Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:36 AM - Re: VIBRATION (Harry Merritt)
2. 11:23 AM - Re: Was : Re: Now Operating LOP (BillLeff1@aol.com)
3. 11:35 AM - Re: Was : Re: Now Operating LOP (BillLeff1@aol.com)
4. 12:32 PM - Re: Was : Re: Now Operating LOP (BobsV35B@aol.com)
5. 02:05 PM - Re: Was : Re: Now Operating LOP (cybersuperstore)
6. 02:08 PM - Re: Was : Re: Now Operating LOP (cybersuperstore)
7. 03:42 PM - Re: VIBRATION (lloyd silverman)
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 |
|
Take out the injectors and have thim cleaned1
Harry
----- Original Message -----
From: lloyd silverman
To: commander-list
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 8:37 PM
Subject: Commander-List: VIBRATION
HARRY, DYNAMIC BALANCE OF THE 500B RT ENGINE DID THE TRICK. NOTE THERE
WAS A DIFFERENTIAL IN THE AMOUNT OF GREASE IN EACH BLADE HUB WHICH
CORRECTING HELPED.
IVE GOT ONE MORE PROBLEM ON THE RIGHT SIDE WHICH IS A PUZZLE . THE
FUEL FLOW METER INDICATES 150pct OF NORMAL FOR ANY GIVEN POWER SETTING.
ITS NOT THE METER AS I SWOPED LEFT WITH RIGHT AND THE PROBLEM FOLLOWED
TO THE LEFT FLOW METER. ANY IDEAS WILL BE APPRECIATED. THANKS,LLOYD
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: | Re: Now Operating LOP |
That is a carbureted engine. I I would run it 50-75 deg. rich.
50 if it is smooth.
Bill
In a message dated 5/4/2010 10:18:23 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
amg3636@hotmail.com writes:
Bill,
What is your opnion as to mixture on my straight 500 with O540's??
Roland Gilliam AC 6291B
____________________________________
From: BillLeff1@aol.com
Subject: Re: Was : Re: Commander-List: Now Operating LOP
Forgot, you are right, we had better gas back then. If you follow the
Commander POH you will be running at peek. Lycoming does show LOP operation.
THEY ALSO SELL CYLINDERS!!!!!!!!!! lOTS OF THEM. You guys can argue and
theorize all you want. But from a maintenance shop point of view. Run rich or
carry cylinders with you!
Bill Leff
In a message dated 4/22/2010 1:02:45 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
cloudcraft@aol.com writes:
Lycoming definitely advocated running the IGSO-540 Lean of Peak --
somewhere in the diaspora of Commander stuff in my garage I have an old Lycoming
IGSO-540 operator's manual that shows the temperature-drop curves when
running LoP.
When I was interviewing Jay (forgot his last name), owner of Suburban Air
Freight, for an article in an early Flight Group News (circa 1997), we
discussed how they operated their fleet of AC-680-FLs.
They ran Rich of Peak -- not because of engine cooling: It was to
compensate for low lead AvGas.
The engine was designed around a high lead content fuel and that lead
lubricated the valve guides, which Jay said was their greatest cause of
premature engine removal when running LoP.
Here we have an argument for running RoP based on something far different
than the engine temperature / heat dissipation controversy. That's
something to consider if you're running the older engines born in the era of green
colored AvGas.
Wing Commander Gordon
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jack B. Mills <moe-rosspistons@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 21, 2010 7:22 pm
Subject: Re: Was : Re: Commander-List: Now Operating LOP
Nico,
Due to the fact that the IGSO540 has only one injector nozzle which
squirts directly into the supercharger impeller the mixture is pretty well
atomized and even from cylinder to cylinder (at least it has been on all four
engines that have been in my plane). If there is a difference in EGT from
cylinder is is most likely because the flow or air fuel mixture is different
due to valve job, intake port configuration, or some other imbalance in the
air fuel mixture flow rate from cyl. to cyl. I am a huge fan of running
LOP, as the cylinder head temps are much cooler. This of course does cut
down on the horsepower. I sort of figgered this out back in the '80s when
running my top fuel dragster. When I had some money the engine was run rich,
made a lot of horsepower and consumed mountains of parts. When money was
tight I simply ran it so lean that it couldn't hurt its self.
Moe Mills
N680RR
680Fp
From: _cybersuperstore_ (mailto:nico@cybersuperstore.com)
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 5:14 PM
Subject: RE: Was : Re: Commander-List: Now Operating LOP
Hi Bill,
As someone who hasn't yet come to terms with pulling the mixtures to the
cheap side of peak, I still wonder, if one could manage each cylinder
separately such as with GAMI's, whether the IGSO-540's would sustain a good TBO.
