Be a Better Pilot
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,977
Likes: 0
From: Glens o' Angus by way of LA
Love it when PBF imparts his wisdom, hate when he reaches right back to the basics and makes me realize I am overlooking the fundamentals and forgetting to perform checks. Makes me want to kick myself.
After reading his post, about what lights are installed on an aircraft and when to use them I thought back to almost 20 years ago when I was doing my PPL and the procedures that were drummed into me, specifically putting the master on and testing the lights and stall warning along with the fuel gauges/pump prior to the full walkaround with the master off. I remembered that we would put on the beacon before the engine start then when taking the active it would be “lights (strobe), Camera (TXP), Action (throttle). Anyway I got to thinking, on my Maule before the start-up I turn on the anti collision lights which is a strobe then on take-off I do not turn any more lights on i.e. no lights in the “lights, camera, action routine and I wondered why. I then realised the Maule does not have nearly as many light and light switches as the Cessna/pipers I learned in, so I went down to hangar and verified that there were only 3 switches, they were 1. The Anti Collision on each wing tip and tail. 2, the landing light. 3 the red and green NAV lights on the wings co-located with the anti-collison lights ( No taxi or beacon light equipped). While checking them I also discovered the anti collision on the tail was not working and realised why I had never noticed it before, the reason being when I start taxing out the hangar I turn all the lights on and see their reflection on the wall but I now realise this does not tell me if the tail anti-collision is working, So the new procedures is essentially back to the basics of testing the lights during the walk around and not being a lazy bastard and doing it on the fly. However I still don’t understand why my plane does not have a red beacon light on the tail or taxi lights, are they mandatory ??? why would they not be installed by the manufacturer?
After reading his post, about what lights are installed on an aircraft and when to use them I thought back to almost 20 years ago when I was doing my PPL and the procedures that were drummed into me, specifically putting the master on and testing the lights and stall warning along with the fuel gauges/pump prior to the full walkaround with the master off. I remembered that we would put on the beacon before the engine start then when taking the active it would be “lights (strobe), Camera (TXP), Action (throttle). Anyway I got to thinking, on my Maule before the start-up I turn on the anti collision lights which is a strobe then on take-off I do not turn any more lights on i.e. no lights in the “lights, camera, action routine and I wondered why. I then realised the Maule does not have nearly as many light and light switches as the Cessna/pipers I learned in, so I went down to hangar and verified that there were only 3 switches, they were 1. The Anti Collision on each wing tip and tail. 2, the landing light. 3 the red and green NAV lights on the wings co-located with the anti-collison lights ( No taxi or beacon light equipped). While checking them I also discovered the anti collision on the tail was not working and realised why I had never noticed it before, the reason being when I start taxing out the hangar I turn all the lights on and see their reflection on the wall but I now realise this does not tell me if the tail anti-collision is working, So the new procedures is essentially back to the basics of testing the lights during the walk around and not being a lazy bastard and doing it on the fly. However I still don’t understand why my plane does not have a red beacon light on the tail or taxi lights, are they mandatory ??? why would they not be installed by the manufacturer?
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,658
Likes: 501
From: Canada
. Leaning any Lycoming or Continental engine at or below 75 % power is permitted at any altitude. Running full rich all the time fouls the plugs and wastes gas. The engine should always be leaned in cruise flight even if it is only for short distances.
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,977
Likes: 0
From: Glens o' Angus by way of LA
[QUOTE]Leaning any Lycoming or Continental engine at or below 75 % power is permitted at any altitude[/QUOTE
Most of my flights involve cruising around at 1000 ft MSL, as soon as I get to 1000 ft its power back to just over 2300 the lean to get to 2350rpm which according to the Lycoming manual is 65% economy cruise. At 2 quid a litre for avgas you gotta make every last drop count.
I read in a lycoming 0-360 related article that at approximately 5000 msl it was just as efficient to redline the engine (2700 rpm)as it is only producing 65% power at full RPM at that altitude, does this sound right? or am i misunderstanding something?
Most of my flights involve cruising around at 1000 ft MSL, as soon as I get to 1000 ft its power back to just over 2300 the lean to get to 2350rpm which according to the Lycoming manual is 65% economy cruise. At 2 quid a litre for avgas you gotta make every last drop count.
I read in a lycoming 0-360 related article that at approximately 5000 msl it was just as efficient to redline the engine (2700 rpm)as it is only producing 65% power at full RPM at that altitude, does this sound right? or am i misunderstanding something?
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
From: Scotland
piperboy84, I've read a similar opinion though I thought the altitude was a little higher for 70% power at full throttle which the author of the article used as it represented the cruise power setting for many aircraft. I've also read that any carburetted engine runs most efficiently at full throttle.
If all that is true and you can cruise at the modest altitude required then full bore should be the way to go, with leaning of course.
If all that is true and you can cruise at the modest altitude required then full bore should be the way to go, with leaning of course.
