Electro air Electronic Ignition System (6100)

[donkaye]

I'm doing a transition training in a couple of weeks and noticed that the plane had one of these installed.  I didn't realize that it had been approved for turbocharged airplanes.  Has anyone installed one of these and can comment on its value?  Has it been approved for automatic timing advancement?

[carusoam]

There are not a lot of electro airs getting installed around here….

Many of their ignition switches, just not the electronic mags…

-a-

 

[alextstone]

It's vey pricey and complex to install.  I am curious, too, as to a real world PIREP from a pilot who has installed one on a Bravo.

[LANCECASPER]

8 hours ago, donkaye said:

I'm doing a transition training in a couple of weeks and noticed that the plane had one of these installed.  I didn't realize that it had been approved for turbocharged airplanes.  Has anyone installed one of these and can comment on its value?  Has it been approved for automatic timing advancement?

The guy that knows the most about this is Darrell at SmoothPower (281) 728-8732  http://smoothpowerllc.com/.

His company is the main Distributor for Electroair. I stopped by his booth at Sun N Fun in 2019 and they had recently installed the system in a Bravo from Maryland. He had pictures of the install and comments from the owner. I understand they've done more since then. They work closely with the shops that do the install. I did not end up doing it since I had just had my mags overhauled, but it was on my list of things I wanted to do. And yes, it would advance the timing automatically. 

 

[philiplane]

I would ask if they solved the gear teeth failing on the six cylinder timing pick ups. It probably is a result of vibration in the accessory gear train. Which is why the magnetos have rubber cushions between them and the drive gear. The Electroair does not.

Until a detonation detection system is developed and installed, no turbocharged engine equipped with an electronic ignition will have any timing advance capabilities. It's not possible to make a timing advance map to keep the engine out of the danger zone, so it has to be an active knock detection system like any current automobile has.

Edited January 31, 2022 by philiplane

[FoxMike]

I know of two Bravos that had the system installed and both removed the system after a short period of time.  The factory got approval to install on turbo engines but cannot provide competent advice about problem owners encountered.

[adverseyaw]

Friend of mine had it in his turbo Cessna 206, which has a TIO-540-AJ1A, pretty similar to the AF1B.

His bottom line: it made starting easier, but that's it. No timing advance on the turbo installations. No change in engine performance nor fuel consumption.

It's a lot of money to spend for easier starting.

[LANCECASPER]

1 hour ago, adverseyaw said:

Friend of mine had it in his turbo Cessna 206, which has a TIO-540-AJ1A, pretty similar to the AF1B.

His bottom line: it made starting easier, but that's it. No timing advance on the turbo installations. No change in engine performance nor fuel consumption.

It's a lot of money to spend for easier starting.

Are you sure that they don't have the Surefly system (which has fixed timing) ?

The info on the Electroair system says, "The EIS-61000 adjusts spark timing automatically by way of our MAP Sensor - timing is adjusted with altitude."

[carusoam]

Looks like there hasn’t been a good pirep for Electro air yet…

Bummer…

-a-

[adverseyaw]

100% sure it was an Electroair, so yes perhaps it was plumbed for timing advance. When running at 30" up at altitude, would the system advance at all? My understanding is that advance is helpful on an N/A engine when you can only get 15 or 18" of MP due to altitude.

[y2kiah]

I have an Electroair and could give a pirep, but it's on a J, not a Bravo...

[LANCECASPER]

2 hours ago, y2kiah said:

I have an Electroair and could give a pirep, but it's on a J, not a Bravo...

Let’s hear about it

[y2kiah]

Ok, I'll start with the good stuff:

• The EIS gives a strong spark as advertised. During engine run-up the RPM drop is a barely noticeable 20 RPM when the mag is turned off, while running on the mag alone drops the usual 100 RPM.
• The engine is happy over a very large mixture range including well lean of peak
• It's cool to have a switch panel and push-button start in place of the key
• I recently had an in-flight mag failure after 3 hrs of cruising with what turned out to be a slowly dying mag, which led to a loud pop, followed by a very rough engine that was still capable of making some power. Luckily, I did not need to use that power since I was over an airport at the time and simply glided down and landed as if it was an engine failure. I taxied in, did a mag check, and confirmed that the mag was dead. I wondered why running on the EIS was so rough, since under most circumstances you wouldn't notice any power reduction turning off the mag in flight. As is turned out, the 3hrs of cruise on a faulty mag had fouled up all of the spark plugs pretty bad, and the engine was really unhappy without all of the plugs firing. Cylinder #4 was especially impacted and looked like it was making no power during that event. I was thankful for the strong spark of the EIS. If I had been running on two mags, there is a chance the engine may have failed outright in that condition.

