My engine quit!

[Paul Tomblin]

I was doing my BFR last night in my club's Piper Lance (in case you're not
familiar: it has retractable gear and a IO-540 fuel injected engine). We
finished up with a bunch of touch and goes, demonstrating short, soft,
etc. The last landing, the instructor pulled the throttle and had me do a
forced landing. I had no trouble making the runway, and rolled off the
runway and over the hold short line. As I was tuning the ground frequency
on the radio, the engine died. And I was unable to restart it and neither
was the instructor - I ended up having to call the FBO to tow me back to
the tie down line.

It wasn't until some hours later that it hit me - during the forced
approach, I had the throttle at idle, the mixture at rich and the boost
pump on. Which is exactly how you prime it for a cold start - except for
starting you only do it for about 3 seconds, and this was for the whole
duration of the forced approach. So I figure I probably flooded it. So
what's the answer? Do you turn off the boost pump when doing practice
forced approaches? What about normal approaches? Does that mean turning
on the boost pump has to become a normal action on go-arounds and touch
and goes?

--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
You'll get access to my computer room right after you pry the Halon test
key out of my cold, lifeless hands.
-- Simon Travaglia

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
>I was doing my BFR last night in my club's Piper Lance (in case you're not
> familiar: it has retractable gear and a IO-540 fuel injected engine). We
> finished up with a bunch of touch and goes, demonstrating short, soft,
> etc. The last landing, the instructor pulled the throttle and had me do a
> forced landing. I had no trouble making the runway, and rolled off the
> runway and over the hold short line. As I was tuning the ground frequency
> on the radio, the engine died. And I was unable to restart it and neither
> was the instructor - I ended up having to call the FBO to tow me back to
> the tie down line.
>
> It wasn't until some hours later that it hit me - during the forced
> approach, I had the throttle at idle, the mixture at rich and the boost
> pump on. Which is exactly how you prime it for a cold start - except for
> starting you only do it for about 3 seconds, and this was for the whole
> duration of the forced approach. So I figure I probably flooded it. So
> what's the answer? Do you turn off the boost pump when doing practice
> forced approaches? What about normal approaches?

Boost pump only during normal ops/normal throttle.

> Does that mean turning
> on the boost pump has to become a normal action on go-arounds and touch
> and goes?

What does the POM say?

[Jose]

> The last landing, the instructor pulled the throttle and had me do a
> forced landing. I had no trouble making the runway, and rolled off the
> runway and over the hold short line. As I was tuning the ground frequency
> on the radio, the engine died.

It's a good thing Jay wasn't cleard to land behind you. That would be
another massive thread. :)

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[john smith[_2_]]

In article >,
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

> I was doing my BFR last night in my club's Piper Lance (in case you're not
> familiar: it has retractable gear and a IO-540 fuel injected engine). We
> finished up with a bunch of touch and goes, demonstrating short, soft,
> etc. The last landing, the instructor pulled the throttle and had me do a
> forced landing. I had no trouble making the runway, and rolled off the
> runway and over the hold short line. As I was tuning the ground frequency
> on the radio, the engine died. And I was unable to restart it and neither
> was the instructor - I ended up having to call the FBO to tow me back to
> the tie down line.
>
> It wasn't until some hours later that it hit me - during the forced
> approach, I had the throttle at idle, the mixture at rich and the boost
> pump on. Which is exactly how you prime it for a cold start - except for
> starting you only do it for about 3 seconds, and this was for the whole
> duration of the forced approach. So I figure I probably flooded it. So
> what's the answer? Do you turn off the boost pump when doing practice
> forced approaches? What about normal approaches? Does that mean turning
> on the boost pump has to become a normal action on go-arounds and touch
> and goes?

Thanks for this one, Paul.
This situation hadn't occured to me, but it's one I could easily
encounter with either the Arrow or the Cherokee Six I fly.
Tip of the hat!