I realize it might not be practical as GAMI suggested, but theoretically,
what would prevent these engines from working well LOP with GAMI's?
I assume when you say that the Wright and P&W engines have "a lot more
meat" on the radial cylinders, that there is more aluminum above the gudgeon
pin to dissipate or handle the heat, right? But are the temperatures not
coming down when running LOP?
Thanks
Nico
____________________________________
From: _owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com_
(mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com)
[_mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com_ (mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com?) ] On Behalf Of
_BillLeff1@aol.com_ (mailto:BillLeff1@aol.com)
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 4:39 PM
Subject: Re: Was : Re: Commander-List: Now Operating LOP
Hey guys, I have been flying IGSO-540's and IGO-540's ( I own 2 560F's )
and I would not even consider operating LOP. If you fly per the Commander
manual you will be operating at peek. Everyone I know that operates that way
goes through a lot of cylinders. The operators that fly 50-100 ROP have
little trouble. Fuel is Cheep!
As far as LOP operations, the P&W and Wright engines are designed for it,
Lycomings are not. There is a lot more meat on the radial cylinders.
I spoke with the folks at GAMI about injectors for the 560F. They said
that the IGO-540 fuel and induction system could not be improve enough to
justify the expense.
One of my 560F's has over 7000 hours on it and the same person has done
every overhaul. Also, with the exception of about 200 hours I have know every
operator of the aircraft. It has had one in flight shutdown, That was a
failed valve in the #1 cylinder and the engine was near TBO. We never ran
lean.
Oddly enough I started flying this 560F in 1971. In 1994 I bought it and
am still flying it. What a great airplane!
Bill Leff
In a message dated 4/18/2010 8:31:50 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
_BobsV35B@aol.com_ (mailto:BobsV35B@aol.com) writes:
Good Morning Craig,
My experience with any Aero Commander is now over fifty years old, but I
do have a LOT of time operating various engines on the lean side of peak
EGT.
Back when I was flying early Aero Commanders and Twin Bonanzas I did
occasionally run those engines on the lean side. It was only at low power
settings and we did not have good instrumentation, but I observed no harm at the
time. Further knowledge that I have acquired over the last sixty years has
convinced me that LOP is the way to go IF you have good distribution. The
way I checked for good distribution before modern engine analyzers were
available was to lean for a power drop. If the airplane could be slowed down
about ten MPH via running on the lean side with no roughness, I figured it
was good enough to operate LOP.
I am certainly no engine expert, but I did attend a course taught by
Curtiss Wright engineers in the spring of 1954.
They made the same points that are now presented by the GAMI folks.
I am a believer, but you HAVE to find a method of assuring that each
cylinder is operating at the proper mixture. If you have not yet done so, I urge
you to attend one of the seminars held by folks from GAMI. If you can't
attend in person, take the home study version, but going with a group of
pilots is a lot more fun. (Been there twice and I was a believer in the process
before the folks at GAMI were born! <G>)
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Brookeridge Air Park
Downers Grove, Illinois
Stearman N3977A
In a message dated 4/18/2010 12:37:23 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
_white_rhino_ps@yahoo.com_ (mailto:white_rhino_ps@yahoo.com) writes:
Sure is Nico. Just brought it up from San Diego last weekend. Been
sorting out leaky new fuel cells and the usual squawks. After double clamping
all the connector tubes, thought I had it whipped. Turns out those 10 cent
cork access hole gaskets were leaking after being used a couple of times.
A trip to Napa finally stopped the 5 dollar a gallon drip!!! Rebuilt
engines are running well. Need to dial in the injectors. Talked to the GAMI
folks and they have never done a IGO-540. Could be useful as I already have
the GEM CHT/EGT monitor and the JPI dual fuel flow so I can see what is
going on pretty well. Has anyone in the gang had experience with this yet?
The idea of running them 50 degrees LOP makes me cringe!
Annual coming late summer so I'm collecting the bits now. I need to
replace the aux fuel valves and that should finish with those issues. Annual
time with the nacelles down is the time for that! The donor plane has been a
big help with parts and bits. My pals have noticed that the donor plane
so far has been the best plane investment in Commanders I've made to date!
Not a lot of air time this year due to work but I'm hoping the fall will
see more action. I put 747H up for sale, but so far, it's all
looky-loos....
