Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:48 AM - Re: Commander to Hawaii (alh1@juno.com)
2. 04:00 AM - Lean Of Peak EGT?? Was: Commander to Hawaii (BobsV35B@aol.com)
3. 04:24 AM - Re: Commander to Hawaii (Barry Collman)
4. 05:51 AM - Re: Commander to Hawaii (Steve at Col-East)
5. 08:46 AM - Re: Lean Of Peak EGT?? Was: Commander to Hawaii (DP)
6. 09:01 AM - Re: Commander to Hawaii (John Vormbaum)
7. 09:16 AM - MoGas STC & LOP (CloudCraft@aol.com)
8. 09:39 AM - Re: Carb heat cables (Harry Merritt)
9. 09:47 AM - Re: Lean Of Peak EGT?? Was: Commander to Hawaii (nico css)
10. 11:43 AM - hawaii (alh1@juno.com)
11. 11:48 AM - Re: Ben Whitfield (BertBerry1)
12. 11:49 AM - Re: hawaii (BertBerry1)
13. 01:11 PM - Re: Ben Whitfield (Barry Collman)
14. 01:27 PM - Re: MoGas STC & LOP (N395V)
15. 04:37 PM - Re: Lycoming GO480 RPM and Oil Pressure Problem (YOURTCFG@aol.com)
16. 04:38 PM - Re: Eatern Airlines (YOURTCFG@aol.com)
17. 06:00 PM - Re: Lean Of Peak EGT?? Was: Commander to Hawaii (W J R HAMILTON)
18. 06:26 PM - Re: Lycoming GO480 RPM and Oil Pressure Problem (Paul Wright)
19. 07:28 PM - commander radios (Robert Feldtman)
20. 07:28 PM - commander radios (Robert Feldtman)
21. 09:24 PM - Re: commander radios (Jim Addington)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commander to Hawaii |
the n number comes back with 1963 as year built and 0-540
lycomings as series of engines. straight 500's were only made in 1958
and 1959. barry will know, but my guess is N7846c is a 500B with I0-540.
fuel burn for a straight 500 at about 7500 feet at peak egt would be
about 24 gph. i know i will hear from guys that can get 20 gph, but
they burn valves an it is cheaper to burn fuel. the average useful
load on a 500 is about 1750 pounds. it holds 156 gallons so you need
an extra tank. it will do it if both engines are running. the call
sign would become N7846C "heavy", but if it lifts off, both engines
keep running, it is hawaii, here we come. did i mention about 8000 feet
on the runway length to make sure you get airborne with that fuel. if
one engine quits on takeoff, you will have to land straight ahead with
the throttles back and you need to make sure there are no tall
buildings the first five or ten miles (three story) because the climb
rate goes way down.
as an aside, if the ferry pilot has 23 hours, even if all is a
commander, he will have his hands full. from the flight track, he
appears to be doing a good job. al hoffman
_____________________________________________________________
Click here for free information on consolidating your debt.
http://track.juno.com/s/lc?u=http://tagline.untd.us/fc/CAaCX09tbf5xRN5IG3KYqOtUcpXjiXfE/
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Commander to Hawaii |
Good Morning Al,
It is nice to hear such a knowledgeable response about the young man's trip.
I am sure all will be fine.
One thing bothers me though. You have stated a suggestion that running at
peak EGT will give a total burn of 24 GPH. I am not familiar with the engine
involved, but that does seem like a reasonable burn for the power involved.
Since it is a non supercharged engine, chances are that it would be developing
well under sixty-five percent power at that altitude. Still, all is well.
However, you follow that with an ancient Old Wives Tale by implying that
operating leaner than that will burn valves.
Since the highest temperature in the cylinder head will be obtained about
forty or fifty degrees Fahrenheit richer than peak EGT, and, by definition, the
Exhaust Gas Temperature will be lower when running more lean than Peak
Exhaust Gas Temperature, why would any valve burning occur?
Twenty gallons per hour, ten gallons per engine, will definitely provide
less power to the airframe and there is no advantage in economy by operating
more than about twenty lean of peak EGT at the cylinder pressures involved, but
there is absolutely nothing involved that would cause a valve to be burned.
Valves get burned by encountering gasses that are above their design limits.
