Take Off Flaps - 210
AustralianMade
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Out in the weather!
Age: 54
Posts: 917
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gaunty,
Mate, sticking my neck out here, so here goes a guess from a rank amateur:
You can check and see if you have full power by stuffing around with the mixture?
Or do you have a fuel flow or CHT or an EGT in the avionics?
C'mon guys be gentle, I'm due to start ab-initio shortly, I have 2 or 3 hours doing TIFs, the same in gliders and about 7,000 hours reading PPRuNe!
Cheers
Mate, sticking my neck out here, so here goes a guess from a rank amateur:
You can check and see if you have full power by stuffing around with the mixture?
Or do you have a fuel flow or CHT or an EGT in the avionics?
C'mon guys be gentle, I'm due to start ab-initio shortly, I have 2 or 3 hours doing TIFs, the same in gliders and about 7,000 hours reading PPRuNe!
Cheers
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The bottom of a scotch bottle
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a couple of things I noticed:
Chimbu Chuckles, have you seen the list of Millenium cylinders being recalled? scary reading. the ol "candle that burns twice as bright lasts half as long". The directive is about a million pages long.
YesTAM, having done quite a few C of A test flights in my time, the damn things never stall like the book says. they get older and more dinged up (and have leading edges filled with bog)....we were for ever 'adjusting' the figgures to more closely represent the book.
And on the topic at hand, I never used 20 degrees, I was always told anything more than 17 was creating more drag than lift, and in my experience it appeared true. I always started with 10, and if needed just added the little bit necessary to get airbourne. once it's flying - it's flying. it'll fly just as well at 10 feet, as it does at 1000-just let it fly, build airspeed and go. The trick is don't get ground shy.
Just my two cents
Chimbu Chuckles, have you seen the list of Millenium cylinders being recalled? scary reading. the ol "candle that burns twice as bright lasts half as long". The directive is about a million pages long.
YesTAM, having done quite a few C of A test flights in my time, the damn things never stall like the book says. they get older and more dinged up (and have leading edges filled with bog)....we were for ever 'adjusting' the figgures to more closely represent the book.
And on the topic at hand, I never used 20 degrees, I was always told anything more than 17 was creating more drag than lift, and in my experience it appeared true. I always started with 10, and if needed just added the little bit necessary to get airbourne. once it's flying - it's flying. it'll fly just as well at 10 feet, as it does at 1000-just let it fly, build airspeed and go. The trick is don't get ground shy.
Just my two cents
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
This does kind of suggest that using 20 flap is approved by the POH ....
Another effect of flap is it affects the G limits of most aircraft, especially the negative G limits, many people don't take this into account when conducting manouveres with flap extended.
I for one try to avoid high drag low speed situations, other than when committed to a landing. So far it has served me well for 24 years!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
matching you full aileron deflection with the flaps (somewhere between 10 and 20) seemed to work a treat and gave me the best take off performance. Makes me wonder if I was pyotes' cheif pilot?!!
Grandpa Aerotart
Well perhaps you should have asked for guidance on soft field v short field.
For my money soft and rough go in the same column and short in seperate column.
For a soft/rough strip you want to get airborne at the slowest possible speed...to get out of the gloop/away from the airframe pounding and accelerate level, just airborne, to climb speed (note I didn't say best rate/angle), retract the gear and climb away...flaps coming up at an appropriate speed/altitude.
There is a school of thought that suggests starting the takeoff roll flapless for better initial acceleration and then shoving the flaps out at say 50-60kts...I am going to suggest that such a technique is best left to professional bush pilots. I used to be one and I would suggest if you NEED that technique then you might re appraise taking off all together.
Simply start your takeoff roll with FULL power against the brakes (not for long though or you'll start skidding along with locked wheels and risk building up a mound of mud/grass in front of the wheels) flaps 20 and stick right back...get the nosewheel out of the soft ground asap and then reduce back pressure and fly it along just above the ground...when she wants to fly 'help' her up and then accelerate in a very slight climb...not level but barely climbing...gear up when it is no use to you anymore...accelerate further in a very gentle climb and then flaps to 10 and resume normal climb...flaps 0 when appropriate.
Soft field the most important thing is get off the ground where you can acclerate quicker...hence more flap.
