Turbo engine maintenance

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 08:31:24 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

Well, TC probably does have credibility, but until he SHOWS me some DATA,
I'm not satisfied to take it on faith. He denigrates those who have done a
pretty good job of SUPPORTING their positions with data...real, empirical
data. His rejoinders? His 17 years experience.

Are you freaking high? Are you able to read and comprehend the English
language (or at least the variant used the US of A)?

Find one sentence in this thread where I "denigrated" anything or
anybody, other than you.

Your remarks about Braly.


My initial query concerning sheep quoting Avweb you have reinforced
time and time again, without any help or encouragement on my part.

snip

So FINALLY, TC, tell me that the Lycoming TIO-540 can/cannot be run LOP.
Don't give me that original BS that it required special skills, training,
blah, blah, blah.

You sir, have the 'group persona of an idiot.

Yeah...I don't agree with you or at least I'm not willing to take your
"expertise" at face value.

As for "group personna", you may want to refer back to your second post with
it's condescending tone.


Again, I would
respectfully suggest that you contact the guy that wrote the freaking
book on GA LOP and ask him whether he recommends that a newbie owner
(with limited/no experience of advanced engine management) of a Turbo
Lance should take-off, grab the mixture control and yank, i.e...

Nice "personna" there.

You might want to contact the LOP/GAMI guy and ask him first. Based on
personal experience, turbo-supercharged TIO-540's have detonation
issues during certain operating regimes. Am thinking the GAMI guy saw
the same issues during testing.


Unlike some other people that post in these groups, I post primarily
about what I have allegedly seen-not what I have read, heard, or
dreamed about after eating peyote. On occasion, I do relate what other
people in the industry that I know and respect have allegedly told me
first-person, therefore...

Hey, nice personna there...

If I had relevant LOP related info, I would share it. When I was
getting out of the TIO-540 game, GAMI was just starting to do testing
on Lycoming engines. I am familiar enuff with LOP theory and operation
to know that before performing "the big pull" you should probably get
educated, not just read about it in the 'groups.


TC, I'm sure you're knowledgeable and have great experience, but in the
words of the old advertisement, "You have to earn your wings every day"
(or
in this case, to convince ME).

Where you are mistaken in this case is that I have the need/desire to
convince "you" of anything.

Well, you sure shoot off your mouth as some "authority"...

Or that I have any concern of my
"credibility" whatsoever in any aspect of my 'group correspondence.
I'm certain that my penis length (assuming I have one) is sufficient,
and I couldn't give a flying-**** whether or not you can **** farther
than I can.

For all you know, I've never set foot in a hangar in my life, let
alone worked on an airplane. By the same yardstick, with all the
advanced knowledge and expertise in quoting other online sources
you've shown me-it's possible you've got a poster of an A36 and a
Tornado Alley Turbo bumpersticker on the wall of your bedroom and like
to masturbate with one hand while typing with the other.

Yeah...your "personna" is really coming through as it did from your first
post on this topic.

The 'groups for me are just like reality TV and daytime drama, only
with enuff GA content to keep me interested. I really should thank
you, you've made an otherwise drab week rather enjoyable.

You've shown me nothing but a way overinflated ego that can't broach being
challenged.

It sure didn't take you long to become shrill and hysterical, did it.

Play your "group personna" games with those here who are into "celebrity"
status (indictive of a mind that never progressed beyond high school).

PLONK

On Sun, 9 Oct 2005 16:50:15 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

PLONK

ROTFLMAO

Thanks again;

TC

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 2 Oct 2005 23:21:21 -0400, "John Doe"
wrote:

below

Can someone tell me their experience with the engine maintenace in
relation
to having to top overhaul the cylinders? I've heard from some owners that
you should only expect about 800 or so hours on the cyliners before having
to get them topped, while others have said if flown properly they should
make it to the engine TBO.

Are the cylinders 800 hours since new nitrides? oversized steels?
chrome? Factory o-haul? name-brand "new limits" o-haul? field o-haul?

Is it intercooled? What power setting used for cruise? Average cruise
altitude? Oil temp at cruise? CHT at cruise? TIT/fuel flow at cruise?
Oil consumption per hour? Calender time since OH? How long did it
typically "sit" without flying? Pretty sure I've mentioned this
before-how many total hours on the exhaust components SINCE NEW?

If the engine in question is not intercooled, has been operated at 75%
@peak TIT (or 50 degrees ROP) regardless of oil temp/CHT, flown
infrequently, it's entirely possible that the e-valve guides are
going/gone and the cam is well on it's way.

If the engine in question is intercooled, has spent most of it's life
with the oil temp at or below 200 degrees F, CHT at or below 400
degrees F, it's still entirely possible that the e-valve guides are
going.

The plane I'm looking to buy has 800 hours SMOH and they haven't touched
the
cylinders since the overhaul. Am I looking at a heavty bill to top the
cylinders soon? (I'm thinking about getting a prebuy done this week) Will
a
compression check tell me what I need or does the A&P have to tear the
engine apart to really tell?

If the engine isn't making metal, and periodic oil analysis looks
good, and the compression is good (no e-valve leaks) there is no
reason "to tear the engine apart". Don't know too many people selling
'planes that are going to let you "tear the engine apart" as part of a
pre-buy.

E-valve leaks on a Lycoming typically means the guides/valves are
trashed. At 800-1000 hours most big-six Lycoming E-valve guides are
marginal. Have personally had them go to TBO without this being an
issue (e-valves don't leak). Have also had them develop e-valve
leakage, requiring repair.

