PDA

View Full Version : Aerobatic engine IO-360 AEIO-360 comparison


Jay Moreland
September 25th 04, 05:42 AM
I need to have someone explain to me the advantages of two different
Aerobatic engines: IO-360 with Christen Inverted Oil system VS an
AEIO-360. Are there any inherent benefits of one over the other when
doing acro with negative G maneuvers? Or are they essentially the same?
Can you take any Lycoming IO model (320 or greater) and put on a
Christen system and have it work well?

john smith
September 25th 04, 11:36 PM
does the IO-360 have the stronger crank and other components found in
the AEIO-360?
The last thing you want to have happen is for the prop to go flying off
by itself if the crank breaks.

Jay Moreland wrote:
> I need to have someone explain to me the advantages of two different
> Aerobatic engines: IO-360 with Christen Inverted Oil system VS an
> AEIO-360. Are there any inherent benefits of one over the other when
> doing acro with negative G maneuvers? Or are they essentially the same?
> Can you take any Lycoming IO model (320 or greater) and put on a
> Christen system and have it work well?
>

B. Jensen
October 3rd 04, 09:21 PM
An AEIO-360 has a solid flange crankshaft.

BJ

Jay Moreland wrote:

> I need to have someone explain to me the advantages of two different
> Aerobatic engines: IO-360 with Christen Inverted Oil system VS an
> AEIO-360. Are there any inherent benefits of one over the other when
> doing acro with negative G maneuvers? Or are they essentially the
> same? Can you take any Lycoming IO model (320 or greater) and put on a
> Christen system and have it work well?
>

Jay Moreland
October 4th 04, 07:10 AM
What benefits does a solid flange crankshaft have? Please explain it in
a way that a complete neophyte like myself would understand. I thought
that the AEIO also has some internal holes that help the oil move to
critical areas better. Can you tell me specifically what kind of
aerobatic capabilities or safety factors this gives one, compared with
an IO-360 with a Christen inverted oil? Specifically, would heavy
inverted flight or Advanced or Unlimited flight not be advisable? If
not, why not?

I mainly would just like to learn more about these engines. Can you give
me any web or book references that would answer these types of questions?
Jay

B. Jensen wrote:
> An AEIO-360 has a solid flange crankshaft.
> BJ
>
> Jay Moreland wrote:
>
>> I need to have someone explain to me the advantages of two different
>> Aerobatic engines: IO-360 with Christen Inverted Oil system VS an
>> AEIO-360. Are there any inherent benefits of one over the other when
>> doing acro with negative G maneuvers? Or are they essentially the
>> same? Can you take any Lycoming IO model (320 or greater) and put on a
>> Christen system and have it work well?
>>
>

B. Jensen
October 5th 04, 01:33 AM
Jay,

When doing aerobatics, there are major gyroscopic forces applied to the
crankshaft where the propeller bolts on. (the flange)

This flange is heavy and therefore engine manufactures routinely have
"lightening" holes drilled into them to make them lighter and save
weight overall on the aircraft. Since aerobatic maneuvers cause alot of
(gyroscopic) stress in this area, cracks and / or flange failure can
occur. In order to strengthen this area, at the expense of adding
weight to the aircraft, the AEIO engines have solid flanges without any
lightening holes.

Depending on the type of aerobatics you do, and the type of propeller
you have installed on your aircraft, this becomes more critical.

For instance, in general terms, if a pilot flies "light" aerobatics with
a lightweight wooden prop, a solid flange isn't as important since low
gyroscopic stresses are imposed on the crankshaft flange. However, an
aerobatic pilot that performs maneuvers that create a large amount of
gyroscopic stress, and has a heavier, metal type prop on his plane, a
solid flange would be a must. You have probably noticed that most
airshow performers, and advanced and above competition pilots are using
solid flanges along with lightweight props such as the MT propeller.

As far as the inverted oil system goes, there are different ways to
"plumb" the Christen inverted oil system. Some methods allow better oil
flow in both directions than others. The ideal way to plumb the oil
system is so that oil can be picked up readily in all attitudes of
flight and returned back efficiently to the oil sump when upright.

This involves a whole different discussion once you have the basics of
how the Christen inverted oil system works.