Short field you want to accelerate quickly on the ground to an appropriate speed and then climb away steeply (maybe) hence less flap (less drag) and the elevator in a more neutral position (less drag) so better acceleration...and the flaps at an optimum setting for climbing away (min drag/max lift).
Bare in mind that Vy/Vx are really test pilot speeds used to certify performance...it is rarely a number you will need or want...it is too slow. Many pilots tend to get airborne and nail Vy or Vx and climb away to some silly altitude (500' for instance) at Vy. Vx is used only to 50' to clear that certification obstacle and then lower the nose and accelerate to a faster speed. Think about how low 50' is.
Think about the result of you having an engine failure at say 200' at Vy/Vx...the nose will be so high up that by the time you react and get the nose down to a suitable glide attitude you will be well below that speed with a high ROD and with insufficient energy to control the landing....result lots of spinal injuries at best. Not to mention your exposure to wind shear at such a slow speed.
Much better, whether short/soft field to climb out at a higher speed that gives you the time/energy to trim for best glide and manouver towards the cheapest thing in front of you.
As an example in my Bonanza Vy is 93kts or some such (I never use it and refuse to memorise it) while best glide speed clean is 110 kts...at 93kts the nose angle is rediculous and if an engine failure occurred most pilots would be back at 85kts by the time they had realised what was happening and lowered the nose....to get 110kts would require a much lower nose attitude and the ROD would be off scale...leaving a VERY tricky round out and flare into whatever was RIGHT in front of you...no manouver ability to stear even 10-15 degrees either side for a better option...and no time.
After takeoff I always get the gear up quick and accelerate in a VERY gentle climb to 110kts and then climb away at 110kts...you can actually feel the aircraft 'come alive' approaching 110kts. If the engine fails soon after lift off and while accelerating I am still very low and need only lower the nose a small amount to slide onto he ground straight ahead. After I get to 110kts at say <200' I have the energy to manouver a little left or right into my pre planned spot. I get the wheels up asap because my home strip is only 800m...the wheels cease being useful the instant I am off the ground because at that point to matter what happens I am off the end and I don't want the wheels down...I want to be sliding with little chance of flipping over after the nosewheel snals off.
If the strip is soft AND short wait until it isn't because you will most probably come a cropper.
Practice the above in dry conditions and apply it when it isn't...you'll soon learn the 210s 'sweet spot' speed....you'll soon develope the feel required to hold the nosewheel just clear of the surface and then drag her into the air at minumum speed and accelerate airborne in a very gentle climb...remember that accelerating is more important than climbing initially.
Hope that helps.
For my money soft and rough go in the same column and short in seperate column.
For a soft/rough strip you want to get airborne at the slowest possible speed...to get out of the gloop/away from the airframe pounding and accelerate level, just airborne, to climb speed (note I didn't say best rate/angle), retract the gear and climb away...flaps coming up at an appropriate speed/altitude.
There is a school of thought that suggests starting the takeoff roll flapless for better initial acceleration and then shoving the flaps out at say 50-60kts...I am going to suggest that such a technique is best left to professional bush pilots. I used to be one and I would suggest if you NEED that technique then you might re appraise taking off all together.
Simply start your takeoff roll with FULL power against the brakes (not for long though or you'll start skidding along with locked wheels and risk building up a mound of mud/grass in front of the wheels) flaps 20 and stick right back...get the nosewheel out of the soft ground asap and then reduce back pressure and fly it along just above the ground...when she wants to fly 'help' her up and then accelerate in a very slight climb...not level but barely climbing...gear up when it is no use to you anymore...accelerate further in a very gentle climb and then flaps to 10 and resume normal climb...flaps 0 when appropriate.
Soft field the most important thing is get off the ground where you can acclerate quicker...hence more flap.
Short field you want to accelerate quickly on the ground to an appropriate speed and then climb away steeply (maybe) hence less flap (less drag) and the elevator in a more neutral position (less drag) so better acceleration...and the flaps at an optimum setting for climbing away (min drag/max lift).
Bare in mind that Vy/Vx are really test pilot speeds used to certify performance...it is rarely a number you will need or want...it is too slow. Many pilots tend to get airborne and nail Vy or Vx and climb away to some silly altitude (500' for instance) at Vy. Vx is used only to 50' to clear that certification obstacle and then lower the nose and accelerate to a faster speed. Think about how low 50' is.
