice. When Georgie -boy (edit: it was edward!) abdicasted and was exiled to France,with Wallis Simson, he took with him, one of the Royal Daimlers.
Rolls Royce have only been in that role, since the present Queen was crowned.

LOP operation , insight for beginners.
If your fuel-air mixture is too weak, it will not burn at all.
If it is too Rich, it will also not burn.
Engines that are equipped with manual mixture-controls, usually have them designed to operate over the rich-weak combustion range, additionally, they can continue weakening to the point of shutting off fuel flow completely......not many engines are operated at a significantly higher pressure than sea-level
Aero-engines spend most of their operating -cycle at altitude, this gives a lower air-density .
A cylinder-full of air at altitude, will have less oxygen in it than the same cylinder filled at ground level...(the air is packed in tighter, lower down! )

If you adjust for a good mixture on the ground, it will become richer as you ascend into thinner air.

Any surplus fuel, unburned in the cylinder, is wasted power. A rich exhaut is unused power.

A rich, combustible mixture can "explode" when ignited the ratio of air to fuel , where this happens, is readily established and well documented

Fortunately, for the person without a test-rig, laboratory or specialised monitoring facilities, there is a very useful side-effect of mixture-optimisation.
TEMPERATURE!
By monitoring cylinder-head temperature, it is possible to establish the optimum mix for cool running whilst getting the most energy-use out of the fuel.

It is not an ideal system, as it relies on the engine-operator having a true understanding of the combustion process and being able to monitor and control it accordingly.

A properly set-up electronic control -system can do this much better than a human. it's more accurate, faster and doesn't get distracted. unfortunately, when it goes T/U it's usually a total "nervous breakdown" We can compensate by having multiple redundancy. These things have to be certified, which takes time and a lot of cash from the manufacturer.
Pilots and engineers come ready-certified. With a short familiarisation-course, they're deemed fully-capable of managing a new (different) variation of engine.

Some pilots have a good mechanical understanding and awareness, they learn how to set the correct fuel-flow and manage their engine properly....the reward is mechanical reliability, reduced maintenance-costs and dramatically reduced fuel-bills.

Fuel is the cheapest thing in an aeroplane?- Really?

Think again...In an "average " SEP "spamcan," around half a litre is consumed per MINUTE.... save a teaspoonful per half-litre burned, multiply by the engine's service life.....still small-change?

Uk petrol pumps are calibrated according to strict legal standards. the dispense is allowed to be something like 0.5% under, or 1% over "strike"

In practical terms, a gallon can be a teaspoonful short, or two teaspoonsfull over and still be legal measure.

The major fuel companies employ pump-engineers solely to "tweak" the calibration down as close to the limit as they can!
For a teaspoonful?...yes! but any major will only operate a site that turns over ONE MILLION GALLONS PER YEAR....so how much is a million teaspoonsful?

Learning the hows and whyfors of running LOP, is a no-brainer for anyone who spends a fair time flying. The half-hour a week person is likely to have a higher maintenance bill than fuel-bill.
Someone flying every day, will have a cleaner, more reliable, longer-lasting engine.

Most Engineers are mechanics...they know how to put machinery back together properly, most know how to diagnose faults.
very few are able to actually operate the machine under real-service conditions. especially since the demise of the Flight Engineer!....but, was he a good spanner-man as well?

bit longwinded, but hopefully food for thought!

[yr right]

A NA engine will loose power with altitude however a blown engine either turbo or supercharge will be the opposite. Even a rajay system which provides SL conditions at altitude till it gets to critical attitude when performance is lost. These engines are fitted with auto controllers to compensate. At the end of the day the person behind the controls can make or break an engine weather it is running lop or rop.

And not one engineer I know would let a cly out with 5/80 and an exhaust leak.

Cheers

[Oracle1]

When is everyone going to wake up? Yr wrong has had some of the best and brightest in the industry contribute over 500 posts in a misguided sense of altruism trying to help him when in fact his only aim has been to aggravate, self promote, and fondle his own ego. It is abundantly clear yr wrong is unwilling or unable to answer the fundamental theoretical questions that have been posed to him and instead has behaved like a bully on the school bus taunting with ever more ridiculous stunts to ensure the spotlight remains firmly aimed at him.

I called this guy as a troll many posts ago, some have recognized this but many have continued to play right into his lap. Whoever you are yr wrong if you are indeed real and misguided you are a disgrace to the industry, unwilling to learn and unable to advance, a prime reason for the decay of GA. Darwin stalks you.

Just as you cant teach a dog physics you cant teach a closed mind. This thread has run its course.

[yr right]

Orry you are a clown. I don't care what you may think. I can answer lots of questions. I am no bully. If someone ask me a question I'll answer it if it's relevant. Do I need to answer a question on octane ratings no I don't. I know about them. What have you done. What engineering have you done. How many cly have you checked and replaced. So at the end of the day go f your self. Why am I the centre of attention because I stupid and still give a view. Your a sheep I'm not.
Cheers

[wishiwasupthere]

So if your such an expert at engineering, how come you can't spell cylinder? Even shortening it to cly makes no sense.

[Creampuff]

You're a liar, yr right. Please sue me. :ok:

[Oracle1]

How many cly have you checked and replaced.


After the tenth cylinder a trained monkey can do it, it ain't that complicated. Wake up to yourself your just a glorified mechanic.

[Creampuff]

yr right has never actually changed a piston on an aero engine.

Don't feed the troll.

[yr right]

Oh you have so so much to learn. You say I'm a bully take a long look at yrself. You are not going to go far with an attitude like that. Not hard yet you never lifted a finger. As I said a clown.

Cheers

[Creampuff]

So anyway, it's worth reading all of John Deakin's Pelican's Perch articles, twice. :ok: It's free!

Try to do the APS course, at least online. Remember: There's a money back promise for people who aren't satisfied and a reward for data contradictory of the data presented.

[yr right]

We'll lets see what happens here. Jaba has said that no such thing as a rotating valve seat. Walter deflected from answering. Now Walter knows there are. So what dose he do say yes or say no. So what dose that say about the so called experts. Now remember this started after I was ask a question. Let's see what happens.
Now this one engine is not the only engine with these seats. However it can be brought new now. And is stc in one other aircraft that can be used for charter type ops.
Funny how I know f all isn't it.
Cheers
Awaiting the results.

[Oracle1]

Nothing is going to happen you are being shut down. No one is going to answer because everyone knows you are a troll, you are not worthy of our time and effort, the penny has dropped.


Go and flog the apprentice he is your only friend PMSL

[Walter Atkinson]

***Hi Walter, I hope you are not suggesting to do away with compression testing.***

No, simply pointing out that a static compression test is s poor way to tell if a valve is leaking when the engine is running. The EMS will show that every time. We use compression testing because before we had EMS, it was all we had. It has "some" value, but is a sub-optimal way to tell if the valve is leaking dynamically.

***I believe you and your followers regarding LOP but I have my doubts ***

The weak link in ANY aircraft endeavor is the biological interface. :ugh: BUT, remember, if it can screw up LOP, it can screw up ROP and the worst possible mixture setting where heat and pressure are concerned is at 40dF ROP. So, how bad could it be mis-setting LOP?

[Walter Atkinson]

As for the 5/80 reading and running it, the airplane was in experimental and it was a research effort to prove that a valve that is leaking during a static compression test that has a good borescope inspection and no indication of a leak on the EMS is NOT a problem. As a result of this, TCM later came out with the SB about borescoping and allowing the compression test to be as low as 40.

We should remember that using the static test was all he had for a long, long time and it has been the holy grail for cylinder health. We have learned more since then.

As for the rotating valve red herring in this thread, I know of no poppet valve system that has a rotating valve seat. What a senseless interjection into an otherwise worthwhile discussion. Silly.

[Walter Atkinson]

OK, Yr Right, with all of the blow-hard you have mustered, you still haven't answered my questions.

I started off trying to educate you on some things you have terribly misguided notions about. I have been a miserable failure in that attempt.

You have been outrun by this august body of knowledgeable folks. Those specks you see in the distance are the rest of aviation, leaving you behind.

[No Hoper]

Creampuff
Calling me a liar is simply no answer at all.
The operator involved is well known on the central coast and has been known to use auto brake fluid, auto start solenoids and such like.
A shining example of owner/operator maintenance.

An exhaust valve leak on a compression test is investigated further prior to the cylinder being condemned. Staking the valve and even a further ground run is part ov the process. Once the cylinder is removed a check with kero is carried out. Once confirmed the valve is removed and inspected.
Commercial imperatives of the operator are not high on the list of considerations for commercial operations.

God Bless on this holy weekend

[dubbleyew eight]

auto brake fluid.

an interesting nonsense.
a Dot 3 brake fluid is hydroscopic organic material that I wouldn't use in aircraft.
but!
a Dot 4 brake fluid is petroleum based.

the aviation certified brake fluid I use is actually an automatic transmission fluid made by Royco. it is petroleum based.
so if you were using a Dot 4 brake fluid why wouldn't that work?????

[No Hoper]

W8
No not red fluid at all, standard brake fluid, the type that causes the seals to swell and go soggy. Cost the operator close to $2000 for the tear down of the system and reseal
God Bless

[Jabawocky]

I can answer lots of questions. I am no bully. If someone ask me a question I'll answer it if it's relevant.

I am still waiting from possibly 10 pages back...or more :ugh: As best I can tell all your questions have been answered that are relevant to aviation.

How was your score in the free online segment of the APS course? It is called a fun test for a reason. Learning is fun.

