jetdriven

If running LOP, add 2" of MP from the book power settings and set power with FF.

Scott, thats what I do as well. We have an aera in a panel dock, ipad2, and a couple nice headsets. The aera is really difficult to remove, the ipad goes with us when we leave. The headsets go in bags on the hat shelf.

We have that Whelen multi-flash belly strobe. I like the LED strobe but man that thing was expensive. Maybe someday.

So does a 172 in a flaps extended stall, and for the same reasons as well. The POH on those says "avoid slips with flaps extended". It is not a limitation, and I demonstrated it with all my students. Its a normal maneuver, and a useful one.

In reverse actually. We decided to get the prop dynamic balanced, and the 1400 hour prop needed paint badly. Rather than balance it, then spend the annual inspection filing and painting the prop (ruining the balance job) , decided to get proactive and refinish the whole prop. Then balance. I have put 4 hours on it and the vibration is no wore than it was, which is a slight buzz at 2500 RPM or more.

heat rises. You really need to get the crankcase and oil warm. Thats the real reason. The cylinders are all thats going to warm up if the hose is put in the front of the cowl.

I just striped and painted our prop. The correct paint, and no other is Sherwin-Williams Polane paint. It is specified in the overhaul manual for both Hartzell and McCauley. Now for touch ups, you can file it, hit it with acid, alodine, wash primer and then epoxy propeller paint they sell at Aircraft Spruce, and it will go a year or two.

Still waiting for Lycoming's official position today. I know their sales rep's position. I know at Oshkosh they said know that people can operate LOP and they are developing a program, and to stay tuned. They should call Braly, but they are primarily Continental guys. 5$ avgas will get you thinking about LOP. Ignore MP and RPM. Set power with fuel flow. What a concept. Quote: jetdriven

Even according to this graph there is no red box above 8500', I dont think you need to run 50 LOP at higher altitudes. CHT will tell what it likes. Quote: carusoam Ned, There are two other things that I get from this graph... (1) no red box above 8,500' for NA engines. (2) can avoid red box by staying 25 deg F LOP from 4,500’ and above Just want to be sure before I commit..... Note: I am using the IO 550, POH recommends 50 deg F LOP for all alts. This much LOP is harder to achieve at higher alts. Best regards, -a-

I would say that I agree with Ross. We could lean to 10 LOP pretty much from 4000' on up, and peak above 7000 but we just changed our magneto timing from 20 to 25 degrees and now we can do more like 25-50 LOP below 3k, and 15-20 LOP above 4k. CHT are higher and EGT are lower. The airplane also indicated 187 MPH at WOT sea level from the 183 it would do previoulsly.

thats a pretty minor leak, maybe it is either coming from the valve cover gasket, or the drainback pipe fitting.

Stick the scat hose from the heater in one cowl flap, maybe the right one because the left side is oily. Leave the cowl plugs in to trap the heat, give it enough time to get the engine and oil up to 50 degrees or more. A really hot heater like a turbo heater may only take 15 mins. I think a hairdryer can do it in 45 mins.

Because they say so! Their position is ludicrous'

What does? Quote: N4352H

My personal idea is use the 121.5 elt to satisfy the regs and a 406 EPRIB on an armband to save your life. On our 201 the antenna routes through two bulkheads from the ELT unit on its way to the antenna. Neatly zip tied and secured every few inches. if the aircraft breaks up, the antenna cable is going to be pulled in two.

Lycoming authorizes PEAK power at 75% and below. Which is certainly in detonation territory at about 75% power. This is recommended by Lycoming, although LOP is not. Ours runs smooth at 28" of MP and 2500 RPM right down to about 100 LOP, at this point the CHT is 280, the FF is around 7 GPH. Yep, really killing it. Today we advanced the mag timing to 25 degrees, it was incorrectly set at 20. The engine wil now get up to a 380 CHT pretty easily at 11 GPH, this is 75 ROP at 25 squared. At 30 LOP the CHT is 365. So, should I follow Lycoming's advice and trash a set of cylinders based on their recommendation? They also recommend 475 as a redline CHT, so, 470 all day is fine too? Lycoming is stuck in the 1950s. Quote: KSMooniac Actually I have run LOP power settings from 50% (actually a bit less) all the way up to 85% power. Regarding Lycoming, just a few posts above jetdriven (Byron) posted an exchange he had with a Lycoming rep that wandered into his hangar and spouted off some very erroneous info regarding LOP ops. LOP ops result in lower peak internal cylinder pressures and cooler CHTs, which yields a much longer fatigue life (ie less chance of cracking). This means that is is highly likely that 2000 hrs of LOP ops will leave a cylinder in great shape for an overhaul whereas ROP ops might lead to cracking due to the higher pressures and temperatures. Angle valve jugs are sole-source Lycoming, and they cost twice as much as parallel valve jugs that have aftermarket competition. This means a potential savings of $4k on a set of 4 if you choose to overhaul instead of replace. One more fact... the detonation margins at 50 LOP are MUCH greater than they are at 50 ROP. Detonation needs high temps and high pressures, and 50 ROP is far more prone to detonation than 50 LOP!