[d&tm]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
> I was doing my BFR last night in my club's Piper Lance (in case you're not
> familiar: it has retractable gear and a IO-540 fuel injected engine). We
> finished up with a bunch of touch and goes, demonstrating short, soft,
> etc. The last landing, the instructor pulled the throttle and had me do a
> forced landing. I had no trouble making the runway, and rolled off the
> runway and over the hold short line. As I was tuning the ground frequency
> on the radio, the engine died. And I was unable to restart it and neither
> was the instructor - I ended up having to call the FBO to tow me back to
> the tie down line.
>
> It wasn't until some hours later that it hit me - during the forced
> approach, I had the throttle at idle, the mixture at rich and the boost
> pump on. Which is exactly how you prime it for a cold start - except for
> starting you only do it for about 3 seconds, and this was for the whole
> duration of the forced approach. So I figure I probably flooded it. So
> what's the answer? Do you turn off the boost pump when doing practice
> forced approaches? What about normal approaches? Does that mean turning
> on the boost pump has to become a normal action on go-arounds and touch
> and goes?
>
Very interesting scenario. The procedure I was taught in the Warrior was to
turn the boost pump off at 500' AGL on the climb out. . You turn it back on
again during downwind landing checks ( 1000' AGL) , So if I was doing a go
around the boost pump would already be on. Our forced landing practice was
almost always done from about 3000 ft or higher. although a couple of times
my instructor pulled the power on downwind but before I had done the checks
, so booster pump would be off, and obviously you wouldnt turn it on again.
Occaisionally he would pull power after takeoff but just momentarily to
check that I would lower the nose immediately. So in short I have never been
faced with your situation where the power was pulled after you have set up
for landing with the boost pump on.
But it does make sense to me that this might result in flooding the engine.
I suspect you are right about turning off the boost pump, but I will be
looking out for some more experienced advice here.
Terry

[Private]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
>I was doing my BFR last night in my club's Piper Lance (in case you're not
> familiar: it has retractable gear and a IO-540 fuel injected engine). We
> finished up with a bunch of touch and goes, demonstrating short, soft,
> etc. The last landing, the instructor pulled the throttle and had me do a
> forced landing. I had no trouble making the runway, and rolled off the
> runway and over the hold short line. As I was tuning the ground frequency
> on the radio, the engine died. And I was unable to restart it and neither
> was the instructor - I ended up having to call the FBO to tow me back to
> the tie down line.
>
> It wasn't until some hours later that it hit me - during the forced
> approach, I had the throttle at idle, the mixture at rich and the boost
> pump on. Which is exactly how you prime it for a cold start - except for
> starting you only do it for about 3 seconds, and this was for the whole
> duration of the forced approach. So I figure I probably flooded it. So
> what's the answer? Do you turn off the boost pump when doing practice
> forced approaches? What about normal approaches? Does that mean turning
> on the boost pump has to become a normal action on go-arounds and touch
> and goes?
>
> --
> Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/

Did you perform the (required?) engine clearing procedures during the
decent?

What does the POH say about closed throttle decents?

Happy landings,

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Private" > said:
>Did you perform the (required?) engine clearing procedures during the
>decent?

No.

>What does the POH say about closed throttle decents?

Nothing. All I can find is that for normal approach you use mixture on
full and electric fuel pump on.

--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
Computers are not intelligent. They only think they are.

[Private]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
> In a previous article, "Private" > said:
>>Did you perform the (required?) engine clearing procedures during the
>>decent?
>
> No.
>

My training schools required SOP was to use carb heat (if avail.) before
(and during) and clear the engine frequntly during any extended closed
throttle operation such as engine out practice and testing. IIRC the
frequency was every 300-500ft. IIRC there is a TC requirement for clearing
during flight testing and that proper clearing is part of the task grading
as per the published Flight Test Standards. There is also a restriction on
'over-clearing' when coming up short. IIRC some examiners say that they
will perform or instruct when to clear.

>>What does the POH say about closed throttle decents?
>
> Nothing. All I can find is that for normal approach you use mixture on
> full and electric fuel pump on.
>

Is there a proceedure for rapid decent such as a passenger health prolem?

ISTM that mixture is altitude dedendant but I do not know yours. Many seem
to benifit (reduced lead fouling of spark plugs) from aggresive leaning when
operating at closed or partial throttle.

Could there be a problem with any fuel or pressure regulaing valves?

If this is a club plane regularly used for training then I suspect that this
has happened before and the club should have developed an approved
proceedure to deal with the problem.

I would be concerned about operational failure should increased power be
required for go-round or if coming up short.