That can only happen when high temperatures and insufficient cooling is
present. The most likely time for valve burning to occur is at high power and
mixtures that are rich of peak EGT but not rich enough to provide proper cooling
of the engine. The more likely culprit is a high power climb with a mixture
that is not rich enough. Fifty to one hundred degrees rich of peak is about
the worst place any engine can be operated at any power above sixty-five
percent.
Lycoming does present the number of seventy-five percent as being critical
while Continental likes to use the number sixty-five as the magic number, but
both manufacturers will agree that cruise mixtures leaner than peak EGT at
sixty-five percent power are unlikely to hurt any engine that is in conformance
with it's type certificate. If it is full of crud from running too rich,
something may stop a valve from closing. That could cause a valve to be burned.
However, running any engine at sixty-five percent power and a mixture that
is leaner than that which will provide peak EGT can do nothing other than make
a valve less likely to be burned.
Comments encouraged!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 6/18/2007 4:49:35 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
alh1@juno.com writes:
fuel burn for a straight 500 at about 7500 feet at peak egt would be
about 24 gph. i know i will hear from guys that can get 20 gph, but
they burn valves an it is cheaper to burn fuel.
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commander to Hawaii |
Hi All,
N7846C is a straight Model 500, s/n 724.
As far as I know, it still has the original Lycoming O-540-A2B engines. It was
actually first Certificated in April 1959.
The reference to 1963 is because that's when it was imported back to the USA
after having been in Mexico for a few years.
I thought the 'N' number rang a bell. Those who attended the Fly-In at Hillsboro
may remember that Ben Pfaff flew it in.
The current owner, as far as I'm aware is Dick B Robbins, of Henderson, Nevada.
Best Regards,
Barry
----- Original Message -----
From: <alh1@juno.com>
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 10:46 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commander to Hawaii
|
| the n number comes back with 1963 as year built and 0-540
| lycomings as series of engines. straight 500's were only made in 1958
| and 1959. barry will know, but my guess is N7846c is a 500B with I0-540.
|
| fuel burn for a straight 500 at about 7500 feet at peak egt would be
| about 24 gph. i know i will hear from guys that can get 20 gph, but
| they burn valves an it is cheaper to burn fuel. the average useful
| load on a 500 is about 1750 pounds. it holds 156 gallons so you need
| an extra tank. it will do it if both engines are running. the call
| sign would become N7846C "heavy", but if it lifts off, both engines
| keep running, it is hawaii, here we come. did i mention about 8000 feet
| on the runway length to make sure you get airborne with that fuel. if
| one engine quits on takeoff, you will have to land straight ahead with
| the throttles back and you need to make sure there are no tall
| buildings the first five or ten miles (three story) because the climb
| rate goes way down.
|
| as an aside, if the ferry pilot has 23 hours, even if all is a
| commander, he will have his hands full. from the flight track, he
| appears to be doing a good job. al hoffman
|
| _____________________________________________________________
| Click here for free information on consolidating your debt.
|
http://track.juno.com/s/lc?u=http://tagline.untd.us/fc/CAaCX09tbf5xRN5IG3KYqOtUcpXjiXfE/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commander to Hawaii |
My boss takes great pleasure in running (what he calls!) 55% lean of peak,
which I kid him about all the time. (I'm guessing it works out to be even
less.) About 22" and 2150. With GAMI injectors we have fuel burn down to
21.5 GPH, total at about 156 knots.
The left engine went 1800 hours on the original chrome(!) cylinders, and no
oil consumption. What eventually had us remove that engine was that at TDC,
the choke of the cylinder had worn to where there was no compression, but
only at immediate TDC. It was kind of weird. There was no oil consumption,
and lots of compression off of TDC. There was a debate between mechanics,
and one would have left us to run the thing. Still ran like a watch. It
appears the chrome simply wore out of the choke.
Our right engine is over 1900 hrs on the original Nikasil jugs, run lean of
peak (1400 hour engine). We finally have a weak cylinder at 78/80 (or 77, I
forget). The rest are 80/80, cold. Still ticking...... (Oil analysis,
cutting filters apart, etc. We're not being dumb.) Overhaul might come when
the engine starts leaking too much . Or it grenades tommorow (who knows!).