Now for some of the bad:

• Coming right back to the mag failure event, the pucker factor increases when you lose your mag because your engine is now totally dependent on the electrical system. Make sure your alternator and battery are in good condition if you are going to install the EIS. If you have the option to install backups for either, I would recommend it. Secondly, I wonder if the strong spark of the EIS led to the engine running smooth enough over 3 hours as the mag was dying, that it was hiding early warning signs of the impending failure. If I had been running on two mags, maybe I would have noticed a decrease in power or roughness earlier in the flight, and ended the flight before the total failure, and under safer conditions. Why did #4 lose almost all power, while the the others continued to operate? The bottom plugs on 2 and 4 run from the EIS. Those likely fouled up more than the top (EIS) plugs on 1 and 3.
• The lead wire connections were designed for automotive plugs and are too flimsy for aircraft engines. There is no mechanical clamping, they rely on friction alone to keep the wire in place compressing the spring. As the wire ages, the friction decreases and the connections have a tendency to slip, leading to loss of contact with the plug. I had to replace one of my lead wires because the connection kept slipping out in flight. All of that voltage has to go somewhere. It ended up shorting and burned a hole through the side of the wire insulation (within the plug). This has apparently been a common problem with the Electroair. It was not a cheap fix.
• The system is unfamiliar to a large number of mechanics out there. I had a mechanic (not at my home shop) tell me the gap on my plugs was too big, until I reminded him that the EIS uses different plugs with a larger gap. Make sure you are very familiar with the system and double check for correct plug installation after any maintenance.
• You have to cram another system and all of its wiring onto your firewall, where space is already tight. Changing the oil filter on my J with all of that extra stuff in the way is a real hassle. Not sure how that would impact a Bravo.

Overall I am happy with the system, it works very well if all of the components are healthy. My take is that you are not relieved from the burden of mag maintenance, or the risk of mag failure, so I would not factor that into the decision too heavily. If your remaining mag does fail, the failure mode of your engine changes as compared to running two mags. You'll probably also have some new maintenance items pop up from time to time.

[philiplane]

Electronic ignition versus magnetos-

For most pilots, you will see very little gain unless you change your operations to take advantage of the timing advance available at certain combinations of altitude, manifold pressure, and RPM.

The strength and duration of spark are widely misunderstood. Hotter spark does not make more power, or burn fuel better. It merely will fire plugs that would otherwise be fouled. Higher energy spark will enable you to jump a wider gap, which is necessary when burning ultra-lean mixtures. Ultra lean mixtures are used for maximum economy, meaning you will use less fuel, while also going slower. There is no way to burn less fuel and go faster. Physics gets in the way.

The Electroair system is more expensive and complicated than it needs to be. There are multiple components that take up valuable engine compartment space. It has automotive style friction fit plug wires which loosen and eventually fall off the plugs. The plug wires are expensive, especially since they don’t last long. They’ve also had problems with the timing pickup gear teeth chipping on six cylinder installations. When that happens, it can fire radically out of time, and jump timing continuously until you shut it off. 

The SureFly is simple, it just drops into place and only needs an additional power wire, and a manifold pressure source. And it gives the exact same benefits.

The primary benefit of any electronic ignition is supposed to be durability, compared to a magneto. That said, well maintained magnetos can last many thousands of hours. If you do the simple 500 hour service, the magneto will outlast a couple of engine overhauls.

The second benefit of an electronic ignition is variable timing. However, you have to understand the limitations. The advance curve begins where your engine is making less than 75 percent power. Maximum advance is found at full rpm, and low manifold pressure. Meaning you get the most benefit by flying above 9000 feet. But on a full power climb to 9000, the timing will not be changing. It doesn't change during takeoff. You don't get any more power under any conditions, you just get more economy under light loads. The salespeople have really misled customers on this, the following is what you can expect in reality.