Craig
____________________________________
From: cybersuperstore <_nico@cybersuperstore.com_
(mailto:nico@cybersuperstore.com) >
Sent: Sat, April 17, 2010 8:03:00 PM
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Re: Commanders
I lost my Outlook on my laptop and had to restore everything to a new
desktop this past week. So, I am going through all the emails because the mail
server lost the data that told it which email messages were already on my
laptop and started downloading 10,000+ messages from more than a year ago.
I am taking the opportunity to clean some of the trash out and sorting them
back into their respected folders while I am at it.
Yesterday I stopped over at Camarillo airport for a coffee and to walk
around to see if I see familiar planes. And there was N747H, which I didn't
thing anything of except to gawk into the windows and move on. Tonight I saw
this message from almost a year ago. I am almost certain that I have seen
747H on the apron before, but cannot be sure.
Craig, is she still under your command?
Thanks
Nico
____________________________________
From: _owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com_
(mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com)
[_mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com_ (mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com?) ] On Behalf Of
craig kennedy
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2009 10:45 AM
Subject: Commander-List: Re: Commanders
Hello gang,
Just thought I would update the group that 560F N747H, stored for over a
year in the middle of nowhere ( Paris , TX ), is running again with rebuilt
engines and props. Richard Cam at Aeroquest did a great job getting all
the problems sorted out. Just a few more days to tidy up the remaining
issues and she should be up for fun and adventure. Maybe even a trip for the
annual get together.
Craig
_http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List_
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List)
_http://forums.matronics.com_ (http://forums.matronics.com/)
_http://www.matronics.com/contribution_
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
===================================
t href="_http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List_
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List)
">_http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List_ (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List)
===================================
ms.matronics.com/">_http://forums.matronics.com_
(http://forums.matronics.com/)
==========
tp://_www.matronics.com/contribution_
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ">_http://www.matronics.com/contribution_
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
==========
===================================
t href="_http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List_
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List)
">_http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List_ (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List)
===================================
ms.matronics.com/">_http://forums.matronics.com_
(http://forums.matronics.com/)
==========
tp://_www.matronics.com/contribution_
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ">_http://www.matronics.com/contribution_
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
==========
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="_http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List_
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List)
">_http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List_ (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List)
href="_http://forums.matronics.com_ (http://forums.matronics.com/)
">_http://forums.matronics.com_ (http://forums.matronics.com/)
href="_http://www.matronics.com/contribution_
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ">_http://www.matronics.com/c_ (http://www.matronics.com/c)
==========
ator?Commander-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
==========
ttp://forums.matronics.com
==========
ibution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
==========
t
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
st">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
ronics.com ww.matronics.com/contribution
____________________________________
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with
Hotmail. _Get busy._
(http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5)
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
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: Now Operating LOP |
Ever hear of Max Conrad. He set many world distance records in a Comanche
and Twin Comanche running over square. He would run 1500 rpm and all the
MP
he could get up to 24 inches. The only thing was he had to rely on Lycomin
g
to calculate the BMEP for him. It was very critical. Don't remember if he
ran LOP. I doubt it.
Bill
In a message dated 5/4/2010 4:39:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wjrhamilton@optusnet.com.au writes:
Folks,
I certainly concur about the IO-540.
Although in Pipers, not Commanders, and before GAMI, we operated a 260B
Comanche and two Aztec, all fitted with EGT on all cylinders, and ran LOP
based on the hottest cylinder. We also ran =9CLow RPM/High boost.
We regularly
obtained around 3000h TBO, after a top at 1000h, which eliminated burning
valve seats.
The fuel saving are quite dramatic, for the same HP output, the cruise
altitudes usually meant that about 65% was all that was available.
The difference between =9Chigh rpm/low boost=9D and running
ROP, and the
reverse plus LOP was the difference between a fuel flow in cruise of abou
t 12.5
US GPH per engine v. about 9 US GPH. For an engine like the IO-540, even
the oil looked different at a 50h oil/filter change, with LOP the oil was
not a black goo, but closer to the original colour of fresh oil. By
definition, running ROP or LOP is cooler than peak EGT, but as test cell
and real
world experience has shown, to maximise the chance of detonation, run a
mixture about 50 degrees ROP.
There are some amazing old wife=99s tales about LOP, particularly
from A&Ps.
We have even had the rubbish turn up, down here in AU, from the ATSB and
as Coroner=99s Courts evidence. One smarter than the average Corone
r decided
that the only way to sort out the old wife=99s tales was to take hi
s court to
GAMI, and commission actual test cell verification. This completely
disproved claims made in an ATSB report about a particular very controver
sial
fatal.