I tend to run a little harder than the boss at 22 squared, or 23/2200 LOP. I
burn a little more gas too, something like 23 GPH, but I'm younger and more
impatient. Our cylinders are never over 400 degrees. In cruise we're
anywhere from 275 to 375. 325 to 365 the norm. (have to watch number 1 on
departure.) I launch with the EGT set with port side number 1 CHT, and
starboard number 5 EGT.
I can't run LOP if I lose a mag. You need good ignition, (I'm assuming
because of the slower flame front propogation). I've had the fuel flow split
between sides when I do. It's pretty dramatic when you do that looking at
the fuel flow spread between engines. Maybe(?) if you persisted in running
an engine that was misfiring it would be possible. It runs like crap, but
maybe possible. But as soon as you lose a mag, or even a plug, you can see
the EGT shoot up. You can't miss it.
You really need to sit in an airplane and be on the rich side, and watch as
you pull back the red handles. CHT's and EGT's rise to peak, and then fall
dramatically on the back side.
On the 500B we can tell how well we did by the exhaust staining of the last
flight.
Once set up, running lean is no more complicated than running rich. An EGT
is essential, not even to set flow once the engine has been set up, but as a
diagnostic tool. We lost the EGT the other day, and when I launched I really
missed it, but knew I was running properly on the lean side.
This is an elegant, efficient, cool, and clean way of running engines.
Lycoming is full of hooey.
The above is only our opinion. Your mileage may vary.
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: <alh1@juno.com>
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 5:46 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commander to Hawaii
>
> the n number comes back with 1963 as year built and 0-540
> lycomings as series of engines. straight 500's were only made in 1958
> and 1959. barry will know, but my guess is N7846c is a 500B with I0-540.
>
> fuel burn for a straight 500 at about 7500 feet at peak egt would be
> about 24 gph. i know i will hear from guys that can get 20 gph, but
> they burn valves an it is cheaper to burn fuel. the average useful
> load on a 500 is about 1750 pounds. it holds 156 gallons so you need
> an extra tank. it will do it if both engines are running. the call
> sign would become N7846C "heavy", but if it lifts off, both engines
> keep running, it is hawaii, here we come. did i mention about 8000 feet
> on the runway length to make sure you get airborne with that fuel. if
> one engine quits on takeoff, you will have to land straight ahead with
> the throttles back and you need to make sure there are no tall
> buildings the first five or ten miles (three story) because the climb
> rate goes way down.
>
> as an aside, if the ferry pilot has 23 hours, even if all is a
> commander, he will have his hands full. from the flight track, he
> appears to be doing a good job. al hoffman
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Click here for free information on consolidating your debt.
> http://track.juno.com/s/lc?u=http://tagline.untd.us/fc/CAaCX09tbf5xRN5IG3KYqOtUcpXjiXfE/
>
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commander to Hawaii |
Well put Old Bob!
a.. In all of the many hours of operating my 500B the red knobs were
always agressively moved aftward from the moment of startup to shutdown.
There is no way that sufficient heat can be produced at a 65% power
setting to damage anything. I consistently see 24 GPH block fuel burns.
The sweet spot is 2300 rpm/22inches @ 7-10K. 175 KTS TAS all day long.
The exhaust color is a light dove gray. Always run full rich in the
climb and your engines will be happy.
Dennis N6273X
----- Original Message -----
From: BobsV35B@aol.com
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 3:59 AM
Subject: Lean Of Peak EGT?? Was: Commander-List: Commander to Hawaii
Good Morning Al,
It is nice to hear such a knowledgeable response about the young man's
trip. I am sure all will be fine.
One thing bothers me though. You have stated a suggestion that running
at peak EGT will give a total burn of 24 GPH. I am not familiar with the
engine involved, but that does seem like a reasonable burn for the power
involved. Since it is a non supercharged engine, chances are that it
would be developing well under sixty-five percent power at that
altitude. Still, all is well.
However, you follow that with an ancient Old Wives Tale by implying
that operating leaner than that will burn valves.
Since the highest temperature in the cylinder head will be obtained
about forty or fifty degrees Fahrenheit richer than peak EGT, and, by
definition, the Exhaust Gas Temperature will be lower when running more
lean than Peak Exhaust Gas Temperature, why would any valve burning
occur?