Think about the result of you having an engine failure at say 200' at Vy/Vx...the nose will be so high up that by the time you react and get the nose down to a suitable glide attitude you will be well below that speed with a high ROD and with insufficient energy to control the landing....result lots of spinal injuries at best. Not to mention your exposure to wind shear at such a slow speed.
Much better, whether short/soft field to climb out at a higher speed that gives you the time/energy to trim for best glide and manouver towards the cheapest thing in front of you.
As an example in my Bonanza Vy is 93kts or some such (I never use it and refuse to memorise it) while best glide speed clean is 110 kts...at 93kts the nose angle is rediculous and if an engine failure occurred most pilots would be back at 85kts by the time they had realised what was happening and lowered the nose....to get 110kts would require a much lower nose attitude and the ROD would be off scale...leaving a VERY tricky round out and flare into whatever was RIGHT in front of you...no manouver ability to stear even 10-15 degrees either side for a better option...and no time.
After takeoff I always get the gear up quick and accelerate in a VERY gentle climb to 110kts and then climb away at 110kts...you can actually feel the aircraft 'come alive' approaching 110kts. If the engine fails soon after lift off and while accelerating I am still very low and need only lower the nose a small amount to slide onto he ground straight ahead. After I get to 110kts at say <200' I have the energy to manouver a little left or right into my pre planned spot. I get the wheels up asap because my home strip is only 800m...the wheels cease being useful the instant I am off the ground because at that point to matter what happens I am off the end and I don't want the wheels down...I want to be sliding with little chance of flipping over after the nosewheel snals off.
If the strip is soft AND short wait until it isn't because you will most probably come a cropper.
Practice the above in dry conditions and apply it when it isn't...you'll soon learn the 210s 'sweet spot' speed....you'll soon develope the feel required to hold the nosewheel just clear of the surface and then drag her into the air at minumum speed and accelerate airborne in a very gentle climb...remember that accelerating is more important than climbing initially.
Hope that helps.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FullyFlappedYes mate it did get carried away a bit but I didn't see any of those who know what they are talking about mention Full flap.
Listen to your Uncle CC I know he knows what he is talking about insofar as short and sticky and just plain short and has flown in and out of places for a living that shouldn't have been but had no choice due to the terrain.
ABX mon vieux, if you keep sticking your neck out like that you'll live to a ripe old age, 
at least it wont be an aircraft that will get you. Keep asking questions and then question the answer until you "get it", there is no such thing as a dumb question only dumb answers. At your stage its probably academic insofar as the question relates to engines with a constant speed propeller that unlike fixed pitch can lull you into a false sense of security. Fixed pitch, at full throttle you either get static RPM or you dont. Engines with a constant speed propeller can look and sound like you're getting the whole nine yards when you you may not be. Go bug your instructor or someone you respect for the answers on CS props and engines as a primer then think through the question I posed.
BTW I didn't personally "invent" the question, it used to be taught as part of your Constant Speed engine handling training.
A37575
Now now, we dont want to encourage the kiddies mate,
before long it would be standard aero club bar technique.
Listen to your Uncle CC I know he knows what he is talking about insofar as short and sticky and just plain short and has flown in and out of places for a living that shouldn't have been but had no choice due to the terrain.
ABX mon vieux,
if you keep sticking your neck out like that you'll live to a ripe old age, at least it wont be an aircraft that will get you. Keep asking questions and then question the answer until you "get it", there is no such thing as a dumb question only dumb answers. At your stage its probably academic insofar as the question relates to engines with a constant speed propeller that unlike fixed pitch can lull you into a false sense of security. Fixed pitch, at full throttle you either get static RPM or you dont. Engines with a constant speed propeller can look and sound like you're getting the whole nine yards when you you may not be. Go bug your instructor or someone you respect for the answers on CS props and engines as a primer then think through the question I posed.BTW I didn't personally "invent" the question, it used to be taught as part of your Constant Speed engine handling training.
A37575
Now now, we dont want to encourage the kiddies mate,
before long it would be standard aero club bar technique.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The bottom of a scotch bottle
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CC - must just be the new cylinders, after several engine failures due to cracked cylinders the FAA issued a directive grounding affected aircraft, and a huge recall. Don't know where they're made these days. They're cheap, so probably China. Small hands you know.....
Not much more to add to the topic. Let the Bun fight continue
Not much more to add to the topic. Let the Bun fight continue
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by Tinstaafl
I tried for ages to see dust through the Shetland drizzle, sleet & snow.