This really upset the =9Clean to rough running, the rich until it
smooths out
=9D brigade, who have no idea how variable the actual cylinder by
cylinder
distribution is in an engine that only has =9Cstandard=9D inje
ctors. For any
engine that can benefit from GAMIs, fitting them and a multi-point EGT, an
d
running LOP is a very positive investment in ensuring long and reliable
minimum cost life.
To tear down an LOP operated IO-540 at 2000h, and find that the first run
barrels are within limits to just deglaze and fit new rings helps make fo
r
a minimum cost overhaul.
Regards,
Bill Hamilton
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Vorm
baum
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: Was : Re: Commander-List: Now Operating LOP
Hi Bill,
I've had many conversations with John about how he runs his airplanes. I
recall that he is a fan of LOP operations. He averages several hundred hou
rs
beyond TBO for all his engines, and saves gas money in the process. His
airplanes seem to run very well and he's never mentioned an undue number
of
replacement cylinders.
Incidentally, my "old" engine, which is at TBO, has always run
beautifully LOP. My "new" engine, which was mid-time, never did...and a co
uple of
years ago, after a decade running it ROP, it broke a ring, burned up a jug
,
and cracked the case, leading to an OH.
My B model is turbonormalized and I cruise at 75% power. I'm a big fan of
LOP operations, as the happy-lean engine seems to support. I'll be getting
GAMIs for both engines soon.
The IGSO-540 series may not be a candidate for LOP due to its fuel deliver
y
method and higher stress condition, but the IO-540 direct drive engines
seem custom made for it.
Cheers,
John
sent by my DROID. Please pardon any typos.
On May 3, 2010 10:59 PM, <_BillLeff1@aol.com_ (mailto:BillLeff1@aol.com)
>
wrote:
Hey, Ken, While I am not a fan of LOP operations, If there is an engine
and installation it might work on it would be the 500B/U/S. With proper
baffling, those engines run so cool heat is not a problem.
That is why Bob Hoover could cut his engines at full power and then
restart them and immediately go back to full power for his air show. He
rarely
had to change cylinders. They just never got hot enough to crack.
However, those airplanes need all the power they can get. LOP may cause
a
power loss that is un acceptable reduction of speed.
Wonder how John Towner operates his flock (30+ aircraft) ? He has to
squeeze every nickel out of his aircraft because his livelihood depends
on it.
Does he prefer to spend money on fuel or engines?
Bill Leff
In a message dated 4/22/2010 9:15:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
_KenWHyde@aol.com_ (mailto:KenWHyde@aol.com) writes:
Know this is about the IGSO540 & IGO540 but what are the thoughts of LOP
on the narrow deck IO540's??
Thanks,
Ken
>
> ==========
> t href="_http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Lis._
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Lis.) ..
nt>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
========================
============
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List)
========================
============
========================
============
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
========================
============
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: Now Operating LOP |
Good Morning Bill,
Funny you should mention Max.
We worked together for a short period of time when he was involved with a
couple of other folks operating an FBO at Joliet, Illinois. We called it
Max
Conrad Aviation.
We had many discussions as to how he operated in that long range cruise
operation and it was always on the lean side IF good distribution could be
obtained.
He used a procedure similar to what I have advocated in that he would see
how much airspeed he could lose before things got rough. With perfect
distribution you can lean down until all cylinders quit firing and you wil
l know
that, at that particular power setting, you have perfect distribution. If
the engine gets rough before the airspeed drops, distribution stinks. If
while leaning you get a small increase in airspeed then a drop of ten MPH
before the onset of roughness, distribution is pretty good.
Max did a lot of experimentation using carburetor heat and other modes to
find a point of good distribution. He did know enough about engines to
realize that maximum power for any certain airflow was obtained at some
point
slightly richer than what we now call LOP. In those days, we did not have
EGT
gauges and we worked in reference to best power.
As has been mentioned here often, best power comes well rich of peak EGT.
The absolutely hottest place you can run any cylinder is fifty rich of pea
k.
At 65 percent power or below, that is fine. At a higher power you are
pushing the engine very close to a bad operating range.
When fuel distribution is bad, one cylinder may be at peak EGT, another
might be running lean of peak EGT and another well rich of peak EGT.
If distribution is bad and you really need the power, the engine should be
run at least 150 rich of peak EGT. That will assure that all cylinders ar
e
getting enough fuel for the power desired.