Twenty gallons per hour, ten gallons per engine, will definitely
provide less power to the airframe and there is no advantage in economy
by operating more than about twenty lean of peak EGT at the cylinder
pressures involved, but there is absolutely nothing involved that would
cause a valve to be burned.
Valves get burned by encountering gasses that are above their design
limits. That can only happen when high temperatures and insufficient
cooling is present. The most likely time for valve burning to occur is
at high power and mixtures that are rich of peak EGT but not rich enough
to provide proper cooling of the engine. The more likely culprit is a
high power climb with a mixture that is not rich enough. Fifty to one
hundred degrees rich of peak is about the worst place any engine can be
operated at any power above sixty-five percent.
Lycoming does present the number of seventy-five percent as being
critical while Continental likes to use the number sixty-five as the
magic number, but both manufacturers will agree that cruise mixtures
leaner than peak EGT at sixty-five percent power are unlikely to hurt
any engine that is in conformance with it's type certificate. If it is
full of crud from running too rich, something may stop a valve from
closing. That could cause a valve to be burned.
However, running any engine at sixty-five percent power and a mixture
that is leaner than that which will provide peak EGT can do nothing
other than make a valve less likely to be burned.
Comments encouraged!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 6/18/2007 4:49:35 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
alh1@juno.com writes:
fuel burn for a straight 500 at about 7500 feet at peak egt would
be
about 24 gph. i know i will hear from guys that can get 20 gph, but
they burn valves an it is cheaper to burn fuel.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
See what's free at AOL.com.
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Commander to Hawaii |
N7846C is indeed Dick Robbins' airplane, he's in the Phillippines, which is
where the aircraft is bound for. I flew it a bit when Morris finished the
(extensive) annual. It flew like a dream, and was very east to manage. A
little underpowered & light compared to my 500B, but still a nice
airplane...and it will do fine in the Phillippines since it has a Mogas STC.
/John
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 4:23 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commander to Hawaii
> <barry.collman@air-britain.co.uk>
>
> Hi All,
>
> N7846C is a straight Model 500, s/n 724.
> As far as I know, it still has the original Lycoming O-540-A2B engines. It
> was
> actually first Certificated in April 1959.
> The reference to 1963 is because that's when it was imported back to the
> USA
> after having been in Mexico for a few years.
>
> I thought the 'N' number rang a bell. Those who attended the Fly-In at
> Hillsboro
> may remember that Ben Pfaff flew it in.
>
> The current owner, as far as I'm aware is Dick B Robbins, of Henderson,
> Nevada.
>
> Best Regards,
> Barry
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <alh1@juno.com>
> To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 10:46 AM
> Subject: Re: Commander-List: Commander to Hawaii
>
>
> I0-540.
> http://track.juno.com/s/lc?u=http://tagline.untd.us/fc/CAaCX09tbf5xRN5IG3KYqOtUcpXjiXfE/
>
>
> __________ NOD32 2336 (20070618) Information __________
>
>
> __________ NOD32 2336 (20070618) Information __________
>
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
In a message dated 18-Jun-07 09:03:21 Pacific Daylight Time,
john@vormbaum.com writes:
...and it will do fine in the Phillippines since it has a Mogas STC.
Hi John V, and everyone,
I'm interested in the MoGas STC you mentioned. At one of the early Twin
Commander Flight Group Fly-Ins (San Antonio circa 1997) Lycoming had a rep there
who said none of the Lycoming engines were allowed to run MoGas due to the high
chlorine content of MoGas.
If there is now a MoGas STC for the AC-500, that would be a complete
turn-around. If they've done a 180, that's fine ... and I'd be (happily) surprised.
And speaking of Lycoming, somewhere I have a graph that shows a dramatic drop
in cylinder head temperatures running LOP and this chart is for the IGSO-540.
If I can find the document, I'll scan and post.
Wing Commander Gordon
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Carb heat cables |
Mat let's get the parts that did't use returned to me.