Happy landings,

> --
> Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
> Computers are not intelligent. They only think they are.

[John Godwin]

"Private" > wrote in
news:FaUQh.27133$DE1.14038@pd7urf2no:

> Did you perform the (required?) engine clearing procedures during
> the decent?

IIRC, Cessna POH suggests that, I don't recall it for PA32 (fuel
injected)

> What does the POH say about closed throttle decents?

My Lance POH doesn't indicate anything special about closed throttle
descents.

--

[The Visitor]

You call it a boost pump, this is a turbocharged engine?
Was it on high or low?

Paul Tomblin wrote:
> I was doing my BFR last night in my club's Piper Lance (in case you're not
> familiar: it has retractable gear and a IO-540 fuel injected engine). We
> finished up with a bunch of touch and goes, demonstrating short, soft,
> etc. The last landing, the instructor pulled the throttle and had me do a
> forced landing. I had no trouble making the runway, and rolled off the
> runway and over the hold short line. As I was tuning the ground frequency
> on the radio, the engine died. And I was unable to restart it and neither
> was the instructor - I ended up having to call the FBO to tow me back to
> the tie down line.
>
> It wasn't until some hours later that it hit me - during the forced
> approach, I had the throttle at idle, the mixture at rich and the boost
> pump on. Which is exactly how you prime it for a cold start - except for
> starting you only do it for about 3 seconds, and this was for the whole
> duration of the forced approach. So I figure I probably flooded it. So
> what's the answer? Do you turn off the boost pump when doing practice
> forced approaches? What about normal approaches? Does that mean turning
> on the boost pump has to become a normal action on go-arounds and touch
> and goes?
>

[Viperdoc[_4_]]

I had a similar scenario with IO-470s that would quit at idle on the roll
out. Windmilling on short final kept them running. Turned out the fuel
pressure was too high from the engine driven fuel pump at idle, and the idle
mixture was too retch. (boost pump off)

It might have quit in the same way yours did, but standard technique is to
keep a few inches of power on until just over the threshold (otherwise sink
rate was too high) , so there were no opportunities to quit.

It does get your attention.

[bsalai]

Paul Tomblin wrote:
snip

So I figure I probably flooded it.

snip\

can you flood an engine while it is running? I'm not an engine guy, but
with the throttle at minimum, not much fuel should be going in, and this
is not much different from taxiing, except you would usually lean for
that. Might be running richer than you like, but that happens during a
normal landing since you are running at low rpm's, throttle low, mixture
rich, fuel pump on, pretty much what you were doing, except in your case
the throttle was lower for longer. You might expect some fouling if you
ran like this for a while, but I don't see how it can flood as long as
the spark plugs are doing that sparky thing they do.

Of course, I could be all wet here.

Brad

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Private" > said:
>(and during) and clear the engine frequntly during any extended closed
>throttle operation such as engine out practice and testing. IIRC the

I always thought "clearing the engine" was an old instructors tale, like
shock cooling.

>>>What does the POH say about closed throttle decents?
>>
>> Nothing. All I can find is that for normal approach you use mixture on
>> full and electric fuel pump on.
>>
>
>Is there a proceedure for rapid decent such as a passenger health prolem?

Nope. I was taught to do a steep turn for that.

>ISTM that mixture is altitude dedendant but I do not know yours. Many seem
>to benifit (reduced lead fouling of spark plugs) from aggresive leaning when
>operating at closed or partial throttle.

We definitely find a benefit to agressive leaning on the ground.

>If this is a club plane regularly used for training then I suspect that this
>has happened before and the club should have developed an approved
>proceedure to deal with the problem.

It's not generally used for training, but our club requires that you do
your BFR every year, and do it in the highest category plane you intend to
fly that year, so I have to do it in the Lance or I'll be stuck flying
PA28s all year.

>I would be concerned about operational failure should increased power be
>required for go-round or if coming up short.

Yeah, me too. That's why I'm researching this issue. Today or tomorrow I
plan to start the plane on the ground and see if the engine floods and
dies with the throttle at idle and the mixture full rich and the electric
pump on.

--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
"Panic kills"
-- Rick Grant (quoting RCAF pilot training)

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, The Visitor > said:
>You call it a boost pump, this is a turbocharged engine?
>Was it on high or low?

