That's sound reasoning, captjns, it would appear some are posting from a private ops perspective rather than as the OP stated commercial operations.

That's a good point, Eddie. Engines and the laws of physics know when an aircraft is engaged in private operations versus commercial operations, and change accordingly.

Captjns: Most of those great manuals 'allow', and some and even 'recommend', setting EGT to 50 degrees F on the rich side of peak in the cruise. Aside from the fact that a single point EGT gauge leaves you blissfully ignorant of where on the lean curve each cylinder happens to be, 50 degrees F on the rich side of peak is just about the worst place to set mixture if you want to avoid exposing the cylinders to unnecessarily high pressures and temperatures. The laws of physics and chemistry, backed by data from millions of hours of operation, prove it. As I said earlier and now for the last time in this thread:

tio540

Not a truer bunch of words said

Leadie, I'm not spending my money and time to go on an APS course. I'll get zero benefit other than be able to possibly argue their point of view to all and sundry. I did read those pelican things years ago though. If anything I found them thought provoking rather than gospel. There's lots of information out on the web and published books about other aircraft and engines, also written by very experienced and technical people (development test crew), thought provoking too but still not gospel.

If however, I operate pistons again then maybe I'll look to build on what I learnt about piston engines all those years ago. But until then, zero benefit from an APS course.

Yes I was told things like "don't run over square" but I did it anyway. Why? Because that power setting is in the aircraft power chart! My engines have made TBO (and beyond) without the fancy equipment, so operating as per the AFM seems to be good enough!

There does also seem to be a bit of a demarcation between the private and the commercial operators here. Private owners don't exactly have to worry about fronting court for someone else operating outside of the approved procedures and crashing a plane/killing people!

RAMROD. I like the mult EGT or CHT (or both) as a diagnostic tool.

dont they offer a 100% money back guarantee if you feel you gained nothing from the course?

and since when has any education been of no benefit? i am willing to bet i could tell you more about your engine by doing a mag check at cruise power at TOD than you could ever gain by doing the same at runup.

i have done the course, and fly behind non mixture equipped aircraft 90% of the time, and when i am flying anything Lycombing or Continental powered, its only fitted with a single EGT probe, and the lessons learnt at the course help me understand whats going on with those aircraft as well.

There are, or at least were major commercial operators in New Zealand who operated LOP. I don't know if they still are but when I talked to a former senior pilot he was pretty proud they did.

The argument to the POH argument is that it just says "recommended" best economy and best power. It doesn't say you can only operate at "best economy" or "best power", because often you can't, takeoff for example. So if you can operate richer than those, why not leaner?

I know that some POHs have said said no LOP (or was it separate Lycoming advice?) Anyway, the funny thing is, as I said before if I used the "lean till rough then enrich till smooth" i'm running at least some of the cylinders LOP. Am I operating illegally?

I bet if I offered most of you a homeopathic remedy you'd point out that the data doesn't support its effectiveness. Well, likewise the operation of an engine at 50 degrees ROP. The data shows it is the worst position. Simple. Manufacturers are like regulators and move at the speed of roading tar, so the pressure from people who have gathered real hard data are in my mind of a similar value to those who pressure for regulatory reform.

From Jabawocky in an earlier post:

To shut the naysayers up, could we get the explanation of how to fly LOP without instrumentation and with eyes shut?

From the same post:

A bit of education here on how to fly LOP without instrumentation and with eyes shut may go along way to preventing these stupid threads that pop up, funnily enough when there's a course on soon with a few spots left...

You won't get it Scavenger. The snake oil salesman want you to pay up to get in on their good oil.

I'm not really sure what the mods are thinking when the OzRunways/Avplan guys who post on PPRUNE get shut down at any hint of advertising, yet with clockwork regularity these guys pop up to spruik their wears under the guise of 'trying to spread the good word' and get away with a bit of free advertising at the same time.

:ugh:

That's right, those APS guys are making a profit out of the courses. It's no wonder they sprulk (sorry ... spruce) them. The presenters had hoped to get real jobs and amass some real wealth, but failed at that and now need to rip off course attendees.

LOP with your eyes closed and without instrumentation?

A lot of those fantastic manuals for simple piston aircraft say the leaning procedure is to lean until the engine 'runs rough' and enrich to remove the roughness.

After complying with this procedure in the manual - to stay legal and safe of course - where on the lean curve is each of the cylinders?

When you use the same procedure 'cause it's in the manual for a different aircraft with a different engine to stay legal and safe of course - where on the lean on the lean curve is each of the cylinders?

Do you need your eyes open to feel roughness?

It's all part of the joke that just keeps on giving. :D

A little defensive there, lead balloon. It was a simple question I asked (without mentioning manuals, staying safe and legal or whatever) but I'm not sure from your post whether the answer to my question is:

or something else. Is this what is taught at the course or not? Could you elaborate please?