Please figure out what you uses and send me a checl
Thanks
Harry
321 267-3141
----- Original Message -----
From: "Harry Merritt" <avtec2@bellsouth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Carb heat cables
> <avtec2@bellsouth.net>
>
> Mat I Have the cable: $100.00
> New Rotor 100.00
> New Caliper 250.00
> Pucks 6 @ 40.00 = 240.00
> 20 Drive Keys & Bolts 160.00
> Freight included (Ground)
> Pay after you received
>
> Harry
> 321 267-3141
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matthew J. Hawkins" <hawkins@cms.udel.edu>
> To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 7:55 AM
> Subject: Commander-List: Carb heat cables
>
>
>> <hawkins@cms.udel.edu>
>>
>> All-
>>
>> Going through annual on N2760B. Looking for two carb heat cables - the
>> ~3' ones under that dash between the pull knob and the rest of the
>> rigging. Anyone have a source for these?
>>
>> Also - looks like I might have to do a Cleveland brake conversion. Any
>> pointers? She's a 560A.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Matt
>>
>> ********************
>> Matthew Hawkins
>> Director, Marine Ops
>> R/V HUGH R. SHARP
>> 302-645-4341
>> FAX: 302-645-4006
>> hawkins@udel.edu
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Commander to Hawaii |
I know the LOP debate, and some folks' experience with engines holding to
TBO while running LOP, has changed many, including my, perception. I ran my
500 ROP for years and have never had any problems with the engines. I burned
22 gph, exactly twice as much as my Twin Comanche, so I wonder whether my
EGT was not calibrated correctly.
If I remember correctly, the EGT operated only off the #1 cylinder? I don't
know.
Perhaps the other cylinders were actually running LOP and held up quite
fine.
Nico
_____
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DP
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 8:45 AM
Subject: Re: Lean Of Peak EGT?? Was: Commander-List: Commander to Hawaii
Well put Old Bob!
* In all of the many hours of operating my 500B the red knobs were
always agressively moved aftward from the moment of startup to shutdown.
There is no way that sufficient heat can be produced at a 65% power setting
to damage anything. I consistently see 24 GPH block fuel burns. The sweet
spot is 2300 rpm/22inches @ 7-10K. 175 KTS TAS all day long. The exhaust
color is a light dove gray. Always run full rich in the climb and your
engines will be happy.
Dennis N6273X
----- Original Message -----
From: BobsV35B@aol.com
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 3:59 AM
Subject: Lean Of Peak EGT?? Was: Commander-List: Commander to Hawaii
Good Morning Al,
It is nice to hear such a knowledgeable response about the young man's trip.
I am sure all will be fine.
One thing bothers me though. You have stated a suggestion that running at
peak EGT will give a total burn of 24 GPH. I am not familiar with the engine
involved, but that does seem like a reasonable burn for the power involved.
Since it is a non supercharged engine, chances are that it would be
developing well under sixty-five percent power at that altitude. Still, all
is well.
However, you follow that with an ancient Old Wives Tale by implying that
operating leaner than that will burn valves.
Since the highest temperature in the cylinder head will be obtained about
forty or fifty degrees Fahrenheit richer than peak EGT, and, by definition,
the Exhaust Gas Temperature will be lower when running more lean than Peak
Exhaust Gas Temperature, why would any valve burning occur?
Twenty gallons per hour, ten gallons per engine, will definitely provide
less power to the airframe and there is no advantage in economy by operating
more than about twenty lean of peak EGT at the cylinder pressures involved,
but there is absolutely nothing involved that would cause a valve to be
burned.
Valves get burned by encountering gasses that are above their design limits.
That can only happen when high temperatures and insufficient cooling is
present. The most likely time for valve burning to occur is at high power
and mixtures that are rich of peak EGT but not rich enough to provide proper
cooling of the engine. The more likely culprit is a high power climb with a
mixture that is not rich enough. Fifty to one hundred degrees rich of peak
is about the worst place any engine can be operated at any power above
sixty-five percent.
Lycoming does present the number of seventy-five percent as being critical
while Continental likes to use the number sixty-five as the magic number,
but both manufacturers will agree that cruise mixtures leaner than peak EGT
at sixty-five percent power are unlikely to hurt any engine that is in
conformance with it's type certificate. If it is full of crud from running
too rich, something may stop a valve from closing. That could cause a valve
to be burned.
However, running any engine at sixty-five percent power and a mixture that
is leaner than that which will provide peak EGT can do nothing other than
make a valve less likely to be burned.