It's officially just called the "electric fuel pump", as opposed to the
engine driven fuel pump, but we call it "boost pump" for short.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
When C++ is your hammer, everything looks like a thumb.
-- Steven M. Haflich

[Roy Smith]

(Paul Tomblin) wrote:
> >ISTM that mixture is altitude dedendant but I do not know yours. Many seem
> >to benifit (reduced lead fouling of spark plugs) from aggresive leaning when
> >operating at closed or partial throttle.
>
> We definitely find a benefit to agressive leaning on the ground.

My club has a 180 HP Arrow which has always been prone to plug fouling
during taxi (even across a couple of engine changes through the years). I
was taught to use "aggressive leaning" on the ground to solve that. I have
faithfully done so, and taught numerous students to do the same. I have
found that it really does cut down on plug fouling, or at least I've
convinced myself that's true.

Then, we recently put one of those electronic fuel computer thingies in the
plane. Great gadget -- it tells you your fuel flow to the 10/th of a
gallon per hour. Accurate as hell. Really tells you what's going on to a
degree that was impossible with the old analog gauges.

The only problem is, the damn thing says the fuel flow doesn't change one
iota between full rich and "aggressively leaned" with the engine running at
1000 RPM on the ground :-)

[Maxwell]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
>
> I always thought "clearing the engine" was an old instructors tale, like
> shock cooling.
>

I have always been taught to clear the engine occasional during throttle off
operations. But I learned to fly 30 years ago. Have most CFIs stopped
teaching it?

And what about "shock cooling"? I flew a jump plane years ago, and the owner
always limited decent speeds and forbided complete throttle off operation. I
can't remember for sure, but I think he insisted a max of 85 mph and 12" or
so.

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Maxwell" > said:
>And what about "shock cooling"? I flew a jump plane years ago, and the owner
>always limited decent speeds and forbided complete throttle off operation. I
>can't remember for sure, but I think he insisted a max of 85 mph and 12" or
>so.

I've talked to sail plane tow pilots, and they climb at max power for
several minutes, and then close the throttle and dive for the ground at
Vne. If shock cooling was a real problem, they'd be losing a jug every
day.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
"Grove giveth and Gates taketh away."
- Bob Metcalfe (inventor of Ethernet) on the trend of hardware speedups
not being able to keep up with software demands

[Maxwell]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
> In a previous article, "Maxwell" > said:
>>And what about "shock cooling"? I flew a jump plane years ago, and the
>>owner
>>always limited decent speeds and forbided complete throttle off operation.
>>I
>>can't remember for sure, but I think he insisted a max of 85 mph and 12"
>>or
>>so.
>
> I've talked to sail plane tow pilots, and they climb at max power for
> several minutes, and then close the throttle and dive for the ground at
> Vne. If shock cooling was a real problem, they'd be losing a jug every
> day.
>
>

I don't doubt it Paul. I always wondered how valid it was, expecially since
we were using a 182 with cowl flaps. But it sure delayed our decents.

[Steve Schneider]

bsalai wrote:
> Paul Tomblin wrote:
> snip
>
> So I figure I probably flooded it.
>
> snip\
>
> can you flood an engine while it is running? I'm not an engine guy, but
> with the throttle at minimum, not much fuel should be going in, and this
> is not much different from taxiing, except you would usually lean for
> that. Might be running richer than you like, but that happens during a
> normal landing since you are running at low rpm's, throttle low, mixture
> rich, fuel pump on, pretty much what you were doing, except in your case
> the throttle was lower for longer. You might expect some fouling if you
> ran like this for a while, but I don't see how it can flood as long as
> the spark plugs are doing that sparky thing they do.
>
> Of course, I could be all wet here.
>
> Brad
>

I've managed to do this once at a high altitude airport. We've flown
into Big Bear (L35 eleveation 6752) many times in the Turbo Lance II. On
one particular landing the engine coughed and died as we rolled off the
runway. Mixture was just a bit richer than it should have been. Never
had it do that at lower elevations. Hot starts are always a pain, worse
so at elevation it seems -- but I did get it running again.

Paul, what is the field elevation where you are flying?