Off to go watch more Warbirds, you have all day to have a crack at the multitude of questions we have all asked you. :ok: We really want to know if we are wrong.

[27/09]

Back to the lean of peak question. This might have been covered earlier in the thread and I may have missed the answer.

Can I successfully run lean of peak in my bog standard O320 or IO360 etc with just a single point EGT or even no EGT?

Is this done solely by leaning till the engine runs rough then enriching till the engine runs smoothly just as I was taught many years ago?

Jabba enjoy your trip to Wanaka. Hope the forecast winds aloft (2000 ft 020/40) don't spoil the show and it doesn't get too breezy on the ground. The crap weather has kept me at home.

[Walter Atkinson]

***Can I successfully run lean of peak in my bog standard O320 or IO360 etc with just a single point EGT or even no EGT?***

Yes. If one leans from Best Power until there has been a 3-5 knot loss of airspeed the engine will be comfortably LOP. If the engine is smooth at that point, it assures you that:
1) The F:A ratios are balanced.
2) The ignition system is healthy.
3) There are no induction leaks.

If it is not running smoothly at that point then one or more of the above is begging to be addressed.


***Is this done solely by leaning till the engine runs rough then enriching till the engine runs smoothly just as I was taught many years ago?***

No. Unless you know what the F:A ratio spread is you have no way of knowing when the roughness is setting in. In a very well balanced engine it will never get rough--it will just get to idle cutoff and die. In a poorly balanced F:A ratio condition, it may get rough before it ever gets to peak EGT. Lean to roughness wasn't about engine management, it was about "cabin comfort." :rolleyes:

[27/09]

The F:A ratios are balanced.

Which begs the question. How well balanced are the F/A ratios (assuming good ignition, no induction leaks) in the average Lycoming O320 O360 IO360?

What I'm interested in is how practical is LOP for the average pilot flying a C172 or PA28 or anyone flying a four cylinder Lycoming.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

The scary issue here is liability. If I try this in a hire machine and for whatever reason things go pear shaped. Saying I was performing this operation according to what I read on PPRuNe is going to be no defence.

Maybe, a disclaimer is required....only do this if your name is on the CofA?

[yr right]

Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Airworthiness Advisory Circulars - Part 6 - General advice (http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_90776)

[Walter Atkinson]

***Which begs the question. How well balanced are the F/A ratios (assuming good ignition, no induction leaks) in the average Lycoming O320 O360 IO360?

What I'm interested in is how practical is LOP for the average pilot flying a C172 or PA28 or anyone flying a four cylinder Lycoming.***

For a growing number of carby pilots in the US this is becoming standard operating procedure. Each carbed engine has an optimal carb temp that results in the optimal F:A mixture being delivers equally to all cylinders. This temp is actually given in many POHs (often in the fine print!) Once this temperature is identified, it becomes very easy to set the carb temp to that value and have very good fuel vaporization which results in even F:A ratios and the ability to run the engine much smoother across the entire mixture spectrum. For example, in most 182s, the optimum carb temp is 10dC. Each aircraft type tends to have it's own optimum value. This was once considered standard operating procedure on carbureted engines but the technique was lost. It is very difficult to find this optimal carb temp without and EMS, but with one it is very easy.

In the IO engines, the F:A ratios are balanced by tuning the injectors (GAMIjectors).

As for "legality", there is nothing I can imagine that would be a problem since the entire mixture curve graph is published in the POHs. If the POH recommends 50dF ROP and you run it 100dF ROP, is that a violation?

[Walter Atkinson]

**Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Airworthiness Advisory Circulars - Part 6 - General advice**

Yr Right, I know what that says without being schooled. My post was NOT about what CASA or anyone else "thinks" but what the SCIENCE is. It was to educate you, which seems to be a difficult endeavor. Others here "get that." You need not quote outdated regs to somehow try to convince us that a government agency is right and the science is wrong. It isn't.

The choice is ours to be sheeple or independent thinkers and grow in our knowledge and understanding.

Continuing to post non-contributory items while ignoring answering very specific questions is noncontributory to adult discussion.

You said you would answer my questions and you have not. It seems that you've been given quite enough time to research the answers if you did not know them.

If one wishes to play in the adult sand box, it is beneficial for one to act like an adult.

[Dexta]

I have a C172 with the O320-E2D, I have a Single point CHT & EGT fitted, when in cruise I will lean until I get an RPM drop which corresponds to peak, or just past peak EGT. I only do this once I'm running less than 75% power, determined by RPM and density altitude (approx. 2500 @ 2500', 2600 @ 5000' and 2700 @ 9000'). I do not know if I'm running LOP on all cylinders, but it is usually on peak or just lean of peak - 40 deg or so, on cylinder 3 (the one with the EGT probe), but what I do notice is my CHT's which drop from 380-400 degrees to below 350. I am getting about 118 KTAS at 8000' for 30 litres per hour and the engine is running smooth. I have been told that this procedure should not hurt the engine as it is under 75% power. I would love to do the APS course (and will next time it is within 300nm of home) but I'm hesitant to install an EMS in the aircraft (as I'm hoping to upgrade the aircraft in the near future). I could of course run 100 deg ROP but the CHT's get upto 400 and as I understand, the lower the CHTs the better. Of course if the above is all wrong then I would be very interested is learning what I can do practically to run my engine at its best with what I have.
Cheers, Dexta.

[Brian Abraham]

Somebody that hasn't attended the yr right school of knowledge. Cessna 206, my bolding.

Operations are almost exclusively LOP with fuel burns about 10 GPH—speed is not important and fuel is very expensive in Central America. This has allowed us to keep the engine running cool and healthy to well past TBO—we only recently replaced it with a factory reman. Operating costs run $155 per hour, not including engine reserve.http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/101/2781-full.html?ET=avweb:e2781:244160a:&st=email#221870

I'm forced to ask the question of yr right, if LOP is so bad why is it that people who run LOP have such a trouble free run? They telling fibs?

[uncle8]

W8
"a Dot 4 brake fluid is petroleum based"

I was alarmed to hear that so just checked the back of my bottle of dot 4 which says, inter alia, "This is a premium non petroleum based product"

[27/09]

Walter: It is very difficult to find this optimal carb temp without and EMS, but with one it is very easy.

In the IO engines, the F:A ratios are balanced by tuning the injectors (GAMIjectors).

So my understanding then is the average PA28 or C172 pilot cannot do LOP operations with the aircraft equipped as it came from the factory. At the minimum there needs to be an engine monitoring system fitted and if fuel injected the likes of GAMI injectors need to be fitted too.

[yr right]

Perhaps Walter you may tell us all what fibs are in the TCM and Lyc SB with exhaust valve leaks. Or are they fibbing as we'll.
cheers

[yr right]

Oils Arnt oils nor are orings not all orings. An ms28775- is not interchangeable with an ms 29513 - yet they look the same. That's why we have ms and an and nas etc and I believe the the repair bill was 20k and not 2k as the whole u/c system was removed and re sealed.
Chees.

[Mick Stuped]

Dexta,
The only issue of running LOP without an EGT on each cylinder (and I suspect this is were most problems arise) is, that you have to get into a slightly different mindset with LOP and understand what your engine is doing. This is where the APS seminar helps. I really think a decent engine management understanding is essential before operating LOP.

If I remember back I think one of the first things that Walter said to me when I did his course years ago, that has really stuck with me ever since. Think of every Cyl as an individual engine, your trick is to get them all flying in perfect formation to become a single unit or engine. So unless all Cyl are producing roughly the same horsepower they wont be in formation. Well that may not be his exact words but that's the simple thought process that helped me understand what's in front or beside me and what I need to strive to achieve and I ask our pilots to think of an engine the same way as a series of engines that are connected by a common shaft.

When leaning to lean side of peak EGT you need to watch for the last cyl to peak, not your first as you would when running ROP and have always been taught. If you dont and you don't have a tight fuel spread or F/A ratio, then as you lean you may have some cyl's LOP (if you are watching for first EGT to peak and lean past peak EGT) but you may also have some at peak or 10-40 ROP and not lean or rich enough and in the danger zone. How can you do this with a single point EMS.

If you do this with a higher power setting then you can potentially have damage the like of what Yr right is seeing in his LOP operations disasters with cylinders showing detonation and burnt hot valves as that odd cylinder not flying in formation has crashed. So without an EMS in my mind, you really are really running blind. With a EMS you can pickup the start of light detonation and stop it before it causes any damage

I ask our pilots monitor our EDM's not only to lean but as part of their scan in flight as I feel individual CHT and EGT is very important in understanding what's happening in front of you and could well save your life by detecting an issue no matter if you run LOP or ROP, well before your other gauges react or you hear, feel a problem or see the oil on the windscreen.

If you invest in a EMS you will find after a while engine management will all make more sense.

I might ad we don't sell or prefer any after market EMS in fact we have three different brands and it all comes back to price and personal preference and how many bells and whistles you want.

For me I just require all CHT, all EGT, TIT for turbo's and Oil Temp. FF and HP is nice but I found that it easy to rely on FF and this could lead to a disaster.

For example we have had an issue in the past with K factor on FF being accidently changed and pilots relying so much on EMS figures that dips in our 210's pre and post were not getting done, laziness and thinking EMS figures looked more accurate than a mark on a stick. Inflight fuel calculations were not being done as they relied on the EMS, so the real consumption was different to the EMS figures pilot had used. CP picked it up on end of week review of fuel consumption figures for the particular aircraft and it wasn't an issue, it was however a warning to make sure with FF on a EMS you only used it as guide and get to know your EMS/aircraft and the importance of trending with all that beautiful data you have recorded. Get to understand your data.