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, Its not a 210, but I just have to mention full flap.
My STOL kitted 172, with 40' flap and 5knots on the nose will get of the ground in about 50 feet and climb quite well before the ASI needle moves.......... Fair Dinkum.
As for your question Guanty, I'm watching for other that know more than me (most Ppruners) to answer the question and teach me stuff.
Besides, I forgot what happens in them noisy old pistons these days..... I don't drive them any more. I do have a liking for that vacuum cleaner sound on the front of my aircraft these days.
My STOL kitted 172, with 40' flap and 5knots on the nose will get of the ground in about 50 feet and climb quite well before the ASI needle moves.......... Fair Dinkum.
As for your question Guanty, I'm watching for other that know more than me (most Ppruners) to answer the question and teach me stuff.
Besides, I forgot what happens in them noisy old pistons these days..... I don't drive them any more.
I do have a liking for that vacuum cleaner sound on the front of my aircraft these days.
AustralianMade
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Out in the weather!
Age: 54
Posts: 917
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Gaunty,
I'll do as you say and bug those who know, but since it is nearly 0100 hrs and they (sensibly) are all asleep, I'll have another crack...
Bring the power up and then cycle the prop, check level of rpm loss?
Cheers Gaunty.
ABX
I'll do as you say and bug those who know, but since it is nearly 0100 hrs and they (sensibly) are all asleep, I'll have another crack...
Bring the power up and then cycle the prop, check level of rpm loss?
Cheers Gaunty.
ABX
Last edited by ABX; 11th Jun 2007 at 05:44.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: The pineapple plantation
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to Gaunty's question.
1. Check your MAP pre start up (ie; engine not going), probably around 28 inches.
2. After applying full power on the take off roll check your MAP again. Should be the same as pre start up. Hence the patter of "full power checked, t&p's, airspeed increasing" on the ground roll.
1. Check your MAP pre start up (ie; engine not going), probably around 28 inches.
2. After applying full power on the take off roll check your MAP again. Should be the same as pre start up. Hence the patter of "full power checked, t&p's, airspeed increasing" on the ground roll.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chimbu -Your recollection of the Cessna really cracked me up - it was just soooo familiar. Stuff like not having the autopilot in IMC not being an issue in the Cessna is a good thing, because it usually doesn't work, really struck a chord. I've owned 4 of those wobbly wheeled Cessna things and I just cannot stop myself doing it. I still think when you look at the performance, even compared to new stuff like an SR22 (Seen how much runway those things use?), you really cannot beat them - but against that, one does get all those 'less relaible than your 51 Harley' issues - and BTW probably about the same technology! Having said all of that are you serious about the $105/hour for an A36? I've had some absolute maintenance nightmares in the Cessnas - but that's mostly because the previous owners were obviously allergic to proper maintenance and LAME's seem to see me coming. However, I've heard some REALLY scary stories about Bonanzas and have not found a LAME yet who would prefer one to a Cessna (maybe that's because Cessnas go worng more often!). You imply quite a few problems with Cessna avionics and autopilots - what if you get rid of them? (I have a King/Century equipped one now that seems to get rid of all of that annoyance) You also say the Bo cost 2.5 time as much - so if you bought a 2.5 times more expensive late model low time 210, (there are still a handful) it still would not be as good as an A36? Let's face it, there are some real high time clapped out old dogs in the bottom end of the complex Cessna single market.
OK OK, you and Forktail have got me convinced, the over complex, expensive parts, over compliicated maintenance programmed Beechcraft it has to be! (and at $105 per hour, I've obviously been completely nuts all these years!)
PS Wasn't this about flaps or something? Now that's where the Cessna leaves the Beechcraft for dead! Which one would you rather have an engine failure in?
OK OK, you and Forktail have got me convinced, the over complex, expensive parts, over compliicated maintenance programmed Beechcraft it has to be! (and at $105 per hour, I've obviously been completely nuts all these years!)
PS Wasn't this about flaps or something? Now that's where the Cessna leaves the Beechcraft for dead! Which one would you rather have an engine failure in?
Last edited by Wheeler; 8th Jun 2007 at 16:03.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What checks can you perform to assure yourself that the available "take off power" is set??