Actually don't bother, Jabawocky seems to be straight up so I'll wait for him. This isn't the first time supporters of the APS course have, in their hubris, made the course look less attractive to the disinterested observer.

It's the arrogance of a perception of knowing better than everybody else.

You're not a disinterested observer at all, scavenger. Your posts reveal that you're critical of what you perceive to be a marketing trick. :=

The value of the course is affected by the hubris of some previous attendees?

The joke just keeps on giving! :D

You guys realize that after they pay for the venue, catering, & logistics etc, the presenters make no money out of it.

It's ok guys, I'd also be pretty peeved off if I went through a whole career believing and propagating old wives tales about engine management only to be told it was all a lie. Peeved off, but I wouldn't be in denial. I also sure as hell wouldn't be accusing the ones sharing their unbiased data with me as trying to profiteer.

Umm, I fail to see (pun intended), how leaning with your eyes closed and not watching (therefore effectively not having) the engine monitoring gear gets you the correct lean settings. To me that sounds like just as much guesswork as lean till rough then enrich a bit.

Maybe jabba was watching the gauges and told the lady with her eyes closed "that's correct stop there". Learn to do it in 2 seconds, doesn't sound like it's all that difficult compared to these monkey brain turbines :E


Ultralights, I very much agree that going to courses, diving into extra material, publications etc for developing ones knowledge is paramount. I've just stated that for me, courses on things that I don't operate now nor intend to operate anytime soon are pretty much pointless. It's like you going to a course on Airbus or Boeing systems if you don't fly it nor intend to fly it!
By the way, it isn't possible to mag check my engine :)

Lead Balloon, since you are quick to point out someone else's incorrect use of language, allow me to suggest you learn the meaning of the word disinterested. Just because I may be critical of something does not mean I have a personal stake. In fact, isn't one of the arguments used on here that critical thinking is what's lacking in the naysayers.

Just complete the sentence if you can:

The best way to lean the mixture, with eyes closed as Jabawocky claims is easy to teach, is to ________________.

Please enlighten me (as a member of the uneducated masses) on the correct leaning technique to achieve your precise lop figure flying a basic a/c like a warrior or even a C152, without any fancy gadgets & gauges to assist you. This is a genuine question - I'm interested to know. If doing it with your eyes closed is the way to go, then you must be doing it by sound. As Ramrod said, the only way that would work is leaning it until it starts running rough and then richen it until it smooths out.
The APS course sounds like a good idea if you are flying a more advanced a/c but I can't see how it could help your average ppl chugging around in his old warrior or C172 with a throttle, a mixture control, a tacho and basic oil pressure & temp gauges, not even an egt gauge let alone probes on every cylinder!

Sorry scavenger, trod on your toes a bit with that post, but looks like we're after the same info!

No worries IFEZ, you cut to the heart of the matter. Wait for Jabawocky, his answer will be most illuminating I'm sure. A pity some of his humility did not wear off on some of the attendees.

Thanks scavenger. I am very much aware of the denotation of the word "disinterested" (and that it is frequently misused instead of "uninterested").

The best way to lean the mixture, with eyes closed as Jabawocky claims is easy to teach, is to:

- in the case of an engine fitted with a CSU, lean until you feel the aircraft decelerate through the seat of your pants [I do this every flight], and

- in the case of an engine fitted with a fixed pitch prop, until the engine 'runs rough' or ceases producing power, and then enrich to remove the roughness or restore power.

The success of these techniques, and where each cylinder ends up on its lean curve, depends on the engine either having left the factory and being fitted in a way that the proper F/A mixture is delivered to each cylinder (a lottery, given the poor quality control of the manufacture of the components that determine these outcomes) or the engine having been set up that way, post-manufacture and fitment (an outcome that I would have thought would be desirable, instead of runnning the engine inefficiently or abusively to cover up the consequences of poor manufacture).

They'll teach you how to fly ROP if you want. Thing is they'll teach you how to do that at temperatures & pressures that are better for your engine :ok:

I reckon Jaba makes a loss on the course, loves a chat does Jaba, reckon he does it so he can have a good chinwag with likeminded people. So if your mind is closed simple, don't go ;)

scavenger,

With a "CONFORMING ENGINE" it is as easy as…….level out in the cruise, (close your eyes for about 3 seconds while quickly moving the mixture leaner. As soon as you feel the deceleration - stop. Open eyes.

Now I do it in the climb if I want to with my eyes open, not because I am any genius but once you have done it 10-20 times you can do it repeatedly. Once you know your calibrated butt is accurate it is hard to get it wrong. If you move the mixture too slowly and/or have your eyes open you will not sense the deceleration and will miss the sweet spot known as best BSFC.