Steve
PA-32RT-300T

[JGalban via AviationKB.com]

Paul Tomblin wrote:
>In a previous article, "Private" > said:
>>(and during) and clear the engine frequntly during any extended closed
>>throttle operation such as engine out practice and testing. IIRC the
>
>I always thought "clearing the engine" was an old instructors tale, like
>shock cooling.
>

Nope. The most likely time to foul plugs is when an engine is at idle or
very low power settings, which is why leaning during taxi is so popular. The
combustion process gets very dirty at low power settings. The fixed timing
is optimized for high rpms, so it's not optimal with the throttle back. Also,
combustion temperatures drop to the point where lead in the fuel is not
completely vaporised, which leads to deposits.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via http://www.aviationkb.com

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, Steve Schneider > said:
>Paul, what is the field elevation where you are flying?

Low. 559 feet.

--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
"The way I see it, unless we each conform, unless we obey orders, unless
we follow our leaders blindly, there is no possible way we can remain
free." - John Ashcroft^W^WFrank Burns

[Newps]

Steve Schneider wrote:

>
> I've managed to do this once at a high altitude airport. We've flown
> into Big Bear (L35 eleveation 6752) many times in the Turbo Lance II. On
> one particular landing the engine coughed and died as we rolled off the
> runway. Mixture was just a bit richer than it should have been. Never
> had it do that at lower elevations. Hot starts are always a pain, worse
> so at elevation it seems -- but I did get it running again.


I see this every summer. We're here at 3650 MSL and you flatlanders fly
in here and go to full rich to land. Engine dies on rollout and you tie
up the runway while you pour good gas after bad trying to restart your
flooded beast.

[The Visitor]

I ask because the boost pump on mine is just that. I always thought it
was part of the difference being turbocharged vs not. It is suppose to
be off for TO and landing, unlike an electric pump. In low it is just
used (never had to) to fix a rough engine or vapour lock. High is a
massive fuel flow that will flood the engine if the mixture isn't moved
almost to the cut off position. High is only to be used in even of an
engine driven pump failure. The rocker switch is also gated to prevent
inadvertant actifation.

John

Paul Tomblin wrote:

> In a previous article, The Visitor > said:
>
>>You call it a boost pump, this is a turbocharged engine?
>>Was it on high or low?
>
>
> It's officially just called the "electric fuel pump", as opposed to the
> engine driven fuel pump, but we call it "boost pump" for short.
>
>

[Steve Schneider]

Newps wrote:
>
>
> Steve Schneider wrote:
>
>>
>> I've managed to do this once at a high altitude airport. We've flown
>> into Big Bear (L35 eleveation 6752) many times in the Turbo Lance II.
>> On one particular landing the engine coughed and died as we rolled off
>> the runway. Mixture was just a bit richer than it should have been.
>> Never had it do that at lower elevations. Hot starts are always a
>> pain, worse so at elevation it seems -- but I did get it running again.
>
>
>
> I see this every summer. We're here at 3650 MSL and you flatlanders fly
> in here and go to full rich to land. Engine dies on rollout and you tie
> up the runway while you pour good gas after bad trying to restart your
> flooded beast.
>


There are many 'flatlanders' who fly into high altitude airports without
having had proper instruction on operating in that environment. The
typical problem is the high density altitude, overloaded departure that
ends up costing lives -- it happens a little too often at Big Bear.

That said, in many years of flying in and out of Big Bear (we have our
own tie down and keep a car at the airport, since we're up there quite
regularly) I haven't seen aircraft stalled on the runway or taxiways due
to a flooded engine being a common problem. In my case, I was perhaps a
1/4"-1/2" richer than normal on the mixture to keep the CHT down on a
particularly hot day (the turbo Lance is known for poor engine cooling
due to the cowl design), but far from full rich. However on any given
day, if you wander over to the fuel pit you'll often find the
un-initiated 'flatlanders' draining their battery trying in vain to
restart a flooded, hot engine after fueling.

When I learned to fly at NAS Alameda, the club would not permit pilots
to fly into airports above some specific elevation (which I've now long
forgotten) until they had logged a high altitude check out with a club
instructor. My indoctrination was in a Cardinal RG at Lake Tahoe back
in '81, by cracky. I know there currently are clubs down here in
flatland San Diego that don't have a similar requirement, but they
should. No doubt it would save some lives.