Hope this helps,

BJ


Jay Moreland wrote:

> What benefits does a solid flange crankshaft have? Please explain it
> in a way that a complete neophyte like myself would understand. I
> thought that the AEIO also has some internal holes that help the oil
> move to critical areas better. Can you tell me specifically what kind
> of aerobatic capabilities or safety factors this gives one, compared
> with an IO-360 with a Christen inverted oil? Specifically, would heavy
> inverted flight or Advanced or Unlimited flight not be advisable? If
> not, why not?
>
> I mainly would just like to learn more about these engines. Can you
> give me any web or book references that would answer these types of
> questions?
> Jay
>
> B. Jensen wrote:
>
>> An AEIO-360 has a solid flange crankshaft.
>> BJ
>>
>> Jay Moreland wrote:
>>
>>> I need to have someone explain to me the advantages of two different
>>> Aerobatic engines: IO-360 with Christen Inverted Oil system VS an
>>> AEIO-360. Are there any inherent benefits of one over the other when
>>> doing acro with negative G maneuvers? Or are they essentially the
>>> same? Can you take any Lycoming IO model (320 or greater) and put on
>>> a Christen system and have it work well?
>>>
>>
>

Jay Moreland
October 6th 04, 01:52 AM
Thank you BJ! That was very informative. Any suggestions on reading
material?
Jay

B. Jensen wrote:
> Jay,
>
> When doing aerobatics, there are major gyroscopic forces applied to the
> crankshaft where the propeller bolts on. (the flange)
>
> This flange is heavy and therefore engine manufactures routinely have
> "lightening" holes drilled into them to make them lighter and save
> weight overall on the aircraft. Since aerobatic maneuvers cause alot of
> (gyroscopic) stress in this area, cracks and / or flange failure can
> occur. In order to strengthen this area, at the expense of adding
> weight to the aircraft, the AEIO engines have solid flanges without any
> lightening holes.
> Depending on the type of aerobatics you do, and the type of propeller
> you have installed on your aircraft, this becomes more critical.
> For instance, in general terms, if a pilot flies "light" aerobatics with
> a lightweight wooden prop, a solid flange isn't as important since low
> gyroscopic stresses are imposed on the crankshaft flange. However, an
> aerobatic pilot that performs maneuvers that create a large amount of
> gyroscopic stress, and has a heavier, metal type prop on his plane, a
> solid flange would be a must. You have probably noticed that most
> airshow performers, and advanced and above competition pilots are using
> solid flanges along with lightweight props such as the MT propeller.
>
> As far as the inverted oil system goes, there are different ways to
> "plumb" the Christen inverted oil system. Some methods allow better oil
> flow in both directions than others. The ideal way to plumb the oil
> system is so that oil can be picked up readily in all attitudes of
> flight and returned back efficiently to the oil sump when upright.
> This involves a whole different discussion once you have the basics of
> how the Christen inverted oil system works.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> BJ
>
>
> Jay Moreland wrote:
>
>> What benefits does a solid flange crankshaft have? Please explain it
>> in a way that a complete neophyte like myself would understand. I
>> thought that the AEIO also has some internal holes that help the oil
>> move to critical areas better. Can you tell me specifically what kind
>> of aerobatic capabilities or safety factors this gives one, compared
>> with an IO-360 with a Christen inverted oil? Specifically, would heavy
>> inverted flight or Advanced or Unlimited flight not be advisable? If
>> not, why not?
>>
>> I mainly would just like to learn more about these engines. Can you
>> give me any web or book references that would answer these types of
>> questions? Jay
>>
>> B. Jensen wrote:
>>
>>> An AEIO-360 has a solid flange crankshaft.
>>> BJ
>>>
>>> Jay Moreland wrote:
>>>
>>>> I need to have someone explain to me the advantages of two different
>>>> Aerobatic engines: IO-360 with Christen Inverted Oil system VS an
>>>> AEIO-360. Are there any inherent benefits of one over the other when
>>>> doing acro with negative G maneuvers? Or are they essentially the
>>>> same? Can you take any Lycoming IO model (320 or greater) and put on
>>>> a Christen system and have it work well?
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Google