When onlookers have to put their fingers in their ears, the prop tips start crackling, passengers have to yell to be heard, your flight plan and charts have slid to the back row and the pilot seat has jumped its lock and run all the way back to the stop, you can be assured that full power has been achieved.
Wheeler, the Bonanza is the type you marry, while you carry on a torrid affair with the 210.
Last edited by Lodown; 8th Jun 2007 at 20:20.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wherever I Lay my Hat...
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by HH
What checks can you perform to assure yourself that the available "take off power" is set??
When I came up for my retract endoresment in a Gutless I recieved lots and lots and lots of browny points from my instructor because I remembered Gaunty's words on the 206 forum and what I had just read in the POH the night before. Set takeoff power and noted after rolling that the MP was reading right up near 29in and noted same to instructor resulting in approving nod of head...I live for those days
Last edited by OZBUSDRIVER; 9th Jun 2007 at 07:13.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well there you go, I am encouraged.
There will be a slight loss of TO MAP v ambient MAP (think about the MAP gauge as a very coarse altimeter when the engine is stopped, handy way of checking whether the gauge is OK too eh. ) depending on the type and how efficient and well maintained the induction system is starting from the air filter right thru the trunks to the inlet. "Full throttle" is a bit misleading as it actually means NO throttling i.e. wide open induction air path to the inlet. As a wise old engineer described to me once think of the engine as just an air pump. Port and polishing your system like they do in the hot rod community comes to mind.
More than a couple of inches drop, time to look and find out why.
Problem for most Aussie trained and operating pilots most training is done around SL and they dont get TO's much above sea level therefore dont see much of a difference. And the top end guys see it as a DA problem, put both together is why I used to get calls from high lat SL trained guys operating up North for the first time worried that their CS ship didn't seem to be giving up the goods. NWN on a 50C day is a good example.
EXACTLY the same principle applies to turbine equipment, the condition of the inlet/gaspath is directly related to the amount of power produced at what temperature and FF and of course it is equally DA related.
Lodown eh eh eh I can remember my first flight in a C206 like it was yesterday, my breath was simply taken away with the enormous noise and howling of the prop. Walked staight over to the local pilot shop and bought a pair of headsets.
There will be a slight loss of TO MAP v ambient MAP (think about the MAP gauge as a very coarse altimeter when the engine is stopped, handy way of checking whether the gauge is OK too eh. ) depending on the type and how efficient and well maintained the induction system is starting from the air filter right thru the trunks to the inlet. "Full throttle" is a bit misleading as it actually means NO throttling i.e. wide open induction air path to the inlet. As a wise old engineer described to me once think of the engine as just an air pump. Port and polishing your system like they do in the hot rod community comes to mind.
More than a couple of inches drop, time to look and find out why.
Problem for most Aussie trained and operating pilots most training is done around SL and they dont get TO's much above sea level therefore dont see much of a difference. And the top end guys see it as a DA problem, put both together is why I used to get calls from high lat SL trained guys operating up North for the first time worried that their CS ship didn't seem to be giving up the goods. NWN on a 50C day is a good example.
EXACTLY the same principle applies to turbine equipment, the condition of the inlet/gaspath is directly related to the amount of power produced at what temperature and FF and of course it is equally DA related.
Wheeler, the Bonanza is the type you marry, while you carry on a torrid affair with the 210.
Lodown eh eh eh I can remember my first flight in a C206 like it was yesterday, my breath was simply taken away with the enormous noise and howling of the prop. Walked staight over to the local pilot shop and bought a pair of headsets.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by gaunty
So CC, FTDK, Tinstaafl, HH, Muffman, ITCZ and the usual suspects can quietly do some colouring in, while the rest of you get on with it.
Notoriety, at last
Mr. Gaunty, ITCZ has been a very naughty boy... how will you punish me?
Grandpa Aerotart
Wheeler they are not my thoughts/numbers but those of an American fella and the numbers are US$ and prolly 9 years old.
Having said that my Bo DOCs are $116/hr. The fixed costs are the ones that hurt
In my experience Bonanzas are built better than equivalent Cessnas...parts cost for a Bo can make your eyes bleed but they don't need em that often. There is no doubt a 210 does some things better than a Bo. The lift a good 150kg more than a A36, I think 210s glide better...but I think the A36 is MUCH more crash worthy due to the structural 'keel' and the emergency exits are world beaters.