Again, not sure exactly what you are looking for. I've allegedly
maintained a crapload of turbocharged Lycomings for tens of thousands
of hours of operation, but my crystal ball's busted. Have seen S1AD's
go 1400-1600 hours without "cylinder" issues, have seen them with 400
hours that needed the cylinders thrown in a dumpster. It depends on
both the actual overhaul and the shivering mass of tissue between the
seat back and the yoke...

TC

TC,

Thanks for taking the time to comment on my posts. The plane just went into
the shop today for a prebuy and I'll have some words within a day or two on
the status of the engine.

It appears you're not a big fan of the Turbo Lance. What do you recommend
as a better combo? I've look at an A36 but they're quite a bit more cash
for not alot of gain. I think my other option is to give up on the turbo
and just look for a straight tail lance that's in good shape.

"John Doe" wrote in message
news:MUD2f.1804$L24.723@lakeread01...
Thanks for taking the time to comment on my posts. The plane just went
into the shop today for a prebuy and I'll have some words within a day or
two on the status of the engine.

It appears you're not a big fan of the Turbo Lance. What do you recommend
as a better combo? I've look at an A36 but they're quite a bit more cash
for not alot of gain. I think my other option is to give up on the turbo
and just look for a straight tail lance that's in good shape.

John, the used airplane market is pretty efficient and, yes, an A36 is
better in every way than a PA32. When I purchased a Turbo Lance as my first
plane I did it because. it offered a good combination of positive atributes
relative to the price. It is the same at all levels, Piper is low quality
compared to Beech and Citations don't compare to Falcons.

Mike
MU-2

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 18:31:27 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:

You might be surprised that I've corresponded with the Deakin dude,
and WRT "factory" turbo Lycoming ops we tended to agree-go figure.


And what exactly is that?

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 20:43:21 -0400, "John Doe"
wrote:

TC,

Thanks for taking the time to comment on my posts. The plane just went into
the shop today for a prebuy and I'll have some words within a day or two on
the status of the engine.

It appears you're not a big fan of the Turbo Lance. What do you recommend
as a better combo? I've look at an A36 but they're quite a bit more cash
for not alot of gain. I think my other option is to give up on the turbo
and just look for a straight tail lance that's in good shape.

Have allegedly been around the block with the Turbo Lance, the Turbo
Saratoga (fixed-gear and retract-SP) but not the 'toga II TC. Have
been under the hood of a couple of 'toga II's, took one for a ride and
liked what I saw, but they were coming out as I was getting out of the
business-have no real experience with them.

When I got out a few years ago, the Turbo T-Lance was cheaper than
anything else in it's class. Personally, I was never too fond of the
way that they behaved in the air (compared to the T-tail or straight
tail NA Lance, or the Cherokee 6), and don't care for the engine
installation at all.

Unfortunately, and please don't take this personally, it means that
they tended to attract a certain type of owners, and often were not
well-maintained or operated properly. As Mr. R has indicated, it also
meant, however, a few years ago, you could buy a lot of airplane for
less.

The engine/install has recurring AD issues on the exhaust, a funky
up-draft cooling system, and runs HOT. The Turbo 'toga SP installation
is almost identical, and also runs hot, but not quite as hot for some
reason (cruise speed?).

If you look at the Deakin dude's thoughts on max CHT/oil temp with
regard to engine longevity, a stock T T-Lance operated at 75% power at
cruise is going to exceed these numbers during operation at even
slightly elevated OAT's. Basically, a lot of the time it is going to
be a 65% power cruise aircraft.

Even operating at 65% it can be pushing acceptable CHT/oil temp
limits. Put Turbo 'toga upper cowl "gills" on a couple, didn't seem to
help much-but it did help keep the paint on the top cowl from
blistering after shut-down. As I indicated to you in earlier posts,
for whatever reason, the intercooler kit removes most of these
limitations. I'm sorry I don't have more info, but the last I had
heard, the intercooler company's assets had been sold, which is a darn
shame.

Had one intercooled Turbo 'Toga SP that I took care of (before, during
and after the intercooler install), and really, really enjoyed flying
it. I assume the flight characteristics changed from both the tapered
wing and the straight tail. A 300 hp Cherokee Six, or Lance can also
be a nice choice. If you are a flat-lander and not hell-bent for
speed, their performance is better than what you would expect. It is a
lot harder to abuse the normally-aspirated engine, and the
installation condition (baffling, etc) is not as super-critical.

The A36, unfortunately is in a different class. The cruise performance
is excellent, and there really is no comparison between the
construction of the aircraft and it's mechanical systems. Again, as
Mr. R indicated, you don't get something for nothing. They are more
expensive to purchase, but realistically are not really that much more
expensive to maintain (if you compare to the Lance or the retract-SP).

I allegedly had the opportunity to take care of a couple of the
factory IO-550 versions, and converted one to the IO-550
configuration. Never had the opportunity to fly it, but had one show
up on the ramp with an STC-installed 350 HP TIO-540. If that
installation works as well as the Chieftain does, it would be just
about the ultimate A-36. In theory would make real close to the same
power @ 65% as the IO-550 @ 78% (max continuous HP).

Unless things have changed a whole lot in the few years, a clean A36
is as close to a sure thing to buy, fly, and if you don't bend it,
sell at a profit as you get in GA.

Hope some of this helps;

TC