The fuel savings with electronic ignition comes from the ability to run at lean mixtures that wouldn't be ignited well by conventional magnetos. Which means running at lower power settings than previously available. Any given horsepower takes a certain amount of fuel to produce. There is no magic about how you light it off. Ultra lean mixtures require a wide gapped plug, which in turn requires more energy to jump the gap. The higher energy, longer width spark does not magically burn the fuel better. It is necessary to burn what little fuel there is.

There is a lot of confusion about what exact benefits an electronic ignition can bring to an engine, and how they are achieved. This is along the lines of saying that you use "fuel to cool" the cylinder heads. As if liquid fuel is poured over the heads to wick heat away? Like how water is used for evaporative coolers? No, that’s not how it works.  Excess fuel "cools" the heads by lowering peak temperature, because the over-rich mixture is producing less than peak HP, and therefore less than peak heat.

The same with electronic ignition. In lower power settings, the extra advance allows ultra lean mixtures to smoothly burn, resulting in fuel savings. There is a tiny gain in efficiency, which results in the same speed on less fuel, under certain limited conditions. There is no overall gain in every measure. Longer hotter spark in itself doesn't do anything, aside from wearing out spark plugs faster. The engine has to be at a power setting where it simply would not run well with conventional ignition, in order to realize the most benefits from a longer duration, higher energy, advanced spark.
Once the flame is ignited, the fire consumes all the fuel in the chamber. Spark isn't required to light every molecule of fuel, only to start the fire. After that it's irrelevant. With correct timing, peak pressure occurs at 15 degrees ATDC and half of the fuel is burned by 10 ATDC. This is about a half a millisecond at 2400 RPM. The remaining fuel burns in the next few degrees of crank rotation with decreasing energy, because the cylinder expands as the piston moves downward, and adding more spark will not change that. There is a point of diminishing returns, more advance is not better. That is why max advance occurs at max RPM and low MP, advance is based on engine rpm and flame speed. Lower speed needs less advance, otherwise the engine will knock and eventually try to run backwards. Higher speed requires more advance to get the flame started so it can expand at the correct crank angle (10-15 degrees ATDC). We are limited by flame front propagation. We use a complex formula to determine the correct timing for a gasoline engine, covering the whole load/RPM range.

In most cases, people reporting significant performance gains after converting to an electronic ignition, would have gotten most of those benefits if they had simply maintained their magneto system. They were starting from a low point to begin with. Well tuned Bendix magnetos, and fine wire spark plugs, will do the same thing as an electronic ignition will, below 9000 feet.

I am gathering data on my SureFly installation on my Aztec. I have 300 hours of engine & air data before, and once I reach 50 hours I will have some basis for comparison. I have no expectations of any differences on flights below 8000 feet, unless I am running below 55 percent power. I expect gains in the 8000-15,000 feet range based on the published timing curve.

 

Ignition timing advance is the second biggest benefit of electronics over a magneto. But, For turbocharged engines, the timing remains fixed to allow adequate detonation margins.

So, the only advantage of an electronic ignition on a turbo, will be better starting versus a magneto. But, that all depends on what type of magneto you have. A Bendix 1200 is best, Bendix S6 series are good, and Slick is the worst. Shower of sparks or Slickstart boosters are better than impulse couplings.

A well-maintained magneto is still a very capable piece of equipment. Most people that report fantastic improvements after their electronic ignition installation, didn't have a properly functioning ignition system to begin with. I see it over and over again.

I have Surefly SIMS on my Aztec. While they do provide better starting for some applications, I didn't have trouble starting to begin with. They provide zero benefit in most flight operations. I am experimenting with some power settings that take advantage of the timing advance. But those are limited to certain combinations of altitude (8000-16000 ft), MP (below 22"), and RPM (2400-2575) where you get the most advance. You get zero advance under most normal cruise conditions.

 

[Dickard]

On 2/5/2022 at 8:15 AM, philiplane said:

Electronic ignition versus magnetos-

For most pilots, you will see very little gain unless you change your operations to take advantage of the timing advance available at certain combinations of altitude, manifold pressure, and RPM.

The strength and duration of spark are widely misunderstood. Hotter spark does not make more power, or burn fuel better. It merely will fire plugs that would otherwise be fouled. Higher energy spark will enable you to jump a wider gap, which is necessary when burning ultra-lean mixtures. Ultra lean mixtures are used for maximum economy, meaning you will use less fuel, while also going slower. There is no way to burn less fuel and go faster. Physics gets in the way.