I have had sundry engineers tell me horror stories of Pipers, Cessnas and Beech over the years...they can be as (illogically) prejudiced as pilots.
In my view if you compare 210s v A36 within the job they were designed to do, haul 4 adults, bags and near full fuel, they compare VERY closely...with the same engine/prop in each the Bo is probably 5-10kts faster..but as I said...1 or 2 minutes/100nm...who cares?
Agree competely re the avionics fit in Cessnas...that old ARC **** was PATHETIC...King/Garmin reigns supreme...my Bo had it's original King radios as fitted in 1970 when I bought her 7 years ago...I just cannot comprehend the old ARC cessna radios lasting 30 years...about 3 years ago I finally got the ****s with tweaking the old KX175s to work 'ok' for a little longer and put in a 'new' radio stack. G340/KX155A/KLN90b/Icom second VHF....I left the original King DME/transponder and HF in. I think a Garmin mode S is in my future
Well I am sick of sitting on my hands gaunty
Guys...full power in a IO/CSU aircraft is easy.
Manifold Pressure
Engine not running = 29.9 odd at MSL/ISA. 28.9 at 1000' DA etc....6000' DA 23.9in...we typically see 29.5 in Oz because it is usually warmer than ISA...so 29.5 is near enough for Govt work.
Engine Idling In my Bo I usually see around 12in MP at idle RPM...if it is a lot more there is a induction leak. It varies a little with RPM...it will be a little higher at 800 RPM than it will be at 1000 RPM. That is because at the lower RPM the pistons are not sucking as hard so the absolute pressure in the induction manifold is a little higher...at 1000 RPM the pistons are sucking much harder so the pressure is lower. Think of it this way...12in MP at idle is the same as the aeroplane parked with the engine shut down at 17000'...the pistons sucking air through the various restrictions in the system (air filter, Venturi, throtte plate, around corners in the piping) cause lower pressure to be measured by the MP guage...it is measuring suction/lower pressure.
Takeoff At the very beginning of the takeoff roll you should see about 1 in MP less than ambient...if you were showing 29.5 before engine start expect approximately 28.5. This is caused by the air filter mostly but there are other small restrictions in the system. As you accelerate ram effect will tend to bring the MP up to something closer to field barometric.
But MP is not the sole indicator of 'power'...by itself it is nearly useless.
Having achieved the MP you expect to see if you're not achieving near redline RPM and redline fuel flow you will not be getting 'full power'.
You need all three parameters to be correct to develope 'full power' or any power for that matter.
Picture this....cruising at 5000' with full throttle, 24in, and 2500 RPM. Now pull the mixture to idle cutoff.
What happened to MP? The answer is nothing...it will still indicate 24in MP.
If you lower the nose enough you can increase IAS and maintain RPM.
So you still have 24/2500...are you developing any power?
Nope!!
Actually in the above experiment the MP will not stay at 24in...as you descend to keep the prop windmilling at 2500 rpm the MP will increase an inch/1000'...developing more power?
Nope!
If you look up on takeoff and see MP where you want it, RPM bang on redline and fuel flow bang on redline and the engine is sounding smooth rejoice because your engine is producing maximum power. 29.5in MP by itself means absolutely nothing.
As an aside I have my Bonanza set up so RPM and fuel flow slighty exceed redline on takeoff...about 25 RPM at the beginning of the takeoff roll increasing to about 50-60RPM airborne and 3 or 4 liters/hr. My engine CHTs are cooler on, and just after, takeoff since that adjustment was made. This is because the slightly higher RPM is reducing the peak combustions pressures in the cylinders and the slightly richer mixture is slowing the rate of combustion a little more. I am still getting at least 300HP, possible 310HP or so because the Milleniums are a little more efficient than some cylinders (Dyno testing has apparently shown about 10hp more at a given MP/RPM/FF) and the increased RPM also gives a tiny bit more HP...but the engine is cooler and less stressed internally.
As an example of how RPM effects HP Bonanzas and 210s in Europe are limited to 285HP by artificially limiting RPM due to environmental noise laws. If memory serves they are limited to a redline about 200-300 RPM less than normal.
Having said that my Bo DOCs are $116/hr. The fixed costs are the ones that hurt
In my experience Bonanzas are built better than equivalent Cessnas...parts cost for a Bo can make your eyes bleed but they don't need em that often. There is no doubt a 210 does some things better than a Bo. The lift a good 150kg more than a A36, I think 210s glide better...but I think the A36 is MUCH more crash worthy due to the structural 'keel' and the emergency exits are world beaters.