This technique works at 500' and WOT/max rpm or at FL150/xxxx RPM.

Now the hidden question you ask is how do I do it sans an EMS. Well take a carby O-320 RV6 that a Airline guy I know owns, no EMS but we are 100% sure the engine is a conforming one. guess what, the Big Mixture Pull works every time. And yes that is a carby engine.

Of course if the engine was not conforming, it would not do that nicely and you would know.

Let me be clear, the ROP pilot takes off after an annual and the injectors have been out, and it is a TC/TN engine, he flies home with one cylinder leaned out to a ROP setting that is driving that cylinder head pressure and temp up through the roof, and it runs smooth as a babies bottom. No EMS therefore he never knows. But if he was familiar with the BMP technique, the first thing he would do after maintenance is do an orbit over the field and a BMP, if it played nice he would go home either LOP or ROP (both are valid if done right). If there was a F/A ratio issue he would certainly discover it and land asking the LAME to fix it.

Of course having an EMS would make the diagnosis a LOT easier.

So there ya go……ROP pilots actually need engine monitors more than LOP pilots. Add to that once LOP by BMP method, you can't hurt any engine, period. But if you are an uncertain red knob fiddler you can.

Two last points;
A: The APS class is for piston pilots and LAME's. Yes a lot of LAME's have had many great learning experiences, David Paynter from Brisbane Aero, the late Steve Hobson from Bankstown, and about 15 more I can think of.

the class is NOT a LOP class…..I will say that again, it is NOT a class about flying LOP, in fact it would be about 10% maximum. The science of combustion taught with real in cylinder engine dyno data, how that relates to what you see on an EMS, how to manage for best speed/range or whatever in all types of flight mode, how to diagnose the EMS data (and this is where 100% of pilots and LAME's learn the most) and it is where we spend the most time. Plus quite a number of life saving diagnosis in flight topics, and how to save a fortune on maintenance bills by doing the right things at the right time and saving hours of chasing problems rather than going straight to them.

This last paragraph is what the original poster was really thinking I bet. I now know who he is…..good student and great guy :ok:

B: Andrew Denyer, Leisa and myself have yet to take a profit from APS and in fact personally we are out of pocket. We leave any residual funds to ensure the classes are fully funded despite the costs and it is not cheap to put on.

While I can't speak for John George and Walter, I do know that we did the sums one day sitting down with a cold drink in Tennesse or Louisianna, and the hourly rate would be something like a dollar or less. I doubt George has ever banked a cheque, John used to send them. Think he gave up. When you realise the motivation is more about better education with science and the safety outcomes that delivers, then you might understand that profit is not even a thought let alone a motivation.

While I think of it, imagine the satisfaction when you get an email explaining how the lessons learned in class saved a family from grief because they diagnosed and dealt with a problem before it got them over the top of the Rocky Mountains, or even the many smaller helped solve a problem that saved wasting several thousand dollars in chasing it down. Last year I had a lady (over 65) who did the course discover a whole bunch of defects, some her LAME was dismissive of and telling her the EMS was just scaring her. He was wrong, she was right and the things I found were a disgrace. She saved herself thousands, and maybe her life one day as a result.

That folks makes it all worth the hundreds of hours we put in for no financial gain.

When the master class is released we will reinvest in that for the benefit of our students…..engine monitor diagnosis torture is the best way to describe it :E

IFEZ…..if we could explain that in one internet post, do you think anyone would ever come to let alone pay for a 2.5 days brain strain?

Seriously, I do not care whether you fly a Briggs and Stratten powered ultralight or a Chieftan……..the theory is all the same. If you really want a better explanation send me a PM with your phone number and I will happily chat for a bit….typing the Q&A's back and forward will kill my keyboard :bored:

Thanks for your straight answer Lead Balloon, that's what I was after. I do not disagree in the slightest.

Lead ballon
Actually with a conforming engine and fixed pitch prop, like the O-320 I mentioned above, you can simply use about a 100RPM drop before it even runs rough. ;)

Scavenger, if you want my details are in a PM shortly. :ok:

And thanks again Jabawocky. In fact I do understand you think:

which is why I was sure you would respond in the manner you did. :ok:

If it's costing you money and safety outcomes are paramount, why not post all the course material somewhere free of charge? You'd save a heap, you could still run the course for those desperate to attend, but safety would be improved for those without the time or resources to attend the course.

It's already available scavenger

"Pelican's Perch" Index - AVweb Features Article

And the online version is available, but it is not mine to give away.

And the classroom environment cannot be beaten. Hey lets ditch flying training right through to operating a jumbo, it can be learned on youtube! :eek: I think you will get what I mean.

Certainly I do, but that does not stop you from posting materials on line for free.