Sorry to ramble on a bit. Thought I would try and give you a operators perspective after maybe 10,000 hours or more of EMS operations and LOP.

[dhavillandpilot]

Mick

Thank you for some educated explanations instead of wanking

As someone who operates GTISO 435hp engines I wouldn't not have an Edm system, it really shows up potential engine problems

Again thanks for an educated point of view

[Mick Stuped]

dhavillandpilot,
Thanks, but don't see myself as edjamakated, Just a farm boy who grew up with a love of anything mechanical and a want to learn to fly.

Spent the rest of my working life sitting in tractors or trucks or in GA listening to the drone of the engines. Guess you can say I love the sound of a happy engine.

That has lead me to become hungry for the science behind it all and basically have just read and now google all I can and I try and make sense of it all. So what I say or advice I give may not always be scientifically correct but it seems to work for me. Most of my science is the science of common sense.

If I have one whinge, it is that it seems that the biggest percentage of newbies we now see seem to have lost this ability and need to be told over and over what to do. But then again that could just be me turning into a grumpy old man.

Well all my fledglings that were out today have come home no snags so I am off to enjoy Easter.

Happy Easter to all.

[No Hoper]

Shvetsov Ash-73. Floating exhaust valve seats
If anyone is interested
Its Russian so may not exist in western thought

[LeadSled]

Folks,
The scary thing is that yr right might actually be a LAME, and actually getting his hands on real aeroplanes!!
Tootle pip!!

[No Hoper]

Folks
The scarier thing is that pilots may follow Walters advice on leaking exhaust valves, compressions below approved limits and LOP.
I see that this thread has become an advert for APS and only the coverted have value

[yr right]

Yep and them seats are in the Pzl engine btw. Unless that engine dose not exists which could also be a problem.

[Hempy]

Folks,
The scary thing is that yr right might actually be a LAME, and actually getting his hands on real aeroplanes!!
Tootle pip!!

I doubt it, but if he was it obviously can't be too hard. As long as there's no requirement to do any more writing other than adding a signature though..

[yr right]

Lead sled.
How's about leave maintenance to the people that do it. Anyone that thinks it safe to fly with a leaking exhaust valve with a comp 5/80 has a serious problem. Maybe you should go read the lyc and tcm sb. Also tcm allow low leak rate. You have to use a a special metered orifice that when set correctly allows you to measure the lowest leak rate you at have pAst the rings. Tcm and lyc do NOT allow any leakage past the valves. Walter has misleading made a statement.

Lead sled you say words that your a(/e is jealous off.

Cheers.

[yr right]

Hempty if it's so easy why don't you give it a try.

Cheers

[yr right]

So hempty lead sled why don't you tell us how you set up vapc or a density controller on an tsio 540. Or may be something a little simper. Say idle speed on a pt6 or a tpe 331. Or may be the correct toqure for a spark plug and since it's so easy what is the most important thing to do if you remove a cly from a tcm engine.
Cheers

[rnuts]

Lycoming SI1187J has been the cause of a few heated lunchroom discussions.

[yr right]

Don't know why quite simple really. Also an AD

Cheers

[Oracle1]

What's really sad is he doesn't even realise what a fool he is making of himself

[yr right]

Oh ocky back.
Ok this is for you ocky.
On take off in your pt6 power aircraft you notice tq is low np is good wf is high n1 is high itt is high what is the likely fault

Cheers

[dubbleyew eight]

So hempty lead sled why don't you tell us how you set up...

simple really that is not the subject of the discussion.

sadly the boy is a typical LAME. good with his hands perhaps, but one wonders how he actually understands instructions with any complexity.
Waddington knew his type well.

[yr right]

Mmmm troll hey we'll I'm been posting on this since the start you haven't so in fact you fit the troll banner more than I.

Really you a low life scum. You done nothing you probably have a problem open a door to your car.

Yet you try to down grade me. Like I said scum.

Cheers

[dubbleyew eight]

On take off in your pt6 power aircraft you notice tq is low np is good wf is high n1 is high itt is high what is the likely fault


you have just done and signed for maintenance on it.....

[yr right]

Negative. Can't you read our something. Or just another mindless sheep that can't think for himself. Do you know what a pt6a is
Cheers

[Oracle1]

The likely fault is that you have worked on it. :ok:

Crawl back under your rock where you belong troll. No one is listening to you. Please master the English language and then come back and tell us all how exceptional you are.

In the meantime please take your hand off it, this is a public forum :eek:



http://i875.photobucket.com/albums/ab320/oracle1_2009/TrollFryFirstmemeeverJustlostmymemevirginity_28c5b4_3382576. jpg[/URL][/IMG]

[Oracle1]

As for the 5/80 reading and running it, the airplane was in experimental and it was a research effort to prove that a valve that is leaking during a static compression test that has a good borescope inspection and no indication of a leak on the EMS is NOT a problem. As a result of this, TCM later came out with the SB about borescoping and allowing the compression test to be as low as 40.



The scarier thing is that pilots may follow Walters advice on leaking exhaust valves, compressions below approved limits and LOP

Anyone that thinks it safe to fly with a leaking exhaust valve with a comp 5/80 has a serious problem.


Two morons who failed comprehension. This was an experiment to create data under controlled conditions to test a theory:confused: Perhaps you should send an email to TCM and tell them they are fools as well?


I think we should have an IQ test before you are allowed to post.

[Brian Abraham]

On take off in your pt6 power aircraft you notice tq is low np is good wf is high n1 is high itt is high what is the likely faultFlown thousands of hours in PT6 powered aircraft but never heard of np or wf. I could give my interpretation of wf but the mod may have a seizure.

[Oracle1]

WTF is what I thought when I tried to decipher the hieroglyphs as well

[yr right]

Omg

No wonder why there is such a large rate of lame leaving the industry. Maybe they spoken to you.
You are a sheep will the mental intelligence to suit. Go on run lop run against the poh even though Jaba wife would not allow it to happen with her staff. Run with leaking exhaust valves ( that won't happen because no lame will sign that off) against FAA casa sbs etc don't worry about the law. It all be good. You are a moron good and prober. You made not one comment in this post with expection to have a crack a me. You may have your arse and your family in the seat beside you. When you over stress a component it may not fail at that point. It will fail and most likely when some one else is in the seat because you know it all.

Cheers

[yr right]

Really thousands of hours and you don't know np or wf wow super hero google it then tell the world how dumb you are

Cheers

[yr right]

Btw common terms used in the use of turbines.
Cheers

[yr right]

When running a gstio 520 is the rpm measured is what
Cheers

[yr right]

Or the NG is ok itt ok oil px ok oil temp ok wf is high what's the problem. What you can't understand these are universal abbreviation used in the industry.

Cheers

[yr right]

On pulling the mixture back and doing a mixture check in a tcm engine the rise is 112 rpm. The mixture is lean ok or rich.

Cheers

[yr right]

Before you use a DD rivet what must you do. Ms29513- oring is used in what type of environment.
Cheers

[Oracle1]

LAMES are leaving the industry in droves in part because of people like you, but also because it is such a gross rip off and the product is straight from 1950's This is mainly because of people like you who are unable to innovate and think past their nose. You keep quoting CASA to justify your argument and your existence when CASA and their total bull**** rules and ideas are killing the industry and LAMES careers. Its laughable how you boast about how proficient you are maintaining engines that were designed in the 30's and 40's. You wouldn't last ten minutes at a Toyota dealership as a mechanic.

Wait till the Chinese start building Mooney's etc for their middle class, there wont be any bull**** liability suits in China.

In the meantime enjoy your afternoon in the setting sun because soon there wont be an industry left for you to work in. You have been outsourced to Asia.

P.S. No one is interested in your dyslexic trivial fact competition about what type of o ring you have tied around your balls

[rnuts]

First one possibly start with pwr recovery wash. GTSIO is prop RPM. Bleed valve stuck and Rich.:ok:
Sitting in a hotel room bored so I couldn't help myself..:}

[jdeakin]

"yr right" wrote:
Anyone that thinks it safe to fly with a leaking exhaust valve with a comp 5/80 has a serious problem. Maybe you should go read the lyc and tcm sb. Also tcm allow low leak rate. You have to use a a special metered orifice that when set correctly allows you to measure the lowest leak rate you at have pAst the rings. Tcm and lyc do NOT allow any leakage past the valves. Walter has misleading made a statement. No one, including Walter, made any such statement. I don't expect you to read, understand, or acknowledge this message, and that's ok. Others may find it interesting.

He did say that he did so experimentally, AFTER determining it was safe by borescoping, and by engine monitor data, both tools that we in GA did not have a few years back. He had the "intellectual curiosity" to go beyond blindly trusting the existing lore. No animals or humans were harmed during these TESTS. CMI (nee TCM) has, more recently and to their credit, greatly modified the new documents coming out of the factory.

We all have been removing cylinders blindly and unnecessarily for slightly low compressions for decades, simply because we did not have the tools to do it any differently, NOR DID WE OR THE FACTORIES HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE.

Walter had the "good luck" to discover that his engine, in his personal airplane (TN Bonanza) had the classic symptoms of yesteryear that would require cylinder rework. Using the new tools (borescope and EMS), he kept on going, while keeping a very wary eye on it. As we suspected, it ran fine for a long time.