The Electroair system is more expensive and complicated than it needs to be. There are multiple components that take up valuable engine compartment space. It has automotive style friction fit plug wires which loosen and eventually fall off the plugs. The plug wires are expensive, especially since they don’t last long. They’ve also had problems with the timing pickup gear teeth chipping on six cylinder installations. When that happens, it can fire radically out of time, and jump timing continuously until you shut it off. 

The SureFly is simple, it just drops into place and only needs an additional power wire, and a manifold pressure source. And it gives the exact same benefits.

The primary benefit of any electronic ignition is supposed to be durability, compared to a magneto. That said, well maintained magnetos can last many thousands of hours. If you do the simple 500 hour service, the magneto will outlast a couple of engine overhauls.

The second benefit of an electronic ignition is variable timing. However, you have to understand the limitations. The advance curve begins where your engine is making less than 75 percent power. Maximum advance is found at full rpm, and low manifold pressure. Meaning you get the most benefit by flying above 9000 feet. But on a full power climb to 9000, the timing will not be changing. It doesn't change during takeoff. You don't get any more power under any conditions, you just get more economy under light loads. The salespeople have really misled customers on this, the following is what you can expect in reality.

The fuel savings with electronic ignition comes from the ability to run at lean mixtures that wouldn't be ignited well by conventional magnetos. Which means running at lower power settings than previously available. Any given horsepower takes a certain amount of fuel to produce. There is no magic about how you light it off. Ultra lean mixtures require a wide gapped plug, which in turn requires more energy to jump the gap. The higher energy, longer width spark does not magically burn the fuel better. It is necessary to burn what little fuel there is.

There is a lot of confusion about what exact benefits an electronic ignition can bring to an engine, and how they are achieved. This is along the lines of saying that you use "fuel to cool" the cylinder heads. As if liquid fuel is poured over the heads to wick heat away? Like how water is used for evaporative coolers? No, that’s not how it works.  Excess fuel "cools" the heads by lowering peak temperature, because the over-rich mixture is producing less than peak HP, and therefore less than peak heat.

The same with electronic ignition. In lower power settings, the extra advance allows ultra lean mixtures to smoothly burn, resulting in fuel savings. There is a tiny gain in efficiency, which results in the same speed on less fuel, under certain limited conditions. There is no overall gain in every measure. Longer hotter spark in itself doesn't do anything, aside from wearing out spark plugs faster. The engine has to be at a power setting where it simply would not run well with conventional ignition, in order to realize the most benefits from a longer duration, higher energy, advanced spark.
Once the flame is ignited, the fire consumes all the fuel in the chamber. Spark isn't required to light every molecule of fuel, only to start the fire. After that it's irrelevant. With correct timing, peak pressure occurs at 15 degrees ATDC and half of the fuel is burned by 10 ATDC. This is about a half a millisecond at 2400 RPM. The remaining fuel burns in the next few degrees of crank rotation with decreasing energy, because the cylinder expands as the piston moves downward, and adding more spark will not change that. There is a point of diminishing returns, more advance is not better. That is why max advance occurs at max RPM and low MP, advance is based on engine rpm and flame speed. Lower speed needs less advance, otherwise the engine will knock and eventually try to run backwards. Higher speed requires more advance to get the flame started so it can expand at the correct crank angle (10-15 degrees ATDC). We are limited by flame front propagation. We use a complex formula to determine the correct timing for a gasoline engine, covering the whole load/RPM range.

In most cases, people reporting significant performance gains after converting to an electronic ignition, would have gotten most of those benefits if they had simply maintained their magneto system. They were starting from a low point to begin with. Well tuned Bendix magnetos, and fine wire spark plugs, will do the same thing as an electronic ignition will, below 9000 feet.

I am gathering data on my SureFly installation on my Aztec. I have 300 hours of engine & air data before, and once I reach 50 hours I will have some basis for comparison. I have no expectations of any differences on flights below 8000 feet, unless I am running below 55 percent power. I expect gains in the 8000-15,000 feet range based on the published timing curve.

 

Ignition timing advance is the second biggest benefit of electronics over a magneto. But, For turbocharged engines, the timing remains fixed to allow adequate detonation margins.