Steve

[Jack Allison]

john smith wrote:

> This situation hadn't occured to me, but it's one I could easily
> encounter with either the Arrow or the Cherokee Six I fly.
> Tip of the hat!

I can only speak for the Arrow. Checking the POH for our plane, it
calls for fuel pump on, and mixture "set". At my home field this means
mixture full rich.

I was taught "Pump, Red, Blue, Greens" (Fuel pump on, Mixture full Rich,
Prop full forward, 3 green landing gear indicators) call out on short
final. The only time I've hand any issue with this is at a high
altitude airport where I had the mixture too rich (wasn't full rich but
was rich enough that when I turned off at the taxiway, the engine quit).


--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL-Instrument Airplane

"To become a Jedi knight, you must master a single force. To become
a private pilot you must strive to master four of them"
- Rod Machado

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

[Thomas Borchert]

Roy,

> The only problem is, the damn thing says the fuel flow doesn't change one
> iota between full rich and "aggressively leaned"
>

Ours does. Same engine. Guess your "aggressive" isn't aggressive enough.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Hilton]

"d&tm" > wrote in message
...
> Very interesting scenario. The procedure I was taught in the Warrior was
> to
> turn the boost pump off at 500' AGL on the climb out. . You turn it back
> on
> again during downwind landing checks ( 1000' AGL)

Why would you want to turn off your fuel pump at arguably the worst possible
moment to have an engine failure? Take off, don't touch a thing till 1000'
AGL, then touch things gently and cautiously (I'm referring to engine
controls here, not gear, flaps etc). If you're in the pattern, leave the
fuel pump on the whole time. If you're really concerned about the engine
pump failing and wanting to check that, land, taxi off the runway, turn off
the fuel pump, and taxi back, then turn your fuel pump on again before
takeoff.

Hilton

[Mike 'Flyin'8']

>"d&tm" > wrote in message
...
>> Very interesting scenario. The procedure I was taught in the Warrior was
>> to
>> turn the boost pump off at 500' AGL on the climb out. . You turn it back
>> on
>> again during downwind landing checks ( 1000' AGL)
>
>Why would you want to turn off your fuel pump at arguably the worst possible
>moment to have an engine failure? Take off, don't touch a thing till 1000'
>AGL, then touch things gently and cautiously (I'm referring to engine
>controls here, not gear, flaps etc). If you're in the pattern, leave the
>fuel pump on the whole time. If you're really concerned about the engine
>pump failing and wanting to check that, land, taxi off the runway, turn off
>the fuel pump, and taxi back, then turn your fuel pump on again before
>takeoff.
>
>Hilton


I too was taught to leave the pump on the whole time if you are to
remain in the pattern. However, I was also taught to leave the pump
on until established at cruise altitude.

Mike Flyin' 8

[Luke Skywalker]

On Apr 4, 8:31 am, (Paul Tomblin) wrote:
> I was doing my BFR last night in my club's Piper Lance (in case you're not
> familiar: it has retractable gear and a IO-540 fuel injected engine). We
> finished up with a bunch of touch and goes, demonstrating short, soft,

> --
> Paul Tomblin /
> You'll get access to my computer room right after you pry the Halon test
> key out of my cold, lifeless hands.
> -- Simon Travaglia


What I would be interested to know is what did Maintenance find?

There is zero chance in my view that you flooded an engine under
combustion.

I have little or no experience with the engine in the Lance but a lot
with the Lyc's in a PIper Commanche (twin and single...up to the 400)
and this definatly should NOT happen.

Robert

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, Luke Skywalker > said:
>On Apr 4, 8:31 am, (Paul Tomblin) wrote:
>> I was doing my BFR last night in my club's Piper Lance (in case you're not
>> familiar: it has retractable gear and a IO-540 fuel injected engine). We
>> finished up with a bunch of touch and goes, demonstrating short, soft,
>
>What I would be interested to know is what did Maintenance find?

It got flown a few times before the mechanic looked at it, and he was
baffled too, but whatever was wrong with it could have cleared up. It's
been starting and flying fine - no roughness, no indication of fouled
plugs, etc.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://blog.xcski.com/
I trust the cut & paste under Win2k's telnet about as far as I can
comfortably spit a rat.
-- John Burnham