It might be interesting to know HOW he ran it. About 20 years ago we were looking at test data, and wondering how these engine would run LOP (Lean of Peak) for the long term. We mutually agreed that we would all run them full time at max possible rated power, LOP. So George, Walter, and John did it, using our own personal airplanes, fully aware that we were taking a risk that we'd have to pay for. Others heard of the "experiment," and joined in, and we all shared data on the Internet Forums (another "tool" that we didn't have before.)

Today, hundreds, if not thousands of pilots are doing it. For the TNIO-550/520 equipped aircraft, that power setting is WOT (Wide Open Throttle, about 30.0"), 2500 RPM, and mixture up to 17 GPH (64 lph), which is roughly 90℉ (50℃) LOP, and 85% to 90% HP. We all ran OUR OWN engines that way (ALL THE TIME) to TBO and well beyond. None of us had a single cylinder removal, and to my knowledge, no one beyond the three of us have either, at least caused by this.

That's DATA, not opinion.

[rnuts]

Isn't low wf a sign of a dodgy prostate !! :)

[Walter Atkinson]

Dexta:

***I have a C172 with the O320-E2D, I have a Single point CHT & EGT fitted, when in cruise I will lean until I get an RPM drop which corresponds to peak, or just past peak EGT. I only do this once I'm running less than 75% power, determined by RPM and density altitude (approx. 2500 @ 2500', 2600 @ 5000' and 2700 @ 9000'). I do not know if I'm running LOP on all cylinders, but it is usually on peak or just lean of peak - 40 deg or so, on cylinder 3 (the one with the EGT probe), but what I do notice is my CHT's which drop from 380-400 degrees to below 350. I am getting about 118 KTAS at 8000' for 30 litres per hour and the engine is running smooth. I have been told that this procedure should not hurt the engine as it is under 75% power. I would love to do the APS course (and will next time it is within 300nm of home) but I'm hesitant to install an EMS in the aircraft (as I'm hoping to upgrade the aircraft in the near future). I could of course run 100 deg ROP but the CHT's get upto 400 and as I understand, the lower the CHTs the better. Of course if the above is all wrong then I would be very interested is learning what I can do practically to run my engine at its best with what I have.***

If you are LOP on the cylinder with the EGT probe and the engine is running smoothly it means that your method is spot on and you DO KNOW that all cylinders are LOP. If the engine is smooth, the F:A ratios are reasonably well balanced, you have a good ignition system and no induction leaks. Everything is fine. If all cylinders are not LOP, your six little engines running in tight formation sharing a common crankshaft will be running rough since they will be making different HPs.

One suggestion:
While you are definitely not hurting anything with your method, you may be leaner than optimal and giving up some performance. You might try setting the mixture on the EGT probe to about 20dF LOP at the altitudes you are flying. See how you like that?

You have proven that you do NOT need to have an EMS to set mixture efficiently or properly if you run LOP. BECAUSE it is smooth, you know that the engine is healthy. If, OTOH, you run ROP and have unbalanced F:A ratios, poor ignition health or induction leaks, you will NOT know it without an engine monitor because it will still be running smoothly! ROP operator need an EMS more than LOP operators!!

[jdeakin]

"DEXTA," I have a C172 with the O320-E2D, I have a Single point CHT & EGT fitted, when in cruise I will lean until I get an RPM drop which corresponds to peak, or just past peak EGT. I only do this once I'm running less than 75% power, determined by RPM and density altitude (approx. 2500 @ 2500', 2600 @ 5000' and 2700 @ 9000'). I do not know if I'm running LOP on all cylinders, but it is usually on peak or just lean of peak - 40 deg or so, on cylinder 3 (the one with the EGT probe), but what I do notice is my CHT's which drop from 380-400 degrees to below 350. I am getting about 118 KTAS at 8000' for 30 litres per hour and the engine is running smooth. I have been told that this procedure should not hurt the engine as it is under 75% power. I would love to do the APS course (and will next time it is within 300nm of home) but I'm hesitant to install an EMS in the aircraft (as I'm hoping to upgrade the aircraft in the near future). I could of course run 100 deg ROP but the CHT's get upto 400 and as I understand, the lower the CHTs the better. Of course if the above is all wrong then I would be very interested is learning what I can do practically to run my engine at its best with what I have.
Cheers, Dexta. It is not "wrong!" A classic message from a thinking pilot, who is treating his engine right.

Good on ya, mate!

Best...
John Deakin

[Walter Atkinson]

Yr Right, your refusal to answer my two very simple questions lead me to believe that you have no clue what the answers to my two simple questions are and have not been able to ascertain the answers.

Thank you for playing. You may pick up your parting gifts on the way out.

[jdeakin]

Which begs the question. How well balanced are the F/A ratios (assuming good ignition, no induction leaks) in the average Lycoming O320 O360 IO360?
Too non-specific. That's like asking "How much does the average blonde weigh?" :) There may even be an answer, but it doesn't tell you anything about the blonde you're with!

What I'm interested in is how practical is LOP for the average pilot flying a C172 or PA28 or anyone flying a four cylinder Lycoming.
It takes only a little bit of knowledge. See my message just before this one.

Best...
John Deakin

[Walter Atkinson]

BTW, for about a decade, as John mentioned, George, John, and I made a concerted effort and were in a race to be the first to destroy an engine running it at high power (about 87-90%) LOP. So far, none of us has succeeded in that effort. We are all miserable failures. The engines love being operated that way.

[yr right]

Captain there is no inteiigent life here

No as for me being dyslexic you smart arse know it all pr;()k I have not made one issue of that. All I said was I was and not on this post. Someone one else did. As the questions shows you no absolute zero about anything aviation you have contributed zero to this forum. You nothing about nothing you by your own worlds are the meaning of a troll.

Wf is the term used for fuel flow
Np. Is prop speed
NG n1 is compressor speed

Simple terms that we'll you should know.

The aircraft engine may look the same as it did when it was first produced but the use of modern alloys have made them more reliable
Not last at Toyota is that right. You may work there your self as the cleaner. As for being suck in the past we'll stuff me what turbine power aircraft not advanced enough for you.
The reason that ford then Holden then Toyota all pulled out was that clowns like yourself put so much money on them selfs that they could not afford to make cars in this country.
Yeh you seam to no a lot about nothing do you drive a Great Wall yourself. A lot of manufactures send there stuff south of the boarder and it just plain ****.Quality is no where as it used to be.
No go and play in the sand pit because that is where you belong and eat with plastic spoon so you don't hurt yourself.

Cheers

[No Hoper]

I am perplexed that turbine pilots state that they are unaware of basic engine parameter notation.
Wf fuel flow
Np prop RPM
NG or N1 compressor RPM
TT or TIT Turbine Temperature

Inspections with boroscope have been common practice from atlleast 1990 that I know of.

The question about the rotating exhaust seat has been answered. Whilst not common it exists.

I understand that CASA is not the fount of knowledge but they makes the rules and as a licensed aircraft engineer I have to abide. How far I stretch the rules isn't going to be discussed here.
Operating a private aircraft in a reasonably benign environment does allow one to experiment. Certifying for maintenance on aircraft operating in less than optimal conditions doesn't allow any margin of error.

[43Inches]

I think this is an argument of Technicians vs Engineers,

Techs will tell you what can/can't be done with regard to pre-defined operating limits set by either the manufacturer or governing body. They're understanding of the exact makeup and physics of the machine is not complete, but more than adequate to perform maintenance/operational tasks and send qualified analysis of performance back to the manufacturer or operator. They can probably perform these tasks better than the engineer that created them.

An engineer will tell you a theory of what can be achieved given analysis, data and creativity (ingenuity). This is then put into limited testing and proved possible and eventually incorporated into everyday use. An engineer does not say no, but may possibly say not yet.

The gas turbine is a good example, it is not a modern concept and actually has basic patents that predate the the piston internal combustion engine. The first powerful turbine engines were fitted to ships in the late 1800s (low powered ones having been used in early 1800s), being steam fired these were not suitable for aircraft. A number of technically minded people worked on turbines throughout the early 1900s for aircraft application, but were unsuccessful, some physicists even said not possible. It was through the combined efforts of a number of engineers designing and patenting various componants that eventually made it possible to create a jet engine.

I don't think there is any doubt that even these "old" technology pistons can be run LOP and safely. It may require more than the standard guages for the average pilot to operate without long term damage but it is possible, but this is possibly true of any leaning, not just LOP.

Having a closed mind and just saying no, is definitly not the attribute of an engineer. An engineer would not dismiss data without looking at it first. In-flight operational data from most piston engine trends is very poor, both in the instrumentation it is gained from to the poor recording of the data by the pilots. Saying that engines have been damaged from being run LOP can not be quantified from a few burnt cylinders and valves as its well know this could be caused by a number of factors. It is very hard to establish whether the pilots were actually operating LOP or not if they themselves don't know how to do it correctly. It is a speculative appraisal which needs to be analysed at a metalurgical level, and possible testing carried out to extract the exact nature of the failure, even this may not possibly come up with an answer without knowing exactly what happened at what setting.

What an engineer would do is to run the engine in a controlled experiment, collect data on the internal runnings, temps, pressures etc. Compare this to the materials, construction of the unit and come up with whether it is more damaging one way or another. This data could then be put into practice and measure the outcomes of operational use from trends and condition monitoring.