If you are looking for maximum range, as Max was, you tried to run on the
lean side when at all practical. Max had it worked out where he could almo
st
always run well lean of what we would now call LOP.
I always enjoyed talking to Max about lean side operations because he was
one of the few pilots of that era who understood what we were doing and wh
at
were the problems that could be encountered.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
In a message dated 5/5/2010 1:35:57 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
BillLeff1@aol.com writes:
Ever hear of Max Conrad. He set many world distance records in a Comanche
and Twin Comanche running over square. He would run 1500 rpm and all the
MP
he could get up to 24 inches. The only thing was he had to rely on Lycomin
g
to calculate the BMEP for him. It was very critical. Don't remember if he
ran LOP. I doubt it.
Bill
In a message dated 5/4/2010 4:39:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wjrhamilton@optusnet.com.au writes:
Folks,
I certainly concur about the IO-540.
Although in Pipers, not Commanders, and before GAMI, we operated a 260B
Comanche and two Aztec, all fitted with EGT on all cylinders, and ran LOP
based on the hottest cylinder. We also ran =9CLow RPM/High boost.
We regularly
obtained around 3000h TBO, after a top at 1000h, which eliminated burning
valve seats.
The fuel saving are quite dramatic, for the same HP output, the cruise
altitudes usually meant that about 65% was all that was available.
The difference between =9Chigh rpm/low boost=9D and running
ROP, and the
reverse plus LOP was the difference between a fuel flow in cruise of abou
t 12.5
US GPH per engine v. about 9 US GPH. For an engine like the IO-540, even
the oil looked different at a 50h oil/filter change, with LOP the oil was
not a black goo, but closer to the original colour of fresh oil. By
definition, running ROP or LOP is cooler than peak EGT, but as test cell
and real
world experience has shown, to maximise the chance of detonation, run a
mixture about 50 degrees ROP.
There are some amazing old wife=99s tales about LOP, particularly
from A&Ps.
We have even had the rubbish turn up, down here in AU, from the ATSB and
as Coroner=99s Courts evidence. One smarter than the average Corone
r decided
that the only way to sort out the old wife=99s tales was to take hi
s court to
GAMI, and commission actual test cell verification. This completely
disproved claims made in an ATSB report about a particular very controver
sial
fatal.
This really upset the =9Clean to rough running, the rich until it
smooths out
=9D brigade, who have no idea how variable the actual cylinder by
cylinder
distribution is in an engine that only has =9Cstandard=9D inje
ctors. For any
engine that can benefit from GAMIs, fitting them and a multi-point EGT, an
d
running LOP is a very positive investment in ensuring long and reliable
minimum cost life.
To tear down an LOP operated IO-540 at 2000h, and find that the first run
barrels are within limits to just deglaze and fit new rings helps make for
a minimum cost overhaul.
Regards,
Bill Hamilton
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Vorm
baum
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: Was : Re: Commander-List: Now Operating LOP
Hi Bill,
I've had many conversations with John about how he runs his airplanes. I
recall that he is a fan of LOP operations. He averages several hundred hou
rs
beyond TBO for all his engines, and saves gas money in the process. His
airplanes seem to run very well and he's never mentioned an undue number
of
replacement cylinders.
Incidentally, my "old" engine, which is at TBO, has always run
beautifully LOP. My "new" engine, which was mid-time, never did...and a
couple of
years ago, after a decade running it ROP, it broke a ring, burned up a ju
g,
and cracked the case, leading to an OH.
My B model is turbonormalized and I cruise at 75% power. I'm a big fan of
LOP operations, as the happy-lean engine seems to support. I'll be getting
GAMIs for both engines soon.
The IGSO-540 series may not be a candidate for LOP due to its fuel
delivery method and higher stress condition, but the IO-540 direct drive
engines
seem custom made for it.
Cheers,
John
sent by my DROID. Please pardon any typos.
On May 3, 2010 10:59 PM, <_BillLeff1@aol.com_ (mailto:BillLeff1@aol.com)
>
wrote:
Hey, Ken, While I am not a fan of LOP operations, If there is an engine
and installation it might work on it would be the 500B/U/S. With proper
baffling, those engines run so cool heat is not a problem.
That is why Bob Hoover could cut his engines at full power and then
restart them and immediately go back to full power for his air show. He
rarely
had to change cylinders. They just never got hot enough to crack.
However, those airplanes need all the power they can get. LOP may cause
a
power loss that is un acceptable reduction of speed.