Comments encouraged!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 6/18/2007 4:49:35 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
alh1@juno.com writes:
fuel burn for a straight 500 at about 7500 feet at peak egt would be
about 24 gph. i know i will hear from guys that can get 20 gph, but
they burn valves an it is cheaper to burn fuel.
_____
See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> .
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Commander-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
i do not have flight track, does anyone know if N7846C made it to hnl?
al hoffman
_____________________________________________________________
Looking for business phone systems? Click here to reduce your phone bills by up
to 50%.
http://track.juno.com/s/lc?u=http://tagline.untd.us/fc/CAaCX096rak3qsOSMBQZrXF5HkqWqplV/
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Ben Whitfield |
This may help you find N8111G and CF-LBD
Name : WHITFIELD, BENJAMIN JAMES PATON
Airman's Address : 12 ARDAVEN PL
LONDON ONTARIO, N6C 1H5, CANADA
FAA Region : Northwest/Mountain
Airman Certificates : Private Pilot (foreign based)
Airplane Single and Multi Engine Land
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
According to Flight Aware, it was diverted.
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N7846C
In a message dated 06/18/07 13:44:44 Central Daylight Time, alh1@juno.com writes:
N7846C
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Ben Whitfield |
Interesting! So now we've got a Ben Whitfield and a Ben Widtfield, the
latter being President of Atlas Aircraft. Obviously two separate guys.
Thanks Bert!
----- Original Message -----
From: BertBerry1
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 7:48 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Ben Whitfield
This may help you find N8111G and CF-LBD
Name : WHITFIELD, BENJAMIN JAMES PATON
Airman's Address : 12 ARDAVEN PL
LONDON ONTARIO, N6C 1H5, CANADA
FAA Region : Northwest/Mountain
Airman Certificates : Private Pilot (foreign based)
Airplane Single and Multi Engine Land
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: MoGas STC & LOP |
ARRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHH! LOP
The purpose of LOP operations is to decrease wear and tear on the engine meaning
CHT and intracylinder pressures. The purpose is not to save $ by reducing fuel
flow. It will take 3 years of fuels savings to return the investment in monitoring
equipment.
I have run a GTSIO 520K and J LOP for hundreds of hours with no valve or cylinder
problems and an IO 540 for close to a thousand LOP hrs with no issues.
When LOP_CHTs are less, peak intracylinder pressures are less and fuel consumption
is down. These are demonstrable facts not hearsay. It is no longer true as
espoused in the old wives tales that "fuel is a cheap coolant"
There is no reason you cannot go beyond TBO running LOP.
Now the key to safe effective LOP ops is doing it correctly.
1 You need balanced injectors. They don't have to be GAMI you can do it yourself
with quarter sizes. All cylinders need to hit peak EGT near simultaneously.
2. You need to temp monitor all cylinders simultaneousl yes you need an engine
monitor. You also need a fuel flow guage that is accurate.
3. You need to quickly establish your numbers and not spend a lot of time leaning
through the peak. You need to establish fuel flows for various power settings
and altitudes.
ARRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHH! MOGAS
Lycoming, I doubt, will ever agree MoGas is Okay.
If there is an STC it is not held by LYcoming and it is an STC for a specific engine-aircraft-year
designation.
The myths about MoGas are
....Too much Chlorine
....Too much Sulfur
....Alcohol in the fuel
....Not enough Octane
....Less BTUs than AVgas
....You need the lead for valve guide lubricant
The chlorine and sulfur are non issues. Cessna suggest a pint of alcohol per xx
gallons in the winter to prevent fuel line freezing. Alcohol can cause problems
with some seals and some of the older fuel hoses but most of these are out
of the system.
Octane ratings only signify antiknock characteristics and have naught to do with
energy levels. The lead is there for antiknock purposes.
The problems with MoGas
Lower vaporization pressure. It will vapor lock a lot easier than 100LL.
Things that predispose to vapor lock are, heat. bends in the fuel line, high points
in the fuel line, fuel lines going from smaller to larger. Thus the airframe
plays a role in the STC process.
To run MoGas you need a fuel line that is as straight as possible, well insulated,
and preferably constantly is going up hill. It should remin the same size
throughout or restrict to smaller sizes as it goes towards the engine. Lower compression
engines do better than high compression.