[Walter Atkinson]

How can operating LOP where internal cylinder pressures are lower, heat is lower, and the combustion chamber is cleaner be worse than operating at 50dF ROP where the OEMs have recommended and heat and pressure are the highest with a dirty combustion chamber? The enemies of metal are heat, pressure and frictional wear--all worse ROP than they are LOP. How do you burn something up when you are running it cooler? Just doesn't pass the smell test, much less data collection. If you can't screw it up as recommended ROP, how can you screw it up worse, LOP in a safer regimen?

As the King of Siam said, "Tis a puzzlement."

****What an engineer would do is to run the engine in a controlled experiment, collect data on the internal runnings, temps, pressures etc. Compare this to the materials, construction of the unit and come up with whether it is more damaging one way or another. This data could then be put into practice and measure the outcomes of operational use from trends and condition monitoring.****

That's what we've been doing for over 15 years! Then we've gone the step further and done it in hundreds of engines in flying machines. Guess what? Conveniently, the data is all the same.

[27/09]

Walter Atkinson: If you are LOP on the cylinder with the EGT probe and the engine is running smoothly it means that your method is spot on and you DO KNOW that all cylinders are LOP.

How can you be sure all cylinders are LOP just by what EGT you see on one cylinder?

john deacon:
Which begs the question. How well balanced are the F/A ratios (assuming good ignition, no induction leaks) in the average Lycoming O320 O360 IO360?

Too non-specific. That's like asking "How much does the average blonde weigh?" There may even be an answer, but it doesn't tell you anything about the blonde you're with!

Actually I disagree. I would think the average Lycoming is far more conforming than your average blonde, otherwise the FAA might have something to say. :O

Because these engines are being produced to a "conformance standard" (for want of a better term) I thinks it's entirely reasonable to expect there is data on how good or bad the F/A ratio spread is. As you rightly pointed out the average doesn't tell you anything about the engine you are flying but it will give you some confidence (or not) on whether or not you have a good chance of running LOP in an aircraft without the need to find out an optimum carb temp etc..

The reason for my question is most of the pilots I know fly behind Lycomings, and in many cases not always the same aircraft. None of these aircraft have any EMS systems fitted. On this thread and others like it we keep hearing about the benefits of LOP. I don't dispute those benefits. However I did question the practicality of running LOP for many pilots flying behind a 4 cylinder Lycoming.

When I asked how how practical is LOP for the average pilot flying a C172 or PA28 or anyone flying a four cylinder Lycoming.

Walter said
Walter: It is very difficult to find this optimal carb temp without and EMS, but with one it is very easy.

In the IO engines, the F:A ratios are balanced by tuning the injectors (GAMIjectors).

Which to me says it's not practical, yet John Deacons says

It takes only a little bit of knowledge.

Which is it?


Walter: Dexta:

***I have a C172 with the O320-E2D, ............***

If you are LOP on the cylinder with the EGT probe and the engine is running smoothly it means that your method is spot on and you DO KNOW that all cylinders are LOP. If the engine is smooth, the F:A ratios are reasonably well balanced, you have a good ignition system and no induction leaks. Everything is fine. If all cylinders are not LOP, your six little engines running in tight formation sharing a common crankshaft will be running rough since they will be making different HPs.

Are you and Dexta talking about the same model of engine here?




In an earlier post
Walter Atkinson: For a growing number of carby pilots in the US this is becoming standard operating procedure. Each carbed engine has an optimal carb temp that results in the optimal F:A mixture being delivers equally to all cylinders. This temp is actually given in many POHs (often in the fine print!) Once this temperature is identified, it becomes very easy to set the carb temp to that value and have very good fuel vaporization which results in even F:A ratios and the ability to run the engine much smoother across the entire mixture spectrum. For example, in most 182s, the optimum carb temp is 10dC. Each aircraft type tends to have it's own optimum value. This was once considered standard operating procedure on carbureted engines but the technique was lost. It is very difficult to find this optimal carb temp without and EMS, but with one it is very easy.

Does this apply so much to Lycoming engines. On another site I've read that because of the way the Lycoming induction system is set up there is a natural heating of the carb and application of carb heat has no effect in at least some installations. In other words the Lycoming induction system lends itself to naturally aid vapourisation unlike in a Continental set up where there is no natural heating of the induction system.

[Brian Abraham]

I am perplexed that turbine pilots state that they are unaware of basic engine parameter notation.
Wf fuel flow
Np prop RPM
NG or N1 compressor RPM
TT or TIT Turbine TemperatureWell, I could show you the flight manuals and training notes (helos - from Flight Safety) and the only parameters talked about are, in the order of your listing, fuel flow, rotor RPM, N1, N2 (missing from your list) and ITT. Not a wf to be seen anywhere.

[No Hoper]

Brian
In helos we have
NR rotor RPM and
N2 (power turbine) RPM on same indicator for reasons you would be aware
N1 Compressor RPM
Wf fuel flow
Pc compressor discharge pressure
Px modified Pc for governor regulating
Py modified Px
But enough.
There just NP on turboprop engines as no need to match needles

[yr right]

Heat is irrelevant 50 below or above. As you lean out the burn is slower this is what is the cause effect on an exhaust valve. Notice that the inlet dosent get damaged at all. The gas flow past the valve going on to extreme lean conditions passes the valve and over heats it. Much like if you get a piece of steel and heat it with a oxy set. Get the metal hot and move the tip around so the heat is not in one place. As you move the tip around the past steel cools. Now place that heat at the edge. What happens it starts to burn the edge. This is the same as what happens to the valve. The colour is very different to a normal valve. Once the valve damaged it will not repair itself. So are burnt valve mine and everyone else imagination. I think not. Also remember that the engine is. at its most stressed on takeoff. Dose the valve burn at this position if it is in good condition no why because the mixture is by manufactures settings is on the rich side of sinc may be they can tell us why that is. Just like they said that the whallya engine was ok cause it was rich enough. It was rich enough until the engine went to full power then it wasn't.
This week I place a plug I placed a plug in the over as I was changing a gear for a starter adaptor. I got the plug hot and I then dropped it into a bucket of room temp water. Gee guess what happen the ceramic cracked.

This myth that if you run lop you will get all your troubles gone is just that. We ran rop we never had a problem in fact we had very little problems at all with our engine. They all made o/h with expect one which had a blower bearing failure that caused that engine to be removed. We done more take off and landings a day than most of you would do in a year. Yet we looked after our engines and airframes.

Now if you won't to run lop do it I'm not telling you what to do. Let's see what tcm have to say I don't know what they have planed. But if you experiment
With lop be prepared to put your hand in your pockets for engine repairs. As I said earlier this is a saving of a few dollars an hour. Expect a bill from $1000 a cly min if you screw it up.

Now they will come back with data distrusting what I have said they have a financial interest in that I have not. I see what I see. Funny they don't acknowledge the work that tcm have put in to provide better reliable engine components. They call there stuff sience we'll what works on paper dosent always work in real life.

They said light was the fastest thing in the known universe then oh we may be wrong the giant collider in France has maybe proven that not to be true. Where dose this leave us now.
Leaves me in the place I started. Leaves you the pilot to decide what you won't to do. People here called me all sorts of stuff yet don't know simple terms parts etc. At the end of the day will it worry me in what you do not really with the exception that if you have an accident I really don't won't to be called into an inquest. If the cly has a damaged valve and until there is documentation to say it's ok ( which I doubt will ever come ) they will be removed and repaired not at my cost but yours.

Cheers

[43Inches]

So the fuel burns hotter and longer when LOP causing valves to erode and pistons melt? But the cylinder pressure is lower CHT and EGT is cooler? Where does peak cylinder pressure, power and temperature occur again?

[yr right]

Fuel burns slower so instead of the fuel being burnt in the chamber it burn is continued outside the chamber and past the valve and into the exhaust. This is a fact. If you don't believe this why do we have burnt valve. Maybe the burnt valve fairy sneaks in and dose it.

Cheers

[43Inches]

So what happens when your mixture is ROP? If rich to cool the engine can this not lead to buildups on the valve and seat and what would this do to valve life. What is the burn rate of fuel that is richer than the correct fuel/air for combustion.

[Ethel the Aardvark]

I think the majority of pro posters here are bums down in experimental category aircraft. A quite different breed of pilots.
They would most likely have all the multiple egt and cht sensors. Pilot would be soul operator and has a vested interest in flying his aircraft non commercially to obtain cheapest cost per mile.
However a commercial operator with their fleet of 210 or 206/7 type aircraft with a bunch of newbie 200 hr pilots who don't ultimately care about engine life or costs are expected to change engine control procedures, some even can't work out how to operate the cowl flap handle. I can't see it happening anytime soon.
Good luck

[yr right]

Speed is irelavant if the burn is contained in the chamber as the valve is closed. Same as the inlet. It made of a different material but as it's no open to the gas flow it dose not get effected.
When the exhaust valve opens it gets all hot gas if it still burning as it passes the valve it burns it. Not that hard really. And if you get a carbon under the seat it can cause it to burn as we'll as in correct lift timing of the cam (not meaning an aircraft engine).
Don't believe me about flame front. What happens when you do a mag check. These are big bore engines

So do you own your own aircraft.
Cheers.

[yr right]

We'll I think you have a lot of truth in what you have said Ethel. I said before it dosent matter what you give someone if the don't look after it it will break. Unless you are like mick who I continuely said well done you are dancing on a dangerous curve. I've it won't worry me or any other lame. We will continue to do what we do.
It will not be hurting my pocket.

Cheers

[Weheka]

So to sum it all up then, it would be fair to say that you think everything Walter, John, Jabba etc has to say about LOP vs ROP, using their advise on correct procedures, equipment etc, is total bollocks and all you will end up with is so many burnt, destroyed cylinders, covering the hanger floor, you will be tripping over them?