Wonder how John Towner operates his flock (30+ aircraft) ? He has to
squeeze every nickel out of his aircraft because his livelihood depends
on it.
Does he prefer to spend money on fuel or engines?
Bill Leff
In a message dated 4/22/2010 9:15:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
_KenWHyde@aol.com_ (mailto:KenWHyde@aol.com) writes:
Know this is about the IGSO540 & IGO540 but what are the thoughts of LOP
on the narrow deck IO540's??
Thanks,
Ken
>
> ==========
> t href="_http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Lis._
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Lis.) ..
nt>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
========================
===========
t
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matr
onics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
========================
============
ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com =========
========================
===
tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
========================
============
========================
============
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List)
========================
============
========================
============
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
========================
============
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: Now Operating LOP |
I found this about Max. I just had to know more about him:
http://soloflights.org/conrad_data_e.html
Very interesting reading. There are links across the top of the page that
contain more of the flights themselves.
Nico
_____
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: Was : Re: Commander-List: Now Operating LOP
Good Morning Bill,
Funny you should mention Max.
We worked together for a short period of time when he was involved with a
couple of other folks operating an FBO at Joliet, Illinois. We called it Max
Conrad Aviation.
We had many discussions as to how he operated in that long range cruise
operation and it was always on the lean side IF good distribution could be
obtained.
He used a procedure similar to what I have advocated in that he would see
how much airspeed he could lose before things got rough. With perfect
distribution you can lean down until all cylinders quit firing and you will
know that, at that particular power setting, you have perfect distribution.
If the engine gets rough before the airspeed drops, distribution stinks. If
while leaning you get a small increase in airspeed then a drop of ten MPH
before the onset of roughness, distribution is pretty good.
Max did a lot of experimentation using carburetor heat and other modes to
find a point of good distribution. He did know enough about engines to
realize that maximum power for any certain airflow was obtained at some
point slightly richer than what we now call LOP. In those days, we did not
have EGT gauges and we worked in reference to best power.
As has been mentioned here often, best power comes well rich of peak EGT.
The absolutely hottest place you can run any cylinder is fifty rich of peak.
At 65 percent power or below, that is fine. At a higher power you are
pushing the engine very close to a bad operating range.
When fuel distribution is bad, one cylinder may be at peak EGT, another
might be running lean of peak EGT and another well rich of peak EGT.
If distribution is bad and you really need the power, the engine should be
run at least 150 rich of peak EGT. That will assure that all cylinders are
getting enough fuel for the power desired.
If you are looking for maximum range, as Max was, you tried to run on the
lean side when at all practical. Max had it worked out where he could almost
always run well lean of what we would now call LOP.
I always enjoyed talking to Max about lean side operations because he was
one of the few pilots of that era who understood what we were doing and what
were the problems that could be encountered.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
In a message dated 5/5/2010 1:35:57 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
BillLeff1@aol.com writes:
Ever hear of Max Conrad. He set many world distance records in a Comanche
and Twin Comanche running over square. He would run 1500 rpm and all the MP
he could get up to 24 inches. The only thing was he had to rely on Lycoming
to calculate the BMEP for him. It was very critical. Don't remember if he
ran LOP. I doubt it.
Bill
In a message dated 5/4/2010 4:39:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wjrhamilton@optusnet.com.au writes:
Folks,
I certainly concur about the IO-540.
Although in Pipers, not Commanders, and before GAMI, we operated a 260B
Comanche and two Aztec, all fitted with EGT on all cylinders, and ran LOP
based on the hottest cylinder. We also ran "Low RPM/High boost. We regularly
obtained around 3000h TBO, after a top at 1000h, which eliminated burning
valve seats.
The fuel saving are quite dramatic, for the same HP output, the cruise
altitudes usually meant that about 65% was all that was available.
The difference between "high rpm/low boost" and running ROP, and the reverse
plus LOP was the difference between a fuel flow in cruise of about 12.5 US
GPH per engine v. about 9 US GPH. For an engine like the IO-540, even the
oil looked different at a 50h oil/filter change, with LOP the oil was not a
black goo, but closer to the original colour of fresh oil. By definition,
running ROP or LOP is cooler than peak EGT, but as test cell and real world
experience has shown, to maximise the chance of detonation, run a mixture
about 50 degrees ROP.
There are some amazing old wife's tales about LOP, particularly from A&Ps.
We have even had the rubbish turn up, down here in AU, from the ATSB and as
Coroner's Courts evidence. One smarter than the average Coroner decided that
the only way to sort out the old wife's tales was to take his court to GAMI,
and commission actual test cell verification. This completely disproved
claims made in an ATSB report about a particular very controversial fatal.
