![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Come across another thing that has puzzled me (big surprise).
Here's a transcript from the manual: "Under full throttle operations (such as takeoff and climb) the engines of the aircraft have been adjusted to provide 43 inches of manifold pressure at seal level and standard temperature. It is possible to read higher (up to 49 inches of manifold pressure) or lower than 43 inches of hg. manifold pressure when ambient temperatures are higher or lower, respectively, than standard." I tried to explain to myself why the MAP would go up with higher than standard temp, and down with the opposite situation. I came up a blank. So, I'm asking the group. Why does this happen? TIA. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Primarily because the absolute pressure controller senses the
temperature of the induction air between the turbo compressor outlet and the fuel servo and adjusts the "absolute" maximum MAP according to temperature by controlling exhaust wastegate position. When setting up this controller, a temp probe is inserted into the induction airstream and the temperature at max power measured. Using a Lycoming chart, the max MAP is adjusted according to the indicated temperature. MAP/RPM is a relatively crude way of indicating horsepower. In simplest terms, when the induction temp goes up, horsepower goes down-consequently when induction temp goes down, horsepower goes up. The absolute controller, in theory, maintains this temp change/HP curve. But an initial start/rig point must be established after engine installation or absolute controller change. TC |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It is possible to read higher (up to 49 inches of manifold pressure
And the MP gauge is redlined at 40" IIRC - at least the one in my pals's Panther Navajo is. Toecutter's post was correct in that the pressure controller must be set to allow the engine to make its full rated HP allowing for a range of OATs. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote in message
And the MP gauge is redlined at 40" IIRC - at least the one in my pals's Panther Navajo is. The Chieftain has a higher horsepower rating (350 hp) with a higher MAP redline (49"). D. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The Panther Navajo has the 350hp Chieftain engines. IIRC my friend told
me the MP redline is still 40" although on takeoff he normally sees 42-43" |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Colemill has always been good at grey area performance changes.
Typically, when converting to a higher HP engine, they de-rate the install by reduced "redlines" in theory reflecting what is comparable to the original install max TO HP. Then they put in a neat little statement something along the lines of the aircraft will meet or exceed the original performance numbers. TC |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for that.
I was having a hard time understanding what was going on. All makes sense now. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 22:43:28 GMT, "xerj" wrote:
Thanks for that. I was having a hard time understanding what was going on. All makes sense now. Good deal. You flying one? getting ready to fly one? I allegedly useta fix them, and still have details of most of the systems rattling around in my skull. TC |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Unfortunately not at the moment. I have flown one, though. A rickety old
thing used mainly for type endorsements. I'm preparing to get back into flying after a looooooong hiatus, if I can find the spare money.Could still be some months away at the earliest. I'm doing a lot of reading and learning about things I really didn't understand previously, but just did because that was the way I was taught. I find it useful to go through POHs and look at the procedures and the performance charts and explain to myself why things are done the way they are, and why the charts come out the way they do. I found the Chieftan one the other day, and it's a good, complex plane to try to come to theoretical grips with. wrote in message ... On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 22:43:28 GMT, "xerj" wrote: Thanks for that. I was having a hard time understanding what was going on. All makes sense now. Good deal. You flying one? getting ready to fly one? I allegedly useta fix them, and still have details of most of the systems rattling around in my skull. TC |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Book Review: Converting Auto Engines for Experimental Aircraft , Finch | Paul | Home Built | 0 | October 18th 04 10:14 PM |
P-3C Ditches with Four Engines Out, All Survive! | Scet | Military Aviation | 6 | September 27th 04 01:09 AM |
PBJ-1(Navy mitchell) manual and bunch of ac. manuals FS | Nenad Miklusev | Naval Aviation | 0 | April 23rd 04 09:08 PM |
Polikarpov PO-2 manual FS,books & Resin kits FS | Nenad Miklusev | General Aviation | 0 | April 23rd 04 09:07 PM |
FS: Piper Navajo Chieftain 350 Manual | Mike | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | August 7th 03 12:15 AM |