It's not intentionally misleading, this is a Lycoming test cell data on an IO-360 engine done in 2002. The precise engine that people are spouting off how the engine has narrower detonation margins LOP. Which IS false. Lycoming's own official "position" and the "facts" spouted off by their employee, Wayne G, are completely in conflict with each other. The man trying to sell me a 42K $ IO-390 package. Has Lycoming's position changed? What is it now? And again, what scientific data is it based on? Or is it an old wives tale? Quote: N4352H I never compared the two Scott.... and on the rich side you can dump fuel and use fuel to cool at greater margins. This is Lycoming's position...not mine. The disconnect is the science vs. what the engine maufacturer suggests. Tell Lycoming they are wrong all day.....

Thats looks promising. The G3 seemed too expensive for what it is. However, the G1 or G2 sounds just right.

easiest is to either open iphoto with your iphone plugged in, or just email the photo to yourself.

No mention of candlepower, but the XeVision 50W is 750k. I suspect the LED is much, much less.

They are all 135 carriers tnat supply the hubs from small airports. I did that too. FedEx and UPS use Part 91 contractors to service some of the less urban areas Parker.

Critical number of 46? I think next flight I am going to run 1900 RPM and 27". Maybe 2700 RPM and 19". Same 46. Book shows different TAS and fuel flow numbers. But all the same right? Quote: Hank Urs-- I use the charts in the Owner's Manual to determine exact settings, but from memory these are typical: 3000 msl 23"/2300 5-6000' 22"/2400 >~7500' WOT/2500 NOTE: WOT means leave it full forward after climb to accelerate, then pull back just enough to make the needle move. This is supposed to create turbulence for improved fuel atomization and more even distribution. I'm typically 50º ROP, but at 9000' and above I run close to peak. The MAPA PPP notebook give the 'critical number' for our engines to be 46. [Critical Number = MP + RPM] This should yield ~65% power; for variations, ± 3 = ± 10%. In my case, 20" + 25 [for '2500'] = 45, less than critical so leaning is easier. NOTE: these numbers are from memory, but they sound right.

All the time you hear, well, I had a dirty injector and burned up a cylinder. ROP, a little leaner with a clogged injector, that cylinder operates at peak with a 500 CHT until it is dead. Your single probe on #3 doesnt tell you what the others are doing. Now that same engine operated LOP, the pilot would notice it will not run smooth LOP. That clogged injector cylinder is leaner and will not run smooth. So run real rich, and before further flight, check it out. That's 2K saved for a new angle valve cylinder right there. Plus a grand in labor. LOP is likely safer. Quote: Becca So, maybe this retired guy from JPI sold me, but I think we should all separate the idea of getting an engine monitor from the LOP/ROP debate and just look at it on its own merits. Engine monitors tell you so much about the health of your engine and your cylinders, I feel like it should be high on everyone's upgrade lists regardless of which side of the LOP/ROP debate you are on.

Quote: N4352H Byron...what was the Rep's name?

Had you operated it LOP all this time you would have a free engine overhaul in fuel saved. Well, not quite at 2$ per gallon, but a mathematical certainty at 5$ a gallon. Quote: N4352H Well, I guess you're just quoting Lycoming then when you posted this a couple of times: While this could be dismissed as arrogant, they readily point to the narrow margins at 50 degrees LOP The detonation margins are much, much narrower at 50 ROP (where they recommend) than they are at 50 LOP. I don't want the debate to get muddled with incorrect statements when folks are trying to learn what is true and what is not. I'm not sure if you're advocating Lycoming's position or playing devil's advocate... whatever the case my intentions are not to offend or make you (or anyone) feel cornered. I just want the facts presented.