Is that what you think in a nut shell, because it's all a bit confusing?

Sometimes you say LOP has been around for ages and it's well known, and other times you say it's crap and no one should attempt it?:confused:

[yr right]

The average pilot will destroy an engine. This is fact. When lop in the earlier days the flight engineer watch with eagle eyes his instrument and make adjustments as required. Mick is a long way and I mean a long way above and beyond what people are on this post. He trends tends and trends. I don't know hot his operation and can only go on what I have been told on this forum.
I have also said if you wish to do it and it's in the poh go do it I don't care but give the maintenance shop pirour knowegle about what you going to do.
I wa ask do I recommend it or my thoughts I have done that. I see and lots others lame see the same results as I do.

Your $$$$$
Fuel is the cheapest single thing you can put in your aircraft. So what do you save over an hour how many hours a year you flying most private don't fly more than a 100 hours a year

Cheers

[No Hoper]

Sitting by the pool sipping beers and assessing the weight and distribution thereof on three blonde backpackers. Mmmmm one is more top heavy but has attracted most attention. Go figure
Have we discovered the near perfect machine with LOP and all those clys flying in close formation.
Low BMEP, low fuel burn and very little heat losses
And this is at full noise or so posters here say
A few more experiments and we are going to have to defuell after every flight

[43Inches]

Speed is irelavant if the burn is contained in the chamber as the valve is
closed. Same as the inlet. It made of a different material but as it's no open
to the gas flow it dose not get effected.

So at what temp lean of peak will this combustion not be contained within the cylinder. The reduction in mixture burn rate would be progressive so at what temp will it start to erode the exhaust valve. Will this happen any temp leaner than best power or leaner than peak or leaner again say 50 LOP.

You have made a statement that the slower mixture burn at LOP makes it combust beyond the valve opening but the mixture with ROP the slower burn does not exit?

I have owned and managed piston aircraft in the past but not now, maybe in the future.

[Creampuff]

I think the majority of pro posters here are bums down in experimental category aircraft. ...Now that right there's hilariously funny. :D

And I know the majority of anti posters are trolls!

[yr right]

I'm guessing that cream puff believes in Santa the tooth fairy and climate change because he was told they all true.
Sorry for not being a sheep and at least putting a balance view on this post. Maybe they from mother Russia were you weren't allowed to have a view out side of the state.
If I'm a troll for doing that so be. But I'm a better person than you will ever be.

I didn't know that you were allowed to say anything against these people selling you all stuff. And they own the post. All you can say is we have the data I've got a hangar full of data

Cheers

[Weheka]

This myth that if you run lop you will get all your troubles gone is just that. We ran rop we never had a problem in fact we had very little problems at all with our engine. They all made o/h with expect one which had a blower bearing failure that caused that engine to be removed. We done more take off and landings a day than most of you would do in a year. Yet we looked after our engines and airframes.

I didn't know that you were allowed to say anything against these people selling you all stuff. And they own the post. All you can say is we have the data I've got a hangar full of data


Either you have a very good operation with all your engines going to TBO, or you have cylinders from stuffed engines scattered all over the floor, i.e. "Iv'e got hanger full of data."

Still a bit confusing as to what you are trying to say?

[Mick Stuped]

Ethel,
Love the handle, wish I could have been around the night that you came up with Ethel the ardvark. Love it.

LOP can be done very successful in an operational environment. Training is all important. I agree new pilots can be a bit of a trial. But really I don't think a lot of management or in company check and training fully understand enough of basic parameters that is needed to have sweet running engine. This results in line pilots perpetuating bad operational habits. Have seen bean counters insist a company go LOP, flight management put it into practise without knowing even if the engines online could run LOP. Pilots thought it was simple missed some important indicators through not understanding and no EMS installed and were not lean enough. Company returned to ROP because bean counters could not see a benefit but from talking to a pilot who came to work for us from them their engines ran so rough they couldn't get to peak let alone LOP. So I can understand why not many of us run LOP.

When a newbie comes to us looking for a job, with ink still wet on their new licence have just been bombarded by so many new things in training that they are a bit in the learning overload mode and really just want to fly, feeling they now know it all. We realise that it is up to us to guide them slowly to LOP through show and tell.

What seems to work for us is we run our own engine management induction separate to flight and operational induction and try to simply explain what's happening when they touch the red knob, not get to bogged down in science to much. This includes time with the HAMC and on the floor with our LAME. EMS is very important to this as generally, gen Y is very good at digital but crap at analogue. We start them ICUS with learning to read and lean via EMS. Then when they can show us what happens to CHT and EGT when they lean in flight we then get them to do the big slow mixture pull. And then check where they are with EGT and CHT Compared to leaning via EMS another light switch moment. Then we get them to run 40 degrees ROP as they were taught and compare CHT and EGT to 40 degrees LOP and ask them to explain why they think the difference. Man do you see the light switches come on. Demo is the best teacher with the use of an EDM.

We encourage questions and we like them to sit with us after their first few solo flights and go through the their own flight data from startup to shutdown and explain what they have done and how they operated the aircraft. If they can see they have done the right thing it gives them confidence. From my experience newbies really want to do the right thing. They bend over backwards to try and get it right. They just need better training when it comes to engine management as the current pilot training syllabus has some major gaps. Don't blame the student, blame the educator.

Sometimes I do feel experts can be to close to their passion they have studied for so long that they forget that most of us are just trying to catch up with the basics of engine management and feel ashamed to ask basic stupid questions that they must have heard thousands of times. For this I really feel that we as an industry really need to focus the attitude to correcting the training establishment, the syllabus, and the authors of the text books.

As we all know change moves slow in this industry, however it is changing, least we are now getting newbies that have used an EMS and have heard if LOP. I am just surprised, as ever that engine management is such a low priority in training but can be such an important part of keeping you up there both safely and economically.

[Weheka]

43inchs
You hit the nail on the head. LOP operated correctly in conjunction with a good EDM and well trained pilots will save not only maintiance costs, extend cylinder/valve life but will also save the price of an engine in its life in fuel savings alone.

Mick and 43inchs have put it in a nut shell. I really don't see what the argument is about when the above statement is the simple truth of the matter.

[adsyj]

Actually this is a pretty bloody good thread.

I appreciate the contribution and challenges put forth by Yr Right and others.

[yr right]

We ran a great operation at lower than 500 feet. When people you know are family and friends are in that seat you make sure that it's done right every time. We never had an engine failure partially or any thing. Running lop will not cure your own problems at all if the pilots treat the engine with content it's that simple. There are pilot and there are operators. Me at the end of the change can pick them very easily. Pilots that think they can put it over engineers are deluding them selfs.
Also our engines always made o/h.

Cheers

[No Hoper]

I have read the articles online at the APS site
Walter, John and Jaba have directed us there for education purposes.
Is it credible evidence to refer to yourself as a source?
I would like some peer reviewed articles printed in Aviation Maintenance journals or similar so I can research further

[Weheka]

LOP operated correctly in conjunction with a good EDM and well trained pilots will save not only maintiance costs, extend cylinder/valve life but will also save the price of an engine in its life in fuel savings alone.

Yr right, forget all the smoke and mirrors. Do you have any argument with the above statement? Is it wrong? If you think it is wrong, why do you think so?

You won't be able to use the pilots that have caused your hanger floor to be full of destroyed cylinders as an example of why you think it is wrong, for obvious reasons.

I don't think anyone is advocating running LOP at 500ft or below?

[yr right]

No no hooper you will serve and be told you have no choice you are a sheep repeat after me baa baa baa pmsl

[Hempy]

No no hooper you will serve and be told you have no choice you are a sheep repeat after me baa baa baa pmsl

HA! Says the guy who is so narrow minded that he refuses to be educated because it's too difficult. I'd suggest you try stepping outside your narrow minded comfort zone and let your over inflated ego allow you to accept that people know more than you think you do, but I honestly think you are too stupid for any of this to sink in anyway. Please let us know who you are so we can avoid your expert services.

[yr right]

Oh humpty dumbbbbty back. As useful nothing useful to say. Typical troll by his own account.
Just a matter of interest would you like some more technical abbreviations.
Or is it a little to much for your brain to cope with.

Cheers

[Walter Atkinson]

With a single probe EGT, you can KNOW that all cylinders are LOP IF the engine is running smoothly. If the F:A ratios are not even, the cylinders will be putting out different HPs and the engine will run rough. If it's smooth, then the F:A ratios are balanced.

As for Yr. Right's claim that LOP mixtures exit the combustion chamber still burning, in the usable mixture ranges, this is simply not true. For the mixture to be still burning as the exhaust valve opens, the mixture must be so lean as to be far too lean for practical use. We show several examples of this in the APS course. As one leans from peak toward LOP mixtures, the EGT falls… until the mixture becomes so lean that the EGT begins to rise with further leaning as the exhaust valve begins to open. This mixture range is so lean as to be very close to Idle Cutoff--unusable in operational conditions. This concern is a red herring.

There are a few mixture ranges where the escaping gasses actually COOL the exhaust valve. That is difficult for many to appreciate, but it has been measured.

There is MUCH refereed material in the literature. All of it agrees on the science. Everything John, Jabba, and I have been posting is completely supported in Taylor's definitive two-volume text on internal combustion as well as Haywood's excellent texts. FWIW, Taylor was the head of the Sloan Combustion Laboratories at MIT--no slacker, he. FWIW, I may be one of the few posting in this thread who has actually read both of Taylor's volumes. I highly recommend them if you have about six months to go through them. If you have another 4 months, study Haywood's text.

