Full Power Climb M20K 231 '84 with Marlin

[PeteMc]

4 hours ago, gabez said:

there is another page in the STC did I didn't post that has the Mooney part of it. The second page I learned is for the piper(s)

Still pretty strange.  Why would the M20K N# and S/N be on that page for the -KB.  I don't have the logs handy, but I thought my paperwork was JUST for my engine.  So it would be the -LB only and not show the -KB.  But it has been so long ago that maybe the full STC for all the engines is stuffed in the back of the logs.

.

[kortopates]

1 hour ago, PeteMc said:

Still pretty strange.  Why would the M20K N# and S/N be on that page for the -KB. 

Not really, I am sure it's on every page of the STC to make it clear the STC is only valid for that aircraft and is not transferable to anyone else. Nor is it unusual that the STC is good for a lot a different TSIO-360's - as it is for many of the early TSIO-360's without wastegates. 

[Pinecone]

4 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

Not to split hairs, but the first 12 Encores back in 1997 actually were certified as 252s since Mooney still held that Type Certificate and could manufacture that airplane without any additional certification from the FAA. Then once the Encore was certified they came back to the factory and were converted to Encores. (I believe serial numbers 13-36 left the factory as Encores)
The one I owned (serial #12) got its Airworthiness Certificate on 10/23/1997 and then was converted to an Encore on 11/10/1997. Here are the logbook entries :
 

Thanks for the info.

From the logbook entries, it seems like they may have had the dual puck brakes already

[jlunseth]

4 hours ago, kortopates said:

I am pretty sure everyone flying a -KB follows this, but you're flying a -GB or -LB.

I agree with Paul. The 231s have a GB or an LB, not a KB.

[jlunseth]

3 hours ago, PeteMc said:

Still pretty strange.  Why would the M20K N# and S/N be on that page for the -KB.  I don't have the logs handy, but I thought my paperwork was JUST for my engine.  So it would be the -LB only and not show the -KB.  But it has been so long ago that maybe the full STC for all the engines is stuffed in the back of the logs.

.

Just guessing, but that looks like part of a larger STC that included the GB, KB, LB - maybe the STC for the Merlyn? The Merlyn Black Magic is STCd for several aircraft, including several Pipers. So when the AFSM was put together for your aircraft, they put the entire Merlyn STC in it, its up to you to find the section of that STC that pertains to your particular engine, either a -KB or an -LB, but not the KB section.

I use a full power full rich climb to whatever my cruise altitude is. I tried reduced power (cruise climbs) when I first got the aircraft and particularly out west (e.g. AZ, NM, MT, CO, SD, WY) the temps were too high in the cruise climb.

Many of us try to get our A&P to set the fuel flow higher than the POH specifies, say 25 or 25.5 GPH.  The extra fuel slows the combustion process down, allowing the cylinders to run cooler. You can always dial the fuel flow down from the max at which it is set, but if the max is not high enough, you can't dial it over the max it was set for. It appears to me that there is a bump in the fuel flow as you get to full MP, 40 in your aircraft? In other words, the fuel flow increases more sharply as you approach max MP. So it may be counterintuitive, but to get best fuel flow and cooler CHTs you need to go to max MP and max fuel flow.

Edited January 3 by jlunseth

[gabez]

51 minutes ago, jlunseth said:

Just guessing, but that looks like part of a larger STC that included the GB, KB, LB - maybe the STC for the Merlyn? The Merlyn Black Magic is STCd for several aircraft, including several Pipers. So when the AFSM was put together for your aircraft, they put the entire Merlyn STC in it, its up to you to find the section of that STC that pertains to your particular engine, either a -KB or an -LB, but not the KB section.

I use a full power full rich climb to whatever my cruise altitude is. I tried reduced power (cruise climbs) when I first got the aircraft and particularly out west (e.g. AZ, NM, MT, CO, SD, WY) the temps were too high in the cruise climb.

Many of us try to get our A&P to set the fuel flow higher than the POH specifies, say 25 or 25.5 GPH.  The extra fuel slows the combustion process down, allowing the cylinders to run cooler. You can always dial the fuel flow down from the max at which it is set, but if the max is not high enough, you can't dial it over the max it was set for. It appears to me that there is a bump in the fuel flow as you get to full MP, 40 in your aircraft? In other words, the fuel flow increases more sharply as you approach max MP. So it may be counterintuitive, but to get best fuel flow and cooler CHTs you need to go to max MP and max fuel flow.

I actually just had my pump and flow divider rebuilt, my aux tanks were not installed properly and the sump valve was set not in the lowest point. Long story short water got in the system and nothing good came out of it. 

 

I am sitting at about 25.5-26 on full climb

[jlunseth]

If you have that much fuel flow the best thing for you to do would be to climb full power full rich cowl flaps open. Your plane will thank you for it. I can’t count how many of those full power climbs I made on the old engine in my plane. Hundreds, and some were from 1,000, which is ground level around here, to 21 or 23. I climb at 500 fpm to keep the airspeed and therefore the cooling up. That meant operating at full power for 40-45 minutes on occasion. Never hurt the engine. It made it to 2300 hrs and probably would have gone further, but it was just time to replace the 22 y.o. engine. Breaking in a new one now.

Pilots and mechanics are figuring out that it’s a really good little engine. Sure, it has its quirks because we have to manage MP all the time. But the reputation it earned in the early days from running at peak and pushing the CHTs high was simply not valid, we had to learn how to run it right. Thank you GAMI and the other experts who taught us that.

The biggest challenge is the high hot climb, in other words, climbing out of a western town into the flight levels in the middle of the summer. When I tried a cruise climb for that years ago the temps were really bad. Seems counterintuitive, but the solution is to put in more power and full fuel, which gets the fuel flow up to max. Even then sometimes there would be one cylinder that would get up around 410, not ideal. I have had new baffling put in and so far it is helping with the cooling issue quite a bit.

Edited January 4 by jlunseth

[Fly Boomer]

58 minutes ago, jlunseth said:

best thing for you to do would be to climb full power full rich cowl flaps open. Your plane will thank you for it.

That seems to be the right thing for Continental's TSIO engines.  Control temperature with pitch.