"Fly like a Professional" articles in Pilot

[UV]

Saw this "gem" on page 59 of this months article...

"Gerry Honey has the following advice for pilots flying behind a constant speed propeller:

" The over square rule" is that manifold pressure can be equal to, but never more than rpm, and generally the two should be in step. Twenty inches with 2000 rpm, 22 inches with 2200 rpm, but never 24 with 2000".

Really...
UV

[Johnm]

Hmmm, so the Arrow IV High speed cruise shouldn't exist then and the POH has it all wrong at 25 2400.

[M14P]

Sadly utter tosh perpetuated... what if we measured manifold pressure in mmHg instead of inHg? Oooooh! Nooooooo! I can never run my engine at 700/2400.

Dissapointing guff.

m

[IO540]

What amazes me is not that somebody sends in this stuff to the magazine, but that the magazine prints it.

Unfortunately they all do this sort of thing fairly regularly.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Then write them a letter...I did recently when Australian Flying printed an 'infomercial' on the new PN68C where the salesman insisted on climbing out to 500' before accelerating to blue line but at the other end landed at blue line because it was a 'CASA preference'....And to their credit AF printed my letter, albeit editted.

As to 'oversquare'....so 'professonal' pilots don't fly turbocharged aircraft?

[High Wing Drifter]

Hmmm, so the Arrow IV High speed cruise shouldn't exist then and the POH has it all wrong at 25 2400.

Not to mention the turbo with 29" and 2200rpm at 75%.

This kind of advice can only be useful to PAX who have to take over, surely Any pilot whould know their cruise settings from their PoH.

[aerobat 1971]

On a related note. . .

My thoughts on an earlier article in the series that's been puzzling me for some time.

The earlier article was called 'Actions when lost', much time was spent on ways to fix your position:

1 - trying to relate the ground features around you to your chart

2 - identify an obvious feature in the area and try to positively identify on the chart, maybe from patterns of roads, railways, rivers or canals etc

3 - get a QDM from an aerodrome nearby

4 - Call on 121.5 for a position fix if (3) can't be achieved.

So, my big question is:

"Whatever happened to using the radio navigation aids like you were taught during your PPL training???"

There's absolutley no mention of using VOR/DME and / or NDB to fix your position - but hey, why should you need to when you can just make a call on 121.5??

When I fly I always set VOR / NDBs along my planned route and constantly use them to cross reference my position against my visual / dead reckoning navigation (although I pay extra close attention to radio aids when I'm near controlled airspace!). To me, including nav frequecies as part of my route plan is plain common sense as it gives me an extra check of the accuracy of my navigation at all times!

Now, the guys who produced the article are experts, and I'm just a PPL student. (Prepares for flaming!) So, what's wrong with my approach to being sure of where I am?

Cheers,

David.

[Monocock]

I must say that I too stopped reading this series of article after noticing a couple of absolute howlers that were misleading to say the least.

My concern over this series of articles is that topics that require an indepth knowledge are skimmed over to keep the article within a certain number of pages. This seems to lead to a reduction in accuracy in what eventually gets printed.

Then write them a letter

I feel sure that this action will make US feel a lot better whilst posting the letter but I feel it is unlikely that anyone in Pilot's "professional team" would be prepared to accept they have given misleading information.

[stiknruda]

Oversquare

I believe that this "rule" is only pertinent to radial engines - something to do with the susceptibility of the con rod "ends".

Gery and his ilk grew up in that era and Gerry for one spends more time in Stearmans than anything else with a wobbly prop!

Yes the myth should be debunked!

Stik

[Lowtimer]

Actually with radials it's just as important the other way round - you have to be careful to keep MP reasonably high in relation to revs. A big no-no on radials is letting the prop drive the engine rather than the other way round, because of the way the master rod big end is lubricated.

[IO540]

The "rule" is bogus in every context.

It just so happens to be a coincidence of numbers that a particular MP (expressed in inches) happens to be the limiting MP for a particular RPM (expressed in RPM/100), due to crankshaft stress or whatever limitations.

For some engines...

[bookworm]

What amazes me is not that somebody sends in this stuff to the magazine, but that the magazine prints it.

and that they print it, and other advice like "don't lean below 3000 ft" very close to articles with titles like "Why is flying in the UK so expensive?"

[Piltdown Man]

The professional reads the manuals supplied with plane and operates to those limitations, speeds and techniques etc...

[QDMQDMQDM]

Actions when lost?!

Look at the GPS, of course!

Obvious.

QDM

[Maude Charlee]

Hahahahaha! I'd like to see this blokey get 4000RPM out of a Seneca to match 40"MAP for a performance climb. Maybe he'll add both RPMs.

Nugget.