All of that is supported by all of the data collected by every engine manufacturer since the Wright Brothers.

This science is not arguable by anyone familiar with these multiple data sources. It is, of course, arguable by anyone with incomplete exposure to the science.

Old Wives' Tales in aviation like we are seeing posted in this thread are like snakes--they take a lot of killin'.

[yr right]

So Walter by what you have just said I and every engineer that's every replaces a cly have never done it for a burnt exhaust valve. Mmm exhaust valve fairies again.

Cheers

[Brian Abraham]

What happens when you do a mag check. These are big bore enginesSo what does happen?

[Walter Atkinson]

***Is it credible evidence to refer to yourself as a source?***

Only when you have done the original research.

Actually most of what we present is from other, undeniably expert sources. We do present some of what we have discovered through our own intensive, scientific research. Some of what we have discovered is still considered proprietary, so we do not discuss those things.

We make a HUGE point of telling everyone as we have done in this thread:

"Do not believe us. Do not believe anyone's opinion. Believe the data, for without data, all you are is another person with an unsupported opinion."

[Walter Atkinson]

***So Walter by what you have just said I and every engineer that's every replaces a cly have never done it for a burnt exhaust valve.***

That, sir, is a ridiculous statement. I said nothing of the sort. The data is clear that your assignment of causality of those burnt valves is erroneous.

[yr right]

As an engineer like as all when we have a problem we look for a cause. Ie mags timing plugs etc. it not a case of change a cly and all be ok. We look at eve eying that May have cause that. And guess what. The fella behind the controls is to blame nearly all off the time. If what Walter has just said is true we would not see the damage that we see. The little red knob is a major problem in the wrong hands. A 210 in around 1985 out bankstown crashed a killed all on board just after takeoff. Reason pilot though he was pulling pitch he pulled the red knob instead and crashed. I keep saying fuel is cheap.

Cheers

[yr right]

When you take a mag out for a check you loose rpm. Now tell me why.

Cheers

[yr right]

Um no Walter I'm fully aware what a burnt valve is and what you have just said can't happen but in real life it dose.

Cheers

[Brian Abraham]

I know you have a RPM drop, that's why I asked you what happens, since you are a LAME, and the expert in these matters.

[Walter Atkinson]

Short answer:

During a mag check, operating on one mag, the combustion takes longer to complete since there is only one flame front. This results in less total expansion of the combustion gas (PV=nRT) since the thetaPP is occurring later in the power stroke. As the expanded volume of the 3800 degree gas changes, so does the temperature. The result is a higher EGT due to the lesser expansion of the hot gas.

It is NOT because the exhaust valve is opening during the event. By definition, half of the F:A charge is burned at the thetaPP. This is generally occurring at about 15-16d ATDC. In a single mag condition the thetaPP is retarded by about 8 degrees. This means that the combustion charge is completed by around 46-48 degrees after top dead center. The exhaust valve doesn't open until about 135 degrees after top dead center. In a useful LOP mixture the burn completion is later than the example above--maybe a thetaPP of 25 or so, but is still completed significantly before the exhaust valve is opening (about 60 degrees before it opens--give or take a tad). Another red herring of concern.

A more fully descriptive answer as presented in the APS class is not possible in this limited forum post.

[Walter Atkinson]

There is no RPM drop during an in-flight mag check with a constant speed propeller.

:ok:

The rpm drop during a pre-flight mag check is due to the reduction of crank angle geometry efficiency due to the retarded thetaPP and the resultant loss of power.

Yr Right, can you define ThetaPP for us? Or, are you still not answering questions?

[Walter Atkinson]

***Um no Walter I'm fully aware what a burnt valve is and what you have just said can't happen but in real life it dose.
***

I have said nothing of the sort--and everyone here knows it.

Your misquoting and misstatements are non-contributory to a meaningful conversation.

Are you still not answering questions?

[yr right]

Sorry just looking at an engine that dropped a leg out of the bed smashes both mags and destroyed the aircraft they wher lucky to get out.
Cheers

[yr right]

If you going to ask high detail question and theory you going beat me everytime there is no denining that. But I keep saying and have said from the first time I spoke on this matter. I see what happens on the floor. But you define that and it never happens you say it's everything else. We'll it's not. How may cly would you have inspected over the years or change fuel system checks mag checks and changes. At the end of the day the little red knob in the wrong hands can and dose destroy an engine.
Cheers

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Sorry just looking at an engine that dropped a leg out of the bed smashes both mags and destroyed the aircraft they wher lucky to get out.
Cheers

.....now, that would surely make the pages of a crash comic...did you fill in an incident report, yr right?

[Agrajag]

If you going to ask high detail question and theory you going beat me everytime there is no denining that. But I keep saying and have said from the first time I spoke on this matter. I see what happens on the floor. But you define that and it never happens you say it's everything else. We'll it's not. How may cly would you have inspected over the years or change fuel system checks mag checks and changes. At the end of the day the little red knob in the wrong hands can and dose destroy an engine. Oh fer Chrissake!

A control column in the wrong hands can destroy an entire aircraft! But we are to hope that we're trained well enough not to do that, otherwise we're all doomed.

Ordinarily I'd be content to sit back and watch you make a goose of yourself, which you achieve by spouting untruths and studiously avoiding addressing any of the many direct questions put to you. The people here who've taken the trouble to get educated on this topic are well aware that your views are poorly-informed at best.

But my main concern is for those who are still trying to learn, but don't yet have the experience or training to assess what's good information and what isn't.

You, sir, are supplying dangerously incorrect advice that may sway some of these poor innocents into believing that you have a valid viewpoint. Irrelevancies such as this:

A 210 in around 1985 out bankstown crashed a killed all on board just after takeoff. Reason pilot though he was pulling pitch he pulled the red knob instead and crashed.imply that the mixture should be lockwired in full rich and left there, lest the dumb pilot move it at the wrong time. One can only wonder how many pilots have not inadvertently pulled the mixture after takeoff in the intervening 29 years.

I don't care whether you really are just a troll, enjoying wasting the time of some well-motivated and highly educated people, or whether you really are as ignorant as you seem to enjoy being. The drivel you spout has the potential to cause someone serious trouble down the line, because your implied knowledge as a LAME may just goad them into following it and wrecking a perfectly good engine. And that will make you culpable when the disaster happens.

So, please, cut it out. It's not funny and it is dangerous.

[Weheka]

A 210 in around 1985 out bankstown crashed a killed all on board just after takeoff. Reason pilot though he was pulling pitch he pulled the red knob instead and crashed. I keep saying fuel is cheap.

Pilots are only human and like everyone else can make mistakes. I don't see how this is at all relevant to the LOP ROP discussion thats been going on.

When you work out the hourly rate you need just to cover the cost of running an aircraft, i don't think the fuel component comes out as being "cheap".

[outnabout]

So now we have the evil villains of piston aviation including - but not limited to -

Running ROP (not in accordance with POH & without proper training)
Running LOP (not in accordance with POH & without proper training)
Poor education / instruction
Dodgy engineers
Blonde backpackers in a bar (or assessment thereof)

And when all else fails - blame the pilot!

From what I can read in all of this, the only group smelling of roses is - unbelievably - CASA. (Stay tuned, folks)

Oracle - you said this thread needs an IQ test. From reading some of these posts, I reckon at times it needs a breathalyser!

[No Hoper]

So no peer review of your findings then Walter.
Have checked both CMI and Textron and no advocating of the Walter Apptoved leaking valve or low compressions. Although some discussion on balanced injectors.
Please do not shut off a mag in flight, the result may turn your single engine aircraft into a glider
Pilots reading this thread carrying passengers into the GAFA, consider your potentially dead passengers before trying anything Wally is advocating

[yr right]

No what you are posting is dangerous. You have serval times stated that is ok not to follow the poh. You ran an engine at 5/80 you don't except that valves burn. You have no peer reviews. You don't acknowledge what work both tcm and lyc have done in the field of reliability What I see and what has been done here in aust is far removed from what you have been saying. Our saftey record is second to none.
You state that if you run what you are selling your engine will make o/h so what if you run it normally it will as well. You dismiss anything you don't agree with. Like dead cly burnt valve or they don't happen. I think you need to read what you write sir.
Like I say do what you won't. Will we pick up the bits and fix them. It's your way or the highway. Next thing you be in black riding a push bike and knocking on doors.
For the average person that dose less than 100 a year this is a waste. Fuel is cheap.
You will kill people.
I also had a mess from awi that is watching this with interest and is concerned to say the least with what you are promoting. If there was such a problem it would have shown it by now. What you say is not followed up on the hangar floor.
I will not kill people because I won't recommend anything that goes against the poh and the law you have no regard for ethier and that sir is what you and you friends have posted on this thread.

Cheers

[yr right]

I repeat to you.
Not one single engine shut down in flight
Not one engine failure.
Not one aircraft lost due any action from me our staff
Not one wheels up.

I think my record speaks for itself.

Cheers

[Cactusjack]

Like I say do what you won't. Will we pick up the bits and fix them. It's your way or the highway. Next thing you be in black riding a push bike and knocking on doors. Awesome thread! **** on TV so I grabbed the beer and popcorn and have spent the past hour scrolling through this maze. This thread has it all; Egotists, comedians, illiterates, knowledgeable folk, knobs, trolls, the plain angry and the list continues.
10/10. As you were boys.....................