I have had sundry engineers tell me horror stories of Pipers, Cessnas and Beech over the years...they can be as (illogically) prejudiced as pilots.
In my view if you compare 210s v A36 within the job they were designed to do, haul 4 adults, bags and near full fuel, they compare VERY closely...with the same engine/prop in each the Bo is probably 5-10kts faster..but as I said...1 or 2 minutes/100nm...who cares?
Agree competely re the avionics fit in Cessnas...that old ARC **** was PATHETIC...King/Garmin reigns supreme...my Bo had it's original King radios as fitted in 1970 when I bought her 7 years ago...I just cannot comprehend the old ARC cessna radios lasting 30 years
...about 3 years ago I finally got the ****s with tweaking the old KX175s to work 'ok' for a little longer and put in a 'new' radio stack. G340/KX155A/KLN90b/Icom second VHF....I left the original King DME/transponder and HF in. I think a Garmin mode S is in my futureWell I am sick of sitting on my hands gaunty
Guys...full power in a IO/CSU aircraft is easy.
Manifold Pressure
Engine not running = 29.9 odd at MSL/ISA. 28.9 at 1000' DA etc....6000' DA 23.9in...we typically see 29.5 in Oz because it is usually warmer than ISA...so 29.5 is near enough for Govt work.
Engine Idling In my Bo I usually see around 12in MP at idle RPM...if it is a lot more there is a induction leak. It varies a little with RPM...it will be a little higher at 800 RPM than it will be at 1000 RPM. That is because at the lower RPM the pistons are not sucking as hard so the absolute pressure in the induction manifold is a little higher...at 1000 RPM the pistons are sucking much harder so the pressure is lower. Think of it this way...12in MP at idle is the same as the aeroplane parked with the engine shut down at 17000'...the pistons sucking air through the various restrictions in the system (air filter, Venturi, throtte plate, around corners in the piping) cause lower pressure to be measured by the MP guage...it is measuring suction/lower pressure.
Takeoff At the very beginning of the takeoff roll you should see about 1 in MP less than ambient...if you were showing 29.5 before engine start expect approximately 28.5. This is caused by the air filter mostly but there are other small restrictions in the system. As you accelerate ram effect will tend to bring the MP up to something closer to field barometric.
But MP is not the sole indicator of 'power'...by itself it is nearly useless.
Having achieved the MP you expect to see if you're not achieving near redline RPM and redline fuel flow you will not be getting 'full power'.
You need all three parameters to be correct to develope 'full power' or any power for that matter.
Picture this....cruising at 5000' with full throttle, 24in, and 2500 RPM. Now pull the mixture to idle cutoff.
What happened to MP? The answer is nothing...it will still indicate 24in MP.
If you lower the nose enough you can increase IAS and maintain RPM.
So you still have 24/2500...are you developing any power?
Nope!!
Actually in the above experiment the MP will not stay at 24in...as you descend to keep the prop windmilling at 2500 rpm the MP will increase an inch/1000'...developing more power?
Nope!
If you look up on takeoff and see MP where you want it, RPM bang on redline and fuel flow bang on redline and the engine is sounding smooth rejoice because your engine is producing maximum power. 29.5in MP by itself means absolutely nothing.
As an aside I have my Bonanza set up so RPM and fuel flow slighty exceed redline on takeoff...about 25 RPM at the beginning of the takeoff roll increasing to about 50-60RPM airborne and 3 or 4 liters/hr. My engine CHTs are cooler on, and just after, takeoff since that adjustment was made. This is because the slightly higher RPM is reducing the peak combustions pressures in the cylinders and the slightly richer mixture is slowing the rate of combustion a little more. I am still getting at least 300HP, possible 310HP or so because the Milleniums are a little more efficient than some cylinders (Dyno testing has apparently shown about 10hp more at a given MP/RPM/FF) and the increased RPM also gives a tiny bit more HP...but the engine is cooler and less stressed internally.
As an example of how RPM effects HP Bonanzas and 210s in Europe are limited to 285HP by artificially limiting RPM due to environmental noise laws. If memory serves they are limited to a redline about 200-300 RPM less than normal.