MoGas has regional additives for EPA temp and altitude differences. These additives
are often seasonal and breakdown rather quickly (months) leaving that nasty
residue you see on your mower and your home gas cans. This stuff tend to gunk
up carburators and injectors.
O 540s and IO 540s should run well on Mogas if there are no problems in the fuel
distribution system and you keep the entire system clean.
High performance turboed engines I am not so sure and probably would not try MoGas.
Most MoGas Stcs are owned by Petersen Aviation http://www.autofuelstc.com/autofuelstc/pa/intro.html
or EAA Experimental Aircraft Association. I do not know of an STC for an Aerocommander
Twin.
On Mo Gas however I will defer to the wisdom of our Bill Hamilton who I think discussed
this issue at length long ago on the old forum.
--------
Milt
2003 F1 Rocket
2006 Radial Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=119211#119211
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Lycoming GO480 RPM and Oil Pressure Problem |
In a message dated 6/17/2007 8:13:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
blbarron@bellsouth.net writes:
Has anyone else had a similar experience with RPM or oil pressure on this
type of engine? The engine has 1200 hours SMOH.
The seals in the gearbox are probaly worn out allowing oil to bypas. With
low oil pressuer the prop will attemt to feather, henc low RPM. Sorry for the
bad news, but that is probaly it. jb
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Eatern Airlines |
In a message dated 6/17/2007 5:42:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
dongirod@bellsouth.net writes:
I was flying the Portland, Seattle, Atlanta flights L-1011 and A-300's about
25 years ago.
Yep ,that would be him. jb
************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Commander to Hawaii |
Folks,
Look up "Pelican's Perch", and find a raft of material supporting LOP
operations for long engine life and maximum fuel/cost efficiency.
A word of caution, theoretical and actual hottest cylinder are not
necessarily the same, to get the best results you need a probe on
each cylinder.
The whole issue was explored at a Coroners Inquest here several years
ago, "Aggressive Leaning" was a claim made for the cause of an engine failure.
This was comprehensively demolished as a cause, Deakin at Pelican's
Perch played a major roll.
Cheers,
Bill Hamilton
----------
At 03:52 AM 20/06/2007, you wrote:
>I know the LOP debate, and some folks' experience with engines
>holding to TBO while running LOP, has changed many, including my,
>perception. I ran my 500 ROP for years and have never had any
>problems with the engines. I burned 22 gph, exactly twice as much as
>my Twin Comanche, so I wonder whether my EGT was not calibrated correctly.
>If I remember correctly, the EGT operated only off the #1 cylinder?
>I don't know.
>Perhaps the other cylinders were actually running LOP and held up quite fine.
>
>Nico
>
>
>----------
>From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of DP
>Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 8:45 AM
>To: commander-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: Lean Of Peak EGT?? Was: Commander-List: Commander to Hawaii
>
>Well put Old Bob!
>
> * In all of the many hours of operating my 500B the red knobs
> were always agressively moved aftward from the moment of startup to
> shutdown. There is no way that sufficient heat can be produced at a
> 65% power setting to damage anything. I consistently see 24 GPH
> block fuel burns. The sweet spot is 2300 rpm/22inches @ 7-10K. 175
> KTS TAS all day long. The exhaust color is a light dove gray.
> Always run full rich in the climb and your engines will be happy.
>
>Dennis N6273X
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:BobsV35B@aol.com>BobsV35B@aol.com
>To: <mailto:commander-list@matronics.com>commander-list@matronics.com
>Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 3:59 AM
>Subject: Lean Of Peak EGT?? Was: Commander-List: Commander to Hawaii
>
>Good Morning Al,
>
>It is nice to hear such a knowledgeable response about the young
>man's trip. I am sure all will be fine.
>
>One thing bothers me though. You have stated a suggestion that
>running at peak EGT will give a total burn of 24 GPH. I am not
>familiar with the engine involved, but that does seem like a
>reasonable burn for the power involved. Since it is a non
>supercharged engine, chances are that it would be developing well
>under sixty-five percent power at that altitude. Still, all is well.
>
>However, you follow that with an ancient Old Wives Tale by implying
>that operating leaner than that will burn valves.