So, the only advantage of an electronic ignition on a turbo, will be better starting versus a magneto. But, that all depends on what type of magneto you have. A Bendix 1200 is best, Bendix S6 series are good, and Slick is the worst. Shower of sparks or Slickstart boosters are better than impulse couplings.

A well-maintained magneto is still a very capable piece of equipment. Most people that report fantastic improvements after their electronic ignition installation, didn't have a properly functioning ignition system to begin with. I see it over and over again.

I have Surefly SIMS on my Aztec. While they do provide better starting for some applications, I didn't have trouble starting to begin with. They provide zero benefit in most flight operations. I am experimenting with some power settings that take advantage of the timing advance. But those are limited to certain combinations of altitude (8000-16000 ft), MP (below 22"), and RPM (2400-2575) where you get the most advance. You get zero advance under most normal cruise conditions.

 

So, this is my airplane that Don was asking about.  Is this EIS gonna be a pain in my neck?

[carusoam]

More like uncharted territory…

-a-

[Dickard]

On 3/2/2022 at 9:51 AM, Dickard said:

So, this is my airplane that Don was asking about.  Is this EIS gonna be a pain in my neck?

Looks like I answered my own question.  Two unplanned landings later and two back to back chewed up teeth in the MTH, my neck is officially in pain...and my plane is sitting outside on a tarmac 70 miles from home.  Oh, and my medical expired because I couldn't get home in time for my appointment with the Doc.

[philiplane]

Please file a Service Difficulty Report with the FAA so this will be on file. Nothing will change until they have several SDR's in the system, and then a fix will occur. Electroair needs to figure out why this happens and design a fix. With a few SDR's on file, the FAA will ensure that happens. But so far, you are just one more owner who's had a problem with the six cylinder MTH teeth failing.

[N201MKTurbo]

Some day in the future…. After years of the new space aged electronic ignition problems… someone will discover this ancient secret. An ignition system with no electronics, no sensors and super simple. Almost nothing to go wrong……

[Fritz1]

removed the electroair from my Bravo and cannot elaborate on details, installed slick start on left impulse coupling mag instead, definitely improved hot start, have retard breaker mag sitting in hangar, just have to figure out wiring of mag switch, think will work better than impulse coupling on hot start, skytech lightweight starter turns engine so fast when hot that impulse coupling does not engage, very often engine catches on hot start when spinning down after starter has been deactivated, the retard breaker mag is legal to install on left mag, not legal to install on right mag while keeping the impulse coupling on the left mag, recently installed Tempest fine wires, engine appears to run smoother and TIT appears to be lower, maybe just placebo because they cost 3x as much as the massive plugs

[TNIndy]

On 2/5/2022 at 1:09 AM, y2kiah said:

Ok, I'll start with the good stuff:

• The EIS gives a strong spark as advertised. During engine run-up the RPM drop is a barely noticeable 20 RPM when the mag is turned off, while running on the mag alone drops the usual 100 RPM.
• The engine is happy over a very large mixture range including well lean of peak
• It's cool to have a switch panel and push-button start in place of the key
• I recently had an in-flight mag failure after 3 hrs of cruising with what turned out to be a slowly dying mag, which led to a loud pop, followed by a very rough engine that was still capable of making some power. Luckily, I did not need to use that power since I was over an airport at the time and simply glided down and landed as if it was an engine failure. I taxied in, did a mag check, and confirmed that the mag was dead. I wondered why running on the EIS was so rough, since under most circumstances you wouldn't notice any power reduction turning off the mag in flight. As is turned out, the 3hrs of cruise on a faulty mag had fouled up all of the spark plugs pretty bad, and the engine was really unhappy without all of the plugs firing. Cylinder #4 was especially impacted and looked like it was making no power during that event. I was thankful for the strong spark of the EIS. If I had been running on two mags, there is a chance the engine may have failed outright in that condition.