[yr right]

And sir I'm not selling anything. All I've giving is what's shown on the floor really data not something that produced on a computer. Real life true to touch both in your and and in there wallets.

Cheers

[Weheka]

Spell check off......spell check on.....

Most posts, complete gibberish.....some posts, perfectly understandable....

[Oracle1]

Of all the posts you have made yr wrong this one that you keep repeating is perhaps the most revealing.



I repeat to you.
Not one single engine shut down in flight
Not one engine failure.
Not one aircraft lost due any action from me our staff
Not one wheels up.

I think my record speaks for itself.

I have been working in the industry in one form or another fixing and flying for almost 22 years and in that time I have amassed tens of thousands of hours with my signature on it in the flying training environment, the worst treatment you can give any piston engine. In that time I have lost track of the amount of engines that have turned into shrapnel for any number of reasons. Some of these I was involved in stripping to figure out what went wrong. Also had a few that stopped that ran just fine again later and could not be determined. (probably ice)

A senior LAME at work who is in is late 60's has had two pistons stop WHILST he was flying them, almost got killed. My Chief Engineer who is literally a GOD when comes to the PT6 with literally hundreds of thousands of hours with his signature on it, and has thousands of hours flying has had more than 5 PT6's
turn into white hot metal. We are approved to 8000 hours on the PT6 and routinely get them there without problems.

If there is one thing I have learnt in this industry after seeing lots of people die is that if you hang around long enough it will happen.

For you to claim that you have never had an engine failure means one of two things,

1. You have f*ck all hours with your signature on it or,

2. You are a liar or full of shyte or both.

[Creampuff]

I repeat to you.
Not one single engine shut down in flight
Not one engine failure.
Not one aircraft lost due any action from me our staff
Not one wheels up.That's because you are a troll.I think my record speaks for itself.It does.

Your posts become strangely coherent and grammatically correct when you want to tell a very big lie.

You are a liar. Please sue me. :ok:

[gerry111]

From yr right: "You have no peer reviews."

I'm not sure that's quite true. There are lots of pilots that understand the proven science presented by APS. And those pilots operate their engines LOP with all the benefits that come along with that. They have open minds and have been prepared to listen to credible arguments. And I'd rather be flying with pilots with that sort of attitude. :ok:

[Walter Atkinson]

Well, I've been standing in front of thousands, of pilots, LAMEs, engine builders, OEM reps from most of the aircraft manufacturers, employees of TCM and the FAA and CASA. Standing there in person, not behind some keyboard. In not a single instance, has any one of them taken issue with ANY of the science and information we present. Thats a lot tougher peer review than the over one dozen articles I have had published in peer-reviewed journals and other magazines over 30 years which the peer review consists of a couple of viewers. Been there and done that.

I am an A&P (LAME), hold the ATP, CFII, and MEI ratings. I have a bit of experience. I have flown and maintained over 75 different types of aircraft. I have a modicum of experience. I have spent countless hours studying the data and participating in experiments in the most advanced engine test facility in the world. I have seen a few billion data points.

Of course, al of this pales in comparison to a LAME who cannot support anything he says with anything other than, "I've seen it all and know everything already."

[Walter Atkinson]

Please let me apologize. In the name of presenting valid, data-backed information about engine management and combustion technology, I have sadly engaged an individual who is ill-prepared for the debate, has no data, cannot properly quote another poster, and is all-around incapable of the discussion.

I shall endeavor to avoid this type of error in the future.

OTOH, it has given the forum members an opportunity to learn a little on a variety of topics in this single thread. Well, some have learned, others have laughed, and others have made no progress!

As US President Zachary Taylor told the American Indians after they were soundly defeated and gathered like cattle onto Reservations, "You should endeavor to Persevere." :ugh:

[Oracle1]

No need to apologize Walter a lot of us are grateful that you have given your time and expertise. Lots of people have viewed the thread and some of them will have learnt something. Don't stop swimming against the tide the word needs more contrarians to fight against the dumbed down mass of humanity. In Australia we have plenty of yr rights, probably way above the world average.

[jdeakin]

"yr right,"

You have serval times stated that is ok not to follow the poh. No, not true. What we have said is the "LIMITATIONS" section of the POH is good, valid information, and should be followed at all times. Where we draw the line is the "How to fly" material that makes up the rest of the POH.

You ran an engine at 5/80 Yes, in a Bonaza that was in EXPERIMENTAL, in order to prove a point.

you don't except that valves burn.I think you mean "accept" not "expect." Assuming this is so, it's not true. Valves DO burn. Valves DO cause engine failures in some cases. If the failure is not detected early, and handled properly, it can even cause loss of life. I do not doubt that you see this type of failure all the time, with parts scattered all over your hangar floor. (Although most prefer them on tables for easier access.)

Where we part company is the CAUSE of these valve failures. We first began wondering why one or two valves fails at around 400 hours of service, yet other valves in the same engine go to TBO. This doesn't make sense, at first. Fix that one valve, and the engine goes on. We've got documented cases (including but not limited to our own) where owners buy a BRAND NEW ENGINE, and the owner insists on taking all cylinders off, and putting a micrometer on all parts to check them. Lo and behold, some cylinders were up to factory specs, and some were not, and a few off by surprising amounts. When the cylinders that were not up to factory specs were repaired or replaced and put back on the engine, no further problems, they go to TBO, and well beyond.

Generally speaking, the typical "burnt valves" are caused by improper installation in the cylinder. That can be at the factory, or by the overhauler.

(Yes, owners ARE spending the extra "several thousand dollars" to remove and repair cylinders.)

We do believe that it IS possible to "burn" valves over time, by running engines just barely ROP under adverse conditions. Valves will be at their very hottest at about 25℉ (14℃) ROP, according to 1943 fuels research by the Government and by 1966 Lycoming research, confirmed by GAMI in this century. That's just one reason we suggest running LOP (much cooler), or if you must run ROP, much richer, or limit power to 60% or 65%.

You have no peer reviews.
Ha! It didn't take you long to pick up on that one! I expect all messages from you will contain that line. NO PEER REVIEW!

I'm not sure how we'd get a "peer review," and we certainly don't have the time or money to pay for it. Who would be the "peers" You? The mind boggles.
You state that if you run what you are selling your engine will make o/h so what if you run it normally it will as well.
Quite true, if we define your "normally." If you run below 60% (maybe 65%) of rated power, run the mixtures anywhere you like, mixture use or misuse at such low power will not harm the engine. You will have the same valve problems at 400 hours either way.

LOP operation will save about 3 GPH (11 lph) at the same power settings, and with the price of fuel these days, that's pretty significant. It will pay for the overhaul! It will also be less maintenance (no fouled plugs) and it's cleaner and cooler. LOP will also make it possible to run at more than the puny 60% or 65%. In fact, thousands of pilots are running at levels of 85% and more, and the engines love it.
I also had a mess from awi that is watching this with interest and is concerned to say the least with what you are promoting. I'm sorry, I don't understand "awi." I would welcome a RATIONAL discourse with anyone.

John Deakin
jdeakin // at // advancedpilot.com

[UnderneathTheRadar]

Please let me apologize. In the name of presenting valid, data-backed information about engine management and combustion technology, I have sadly engaged an individual who is ill-prepared for the debate, has no data, cannot properly quote another poster, and is all-around incapable of the discussion.

Never argue with an idiot - they'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience......

[A Squared]

Have checked both CMI and Textron and no advocating of the Walter Apptoved leaking valve or low compressions.

For the record Walter has not advocated running with leaking valves or extremely ow compression. His references to doing such was to point out that a valve which leaks under a static test does not necessarily do so in operation, and that compression is not the sole determinant of the health of a cylinder. Nowhere does he suggest that it's generally acceptable to ignore a leaking exhaust valve in a cylinder 5/80 compression.

I'm not sure whether this is a case of you not understanding what he wrote, or of you understanding his words but deliberately misrepresenting them to make some point. I would hope for the sake of your integrity that it's the former, not the later. In yr right's case, it's pretty clearly the latter.

Does it need to be pointed out that if one feel compelled to lie about the other's position, perhaps ones own position isn't all that strong?

[No Hoper]

Asquared,
Comprehension.isn't an issue.
The issue is that impressionable young pilots will take his advice.
BTW A&P does not equal LAME
AWI is a CASA Airworthiness Inspector.
WF is still fuel Flow
Shvetsov invented the rotating valve seat

[jdeakin]

Comprehension.isn't an issue. I was hoping it was. The other alternatives are really ugly.

The issue is that impressionable young pilots will take his advice. If that's Walter's advice that you're referring to, I certainly hope so. Better than the Ego-maniacal voodoo that "yr right" is preaching.

BTW A&P does not equal LAMEI certainly hope not, if "yr right" is an example of the latter.

AWI is a CASA Airworthiness Inspector. Ah, thank you for that. With CASA's demonstrated incompetence, I now see where "yr right" gets his info. I don't think much of our own FAA, but they're improving with every message he leaves.

WF is still fuel FlowThanks again. Curious, what does "WF" stand for? Weight of Fuel? I've not heard it before, but I've not heard of many things.

Shvetsov invented the rotating valve seatOk, thanks (again) for that. Still amazes me why he tossed that into the conversation.I assume then that a Shvetsov engine WITH ROTATING VALVE SEATS can be purchased today? Is it in current production? What aircraft is it mounted in? Pictures? Schematics? Please tell me more!

John Deakin
jdeakin // at // advancedpilot.com