>
>Since the highest temperature in the cylinder head will be obtained
>about forty or fifty degrees Fahrenheit richer than peak EGT, and,
>by definition, the Exhaust Gas Temperature will be lower when
>running more lean than Peak Exhaust Gas Temperature, why would any
>valve burning occur?
>
>Twenty gallons per hour, ten gallons per engine, will definitely
>provide less power to the airframe and there is no advantage in
>economy by operating more than about twenty lean of peak EGT at the
>cylinder pressures involved, but there is absolutely nothing
>involved that would cause a valve to be burned.
>
>Valves get burned by encountering gasses that are above their design
>limits. That can only happen when high temperatures and insufficient
>cooling is present. The most likely time for valve burning to occur
>is at high power and mixtures that are rich of peak EGT but not rich
>enough to provide proper cooling of the engine. The more likely
>culprit is a high power climb with a mixture that is not rich
>enough. Fifty to one hundred degrees rich of peak is about the worst
>place any engine can be operated at any power above sixty-five percent.
>
>Lycoming does present the number of seventy-five percent as being
>critical while Continental likes to use the number sixty-five as the
>magic number, but both manufacturers will agree that cruise mixtures
>leaner than peak EGT at sixty-five percent power are unlikely to
>hurt any engine that is in conformance with it's type certificate.
>If it is full of crud from running too rich, something may stop a
>valve from closing. That could cause a valve to be burned.
>
>However, running any engine at sixty-five percent power and a
>mixture that is leaner than that which will provide peak EGT can do
>nothing other than make a valve less likely to be burned.
>
>Comments encouraged!
>
>Happy Skies,
>
>Old Bob
>AKA
>Bob Siegfried
>Ancient Aviator
>Stearman N3977A
>Brookeridge Air Park LL22
>Downers Grove, IL 60516
>630 985-8503
>
>In a message dated 6/18/2007 4:49:35 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
>alh1@juno.com writes:
>fuel burn for a straight 500 at about 7500 feet at peak egt would be
>about 24 gph. i know i will hear from guys that can get 20 gph, but
>they burn valves an it is cheaper to burn fuel.
>
>
>----------
>See what's free at <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503>AOL.com.
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Lycoming GO480 RPM and Oil Pressure Problem |
JB,
Thanks for the bad news. It's better than not knowing.
Paul
_____
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
YOURTCFG@aol.com
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Lycoming GO480 RPM and Oil Pressure Problem
In a message dated 6/17/2007 8:13:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
blbarron@bellsouth.net writes:
Has anyone else had a similar experience with RPM or oil pressure on this
type of engine? The engine has 1200 hours SMOH.
The seals in the gearbox are probaly worn out allowing oil to bypas. With
low oil pressuer the prop will attemt to feather, henc low RPM. Sorry for
the bad news, but that is probaly it. jb
_____
See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> .
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | commander radios |
I just pulled a bunch of old radios (ADF, transponder, B4 autopilot, all the
wires, actuators, control heads from the front
panel) out of my 500B. Increased carrying load! Anybody interested in
this stuff? ADF still working fine when I removed it - B4 didn't work
( was both electrical and vaccum powered). So if anybody wants it -
let me know I am in Temple, Texas
bobf
254 721 1450
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | commander radios |
I just pulled a bunch of old radios (ADF, transponder, B4 autopilot, all the
wires, actuators, control heads from the front
panel) out of my 500B. Increased carrying load! Anybody interested in
this stuff? ADF still working fine when I removed it - B4 didn't work
( was both electrical and vaccum powered). So if anybody wants it -
let me know I am in Temple, Texas
bobf
254 721 1450
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: commander radios |
Robert, What brand is the ADF and is the antenna good?
Jim Addington (Denton, Texas)
N444BD
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Feldtman
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 9:26 PM
Subject: Commander-List: commander radios
I just pulled a bunch of old radios (ADF, transponder, B4 autopilot,
all the wires, actuators, control heads from the front panel) out of my
500B. Increased carrying load! Anybody interested in this stuff? ADF
still working fine when I removed it - B4 didn't work ( was both
electrical and vaccum powered). So if anybody wants it - let me know I
am in Temple, Texas
bobf
254 721 1450
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|