This really upset the "lean to rough running, the rich until it smooths out"
brigade, who have no idea how variable the actual cylinder by cylinder
distribution is in an engine that only has "standard" injectors. For any
engine that can benefit from GAMIs, fitting them and a multi-point EGT, and
running LOP is a very positive investment in ensuring long and reliable
minimum cost life.
To tear down an LOP operated IO-540 at 2000h, and find that the first run
barrels are within limits to just deglaze and fit new rings helps make for a
minimum cost overhaul.
Regards,
Bill Hamilton
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
Vormbaum
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: Was : Re: Commander-List: Now Operating LOP
Hi Bill,
I've had many conversations with John about how he runs his airplanes. I
recall that he is a fan of LOP operations. He averages several hundred hours
beyond TBO for all his engines, and saves gas money in the process. His
airplanes seem to run very well and he's never mentioned an undue number of
replacement cylinders.
Incidentally, my "old" engine, which is at TBO, has always run beautifully
LOP. My "new" engine, which was mid-time, never did...and a couple of years
ago, after a decade running it ROP, it broke a ring, burned up a jug, and
cracked the case, leading to an OH.
My B model is turbonormalized and I cruise at 75% power. I'm a big fan of
LOP operations, as the happy-lean engine seems to support. I'll be getting
GAMIs for both engines soon.
The IGSO-540 series may not be a candidate for LOP due to its fuel delivery
method and higher stress condition, but the IO-540 direct drive engines seem
custom made for it.
Cheers,
John
sent by my DROID. Please pardon any typos.
On May 3, 2010 10:59 PM, <BillLeff1@aol.com> wrote:
Hey, Ken, While I am not a fan of LOP operations, If there is an engine and
installation it might work on it would be the 500B/U/S. With proper
baffling, those engines run so cool heat is not a problem.
That is why Bob Hoover could cut his engines at full power and then restart
them and immediately go back to full power for his air show. He rarely had
to change cylinders. They just never got hot enough to crack.
However, those airplanes need all the power they can get. LOP may cause a
power loss that is un acceptable reduction of speed.
Wonder how John Towner operates his flock (30+ aircraft) ? He has to squeeze
every nickel out of his aircraft because his livelihood depends on it. Does
he prefer to spend money on fuel or engines?
Bill Leff
In a message dated 4/22/2010 9:15:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
KenWHyde@aol.com writes:
Know this is about the IGSO540 & IGO540 but what are the thoughts of LOP on
the narrow deck IO540's??
Thanks,
Ken
>
> ==========
> t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Lis...
nt>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
t
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Commander-List
===================================
ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
===================================
tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
===================================
t
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Commander-List
===================================
ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
===================================
tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
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: Now Operating LOP |
Wouldn't he run the risk of pre-ignition (detonation?) on 1500 x 24"?
Although lower RPM would result in less fuel flow because less air is
pumped, it does sound extreme. Even though Lycoming calculated the BMEP,
one's hair still tends to stand on end.
Interesting, though.
Nico
_____
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BillLeff1@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: Was : Re: Commander-List: Now Operating LOP
Ever hear of Max Conrad. He set many world distance records in a Comanche
and Twin Comanche running over square. He would run 1500 rpm and all the MP
he could get up to 24 inches. The only thing was he had to rely on Lycoming
to calculate the BMEP for him. It was very critical. Don't remember if he
ran LOP. I doubt it.
Bill
In a message dated 5/4/2010 4:39:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
wjrhamilton@optusnet.com.au writes:
Folks,
I certainly concur about the IO-540.
Although in Pipers, not Commanders, and before GAMI, we operated a 260B
Comanche and two Aztec, all fitted with EGT on all cylinders, and ran LOP
based on the hottest cylinder. We also ran "Low RPM/High boost. We regularly
obtained around 3000h TBO, after a top at 1000h, which eliminated burning
valve seats.
The fuel saving are quite dramatic, for the same HP output, the cruise
altitudes usually meant that about 65% was all that was available.
The difference between "high rpm/low boost" and running ROP, and the reverse
plus LOP was the difference between a fuel flow in cruise of about 12.5 US
GPH per engine v. about 9 US GPH. For an engine like the IO-540, even the
oil looked different at a 50h oil/filter change, with LOP the oil was not a
black goo, but closer to the original colour of fresh oil. By definition,
running ROP or LOP is cooler than peak EGT, but as test cell and real world
experience has shown, to maximise the chance of detonation, run a mixture
about 50 degrees ROP.