Now for some of the bad:

• Coming right back to the mag failure event, the pucker factor increases when you lose your mag because your engine is now totally dependent on the electrical system. Make sure your alternator and battery are in good condition if you are going to install the EIS. If you have the option to install backups for either, I would recommend it. Secondly, I wonder if the strong spark of the EIS led to the engine running smooth enough over 3 hours as the mag was dying, that it was hiding early warning signs of the impending failure. If I had been running on two mags, maybe I would have noticed a decrease in power or roughness earlier in the flight, and ended the flight before the total failure, and under safer conditions. Why did #4 lose almost all power, while the the others continued to operate? The bottom plugs on 2 and 4 run from the EIS. Those likely fouled up more than the top (EIS) plugs on 1 and 3.
• The lead wire connections were designed for automotive plugs and are too flimsy for aircraft engines. There is no mechanical clamping, they rely on friction alone to keep the wire in place compressing the spring. As the wire ages, the friction decreases and the connections have a tendency to slip, leading to loss of contact with the plug. I had to replace one of my lead wires because the connection kept slipping out in flight. All of that voltage has to go somewhere. It ended up shorting and burned a hole through the side of the wire insulation (within the plug). This has apparently been a common problem with the Electroair. It was not a cheap fix.
• The system is unfamiliar to a large number of mechanics out there. I had a mechanic (not at my home shop) tell me the gap on my plugs was too big, until I reminded him that the EIS uses different plugs with a larger gap. Make sure you are very familiar with the system and double check for correct plug installation after any maintenance.
• You have to cram another system and all of its wiring onto your firewall, where space is already tight. Changing the oil filter on my J with all of that extra stuff in the way is a real hassle. Not sure how that would impact a Bravo.

Overall I am happy with the system, it works very well if all of the components are healthy. My take is that you are not relieved from the burden of mag maintenance, or the risk of mag failure, so I would not factor that into the decision too heavily. If your remaining mag does fail, the failure mode of your engine changes as compared to running two mags. You'll probably also have some new maintenance items pop up from time to time.

I agree with pirep from y2kiah although I am not aware of the lead wire connections being designed for automotive plugs. 

I have the Electroair system on my turbo normalized M20F. The system works well and the guys at Smooth Power are great to work with. I like the push button start rather than the key also. 

[McMooney]

I"m a surefly convert, wish i could have dual.  the thing just works.  when doing a mag check there's barely any drop on the surefly.

flying at altitude lop is where it shines,  i flew from montgomery to klch on my way to ksgr and  due to flying super lop,l i needed something like 20ish gallons for a top off.

mag overhaul damn near cost as much as the surefly, 2 would dwarf the cost of the surefly.

there was  a time i lost my alternator lead,  even at 10volts, 2hours in, the surefly didn't even blink.  given a backup battery i'm good

 

[Dickard]

21 hours ago, philiplane said:

Please file a Service Difficulty Report with the FAA so this will be on file. Nothing will change until they have several SDR's in the system, and then a fix will occur. Electroair needs to figure out why this happens and design a fix. With a few SDR's on file, the FAA will ensure that happens. But so far, you are just one more owner who's had a problem with the six cylinder MTH teeth failing.

My current A&P is working with Electroair, and the FAA has already reached out to me.  "Just turn off the EIS", yeah, I just wanted the plane on the ground and didn't want to touch anything it was running so bad.  As I flared and pulled power, the engine quit.  Landed with a non-rotating prop.  Strange feeling.

[Dickard]

1 hour ago, McMooney said:

I"m a surefly convert, wish i could have dual.  the thing just works.  when doing a mag check there's barely any drop on the surefly.

flying at altitude lop is where it shines,  i flew from montgomery to klch on my way to ksgr and  due to flying super lop,l i needed something like 20ish gallons for a top off.

mag overhaul damn near cost as much as the surefly, 2 would dwarf the cost of the surefly.

there was  a time i lost my alternator lead,  even at 10volts, 2hours in, the surefly didn't even blink.  given a backup battery i'm good

 

The PO installed the Electroair.  He raved about it giving better fuel economy.  Ummm...from what I've read, that's not possible on the turbo.

Other than the push button start, which is nice, I'm not sure what it really gets me.

This is my first airplane ownership experience.  So far it has sucked.  I've never felt safe in this plane and have never felt confident in my A&P(s).

[Dsal1]

I just had the system installed using fine wire plugs on the bottom for the EIS. It starts right up and runs smooth. The TIT is lower and CHT’s are slightly higher as expected. No drop in rpm when you turn off the mag. No problems starting when hot. It was not a hard install as I had already installed the Electroair starter switch. You do need to flip the rocker switch when you add the EIS though if you ran a mag there before.