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 |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
"Dylan Smith" wrote in message ... In article et, Mike Rapoport wrote: ...get somewhere for maitenance. The math works out to one hour of maitenance/training overhead for every productive flight hour which means the plane is effectively only half as fast. It has also pushed the cost/effective flight hour to well over $1000. The thing is - is there an aircraft that WON'T have that overhead that will give you the reliability of the MU-2? Anything turbocharged/piston is likely to need more maintenance and just as much recurrent training. If it's not a high end pressurized turboed piston twin, you end up stooging around at low altitude like the rest of us and that kills your mostly all-weather capability. -- Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net "Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee" Agreed, it is not a problem with the airplane, it is a problem with low utilization, need for specialized maitenance and trainig (neither availible locally).. I would not get another airplane to replace it, the plan is to charter. Mike MU-2 |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message nk.net... "Matt Barrow" wrote in message ... No, it isn't. MOF, it's probably easier as the air temp is colder and thus aerodynamic cooling of the engine compartment will be more efficient. The lower ambient temperatures don't compensate for the decreased mass flow. True, especially if the cowling/baffling is badly done, there isn't an intercooler... and: "There's another hitch in the git-along, with turbos. There are several conditions where they sort of lay down on the job, and you'll see the MP running lower than it ought to. While your engine is converting dollars to noise, it's also converting fuel to energy, and a large part of that energy (and noise) goes out the exhaust stack. That's the whole idea behind the turbo, to recapture some of that lost energy in the exhaust. Anything that reduces that exhaust energy deprives the turbo of its driving force, which causes a loss in turbo RPM, which causes a loss of upper deck pressure, which (you guessed it) causes a loss of MP. If you took the engine into outer space, it couldn't produce any power at all (no air), and the turbo couldn't produce any increase in the MP at all. We don't need to go that high to see the effect, an altitude in the high teens will do it, and the warmer the OAT, the more loss you'll see. On a really hot day on my engine, you might see the full-throttle MP start dropping off at 15,000 feet, on a cold day it might hold full MP to some altitude above 20,000 feet. TATurbo now has an improved intercooler and induction system that is making full redline manifold pressure, at 22,000', lean of peak, even on very hot days." http://www.avweb.com/newspics/pp34_c...uise_17500.jpg (Note the CHT line) From article http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182105-1.html The BIGGEST factor is going to be the MIXTURE. Are they going to be equal, no |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: Duo Discus Turbo - Texas, USA | Mark Zivley | Soaring | 2 | May 4th 05 11:34 PM |
turbo stc? | The Weiss Family | Owning | 21 | October 3rd 04 10:35 PM |
Turbo prop AT-6/SNJ? | frank may | Military Aviation | 11 | September 5th 04 02:51 PM |
Turbo 182: correct mixture for final approach at high altitude? | Barry Klein | Piloting | 38 | January 15th 04 03:25 AM |
A36 Bonanza turbo prop | Jeff | Owning | 46 | January 7th 04 02:37 PM |