There are some amazing old wife's tales about LOP, particularly from A&Ps.
We have even had the rubbish turn up, down here in AU, from the ATSB and as
Coroner's Courts evidence. One smarter than the average Coroner decided that
the only way to sort out the old wife's tales was to take his court to GAMI,
and commission actual test cell verification. This completely disproved
claims made in an ATSB report about a particular very controversial fatal.
This really upset the "lean to rough running, the rich until it smooths out"
brigade, who have no idea how variable the actual cylinder by cylinder
distribution is in an engine that only has "standard" injectors. For any
engine that can benefit from GAMIs, fitting them and a multi-point EGT, and
running LOP is a very positive investment in ensuring long and reliable
minimum cost life.
To tear down an LOP operated IO-540 at 2000h, and find that the first run
barrels are within limits to just deglaze and fit new rings helps make for a
minimum cost overhaul.
Regards,
Bill Hamilton
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
Vormbaum
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 4:21 PM
Subject: Re: Was : Re: Commander-List: Now Operating LOP
Hi Bill,
I've had many conversations with John about how he runs his airplanes. I
recall that he is a fan of LOP operations. He averages several hundred hours
beyond TBO for all his engines, and saves gas money in the process. His
airplanes seem to run very well and he's never mentioned an undue number of
replacement cylinders.
Incidentally, my "old" engine, which is at TBO, has always run beautifully
LOP. My "new" engine, which was mid-time, never did...and a couple of years
ago, after a decade running it ROP, it broke a ring, burned up a jug, and
cracked the case, leading to an OH.
My B model is turbonormalized and I cruise at 75% power. I'm a big fan of
LOP operations, as the happy-lean engine seems to support. I'll be getting
GAMIs for both engines soon.
The IGSO-540 series may not be a candidate for LOP due to its fuel delivery
method and higher stress condition, but the IO-540 direct drive engines seem
custom made for it.
Cheers,
John
sent by my DROID. Please pardon any typos.
On May 3, 2010 10:59 PM, <BillLeff1@aol.com> wrote:
Hey, Ken, While I am not a fan of LOP operations, If there is an engine and
installation it might work on it would be the 500B/U/S. With proper
baffling, those engines run so cool heat is not a problem.
That is why Bob Hoover could cut his engines at full power and then restart
them and immediately go back to full power for his air show. He rarely had
to change cylinders. They just never got hot enough to crack.
However, those airplanes need all the power they can get. LOP may cause a
power loss that is un acceptable reduction of speed.
Wonder how John Towner operates his flock (30+ aircraft) ? He has to squeeze
every nickel out of his aircraft because his livelihood depends on it. Does
he prefer to spend money on fuel or engines?
Bill Leff
In a message dated 4/22/2010 9:15:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
KenWHyde@aol.com writes:
Know this is about the IGSO540 & IGO540 but what are the thoughts of LOP on
the narrow deck IO540's??
Thanks,
Ken
>
> ==========
> t href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Lis...
nt>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
http://forums.matronics.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
t
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronic
s.com/Navigator?Commander-List
===================================
ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
===================================
tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
===================================
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 |
|
THANKS,LLOYD
----- Original Message -----
From: Harry Merritt<mailto:avtectwo@cfl.rr.com>
To: commander-list@matronics.com<mailto:commander-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 7:27 AM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: VIBRATION
Take out the injectors and have thim cleaned1
Harry
----- Original Message -----
From: lloyd silverman<mailto:LLOYDSSS11@MSN.COM>
To: commander-list<mailto:commander-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 8:37 PM
Subject: Commander-List: VIBRATION
HARRY, DYNAMIC BALANCE OF THE 500B RT ENGINE DID THE TRICK. NOTE
THERE WAS A DIFFERENTIAL IN THE AMOUNT OF GREASE IN EACH BLADE HUB WHICH
CORRECTING HELPED.
IVE GOT ONE MORE PROBLEM ON THE RIGHT SIDE WHICH IS A PUZZLE . THE
FUEL FLOW METER INDICATES 150pct OF NORMAL FOR ANY GIVEN POWER SETTING.
ITS NOT THE METER AS I SWOPED LEFT WITH RIGHT AND THE PROBLEM FOLLOWED
TO THE LEFT FLOW METER. ANY IDEAS WILL BE APPRECIATED. THANKS,LLOYD
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.mat
ronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List<http://www.matronics.co
m/Navigator?Commander-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
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! --
|