Given that:

do you recommend the online version, or would it be akin to:

In any case, thanks for answering, and if the materials aren't yours to post for free, but only to sell at a personal loss, I now understand your position a little better.

Aerozep, I used to run the IO-240 with Fadec. What's your fuel burn at 75% on the 235? Mine was around 23L. I should research the auto mixture setting on the Fadec in relation to EGT as its automatic and I wonder what it's doing under the hood.

Just remember you can't use EGT as an absolute number, at varying RPM the EGT absolute changes, same for MP, so everything needs to be referenced to peak to be useful as a guide.

Another thing not well understood. And not easy to teach on a forum. :ok:

I started the thread. Had no idea there was another course on, was just hoping that someone, a few young CPLs or whoever would click and start wondering about exactly what they know, or more what they know they don't know as might be the case, in Rumsfeldian.

I did the course in Perth a few years back. Thing is with the course, you'd only sign up if you were already questioning your known unknowns, which was the purpose of the thread.

squittle pop!

If you are referring to my post Jabba, you are absolutely correct. With Fadec, or at least with the Vm1000 display you have little to no information available to you on what's happening, thus I wonder what the manufacturers set it to as they claim with Fadec fitted your engine will run for eons over TBO.

and just because it seems relevant to the what do you do with no instrumentation theme:

A while back I ferried an agcat to an operator. At 1800rpm and 28" (R985, 55% power) the CHT (single probe) was showing in the redline, from memory it started at something like 210°C up to 280°C (absolute redline for this engine is an astonishing 550°F!) This is a low power setting, and I was getting around 220°C. I think it is because of the complete lack of baffling to direct the airflow to the rear of the cylinders, that's my guess.

Before I did the APS course I would have just sat it there for the next few hours because frankly there isn't much you could do about it. But being a hubristic know it all I thought hang on.. and pulled the mixture back until the seat-o-meter felt that deceleration just so, and added a sprinkle of "MP and voila! CHTs dropped to around 200°C, airspeed much the same. With absolutely nil engine monitoring save the CHT I knew this was a happy, smooth running LOP round engine, just by what the CHT did. Just gotta look at what's printed on the APS T shirts.

Ok to spruik the T-shirts?

(The ag boys didn't like the look of the exhaust pipe at all when I landed, I'm sure they sooted it up soon enough though. Buggered if I know how these engines survive in actual ag operations - slow, no baffling, max continuous power... now there is a good argument for the superior reliability of turbines, compared to what I'm guessing happens to these motors)

Thanks Lead Balloon & Jabawocky for your responses.


Jabawocky - PM sent :ok:

Three things you should NEVER discuss: Politics, religion and LOP!

Jaba, I don't know why you bother with threads like this. Those that want to learn more about the engines they operate will make up their own minds about whether or not to attend one of your courses, and those that don't ........ well, who really cares!

Dr :8

PS: For the record, I have done the APS course!

I haven't done the course but I have read all of Deakin's info as well as a lot of others. What seems to be missed by the pilots who haven't read up is that it really has nothing to do with LOP, but correct mixture settings as a whole. I have never ran LOP and unless I end up an owner I'm never likely to.

But, now having the knowledge I operate ROP in a much safer way, I know when to, and how much to lean by and understand why a blanket rule of 50F ROP CAN be abusive to the engine. I have an understanding of what the needles are trying to tell me (yep, those unreliable single point ones, but if it's all you have then it's the best that you can do), and if nothing else, I am now thinking about what the engine is going through after complying with my requested power/mixture settings, rather then setting 50F ROP religiously at all power settings/stages of flight/ conditions etc. So I think even if nothing's changed, because of company SOP etc, the understanding is priceless.

And tightarses wanting stuff for free, I spose they run round town giving away theirs and other peoples' property?

Thanks Forkie for the tip :ok:

But really, the last post is more the point, we teach whole of operation by scientific methods as you well know. But the diagnosis element is the big thing. That is where the major benefit is.

Give 99% of pilots and engine monitor and they are a dog watching TV, it is that simple. They might think they know what they are seeing but being able to diagnose with it is another matter.

And I enjoy the banter, there has been not much else of interest on prune in months so it makes a change! :)

That's because it's the quickest practical way to achieve the scientifically-proven desired setting for a conforming engine, cleared. ;)

PS: The single most important reason for my decision to attend an APS course was the opportunity to meet and draw on the wisdom of a person who's forgotten more about piston aero engine operation than anyone has ever learned in the third world of GA that is Australia - Mr John Deakin. You can't do that by reading on-line materials.

Clearedtoenter, what page and complete reference please.

I get the same 'feelings' with every landing in the Tiger Moth......'specially in a > 15Kt X/wind......

Cheers..Lots of 'em..:ok::ok::ok: To ALL who fly 'Tigers'....