Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Correct Lycoming / Continental engine shutdown procedure (non electrical considerations)

While being billed break-on/off and being cautious about budget, I found there were better times to depart/land than harry-up on taxi or checklist…

I find something like tacho to work for better engine management and give incentives for fuel economy, but you don’t want the guy flying S&L at 1800rpm?

The ultimate billing for renters with the right incentives should be something like Airborn Time + 0.2 for taxi, even if your renter spends ages on the ground he is not eating fuel nor his killing engine

EGSX, United Kingdom

Antonio wrote:

Hmm, I thought you had the 90 amp Ford…either you have few avionics, you leave your strobes, pitot heat and landing light to your ‘entering runway’ checklist or your regulator is better than mine (Zeftronics) or I have some high-resistance elsewhere in the system…

True. 90A Ford with Zeftronic

I do wait with some higher draw switches until Im ready to depart (end of Run-Up ch.List). Pitot, Hot Plate. Hot Prop.
To be honest I don’t think modern avionics pull much amps. I have to pull all the way to idle to see the Low Volt light come on and show a discharge on the Amp meter.

spirit49
LOIH

Oh dear clearly in 40 years in the business 17,000 hours flying and holding a maintenance licence I have learned nothing at all about flying or engines.

Following my dressing down on this forum by the two wing master race I shall institute your ideas with a prediction of the results .

After take start I will get the 10 hour student to lean the engine for the taxi out because you lot say so……………………. result…….. eventually one of the low timers will forget to go full rich before take off and the engine will stop on the threshold…..Oh dear two fast jets on bingo fuel are forced to go around as the hapless student try’s to restart the engine.

Having forgotten intialy to lean the mixture on taxi in the student goes head down while moving to do this and runs off the taxiway……….. unfortunately he blocks the taxiway exit for an emergency services helicopter …………. some poor sod fails to-get to hospital and dies.

Perhaps a little dramatic but years of instruction tells me you have to build pilot skill levels at a rate the individual can master and keep things simple while this is done, the students already operate in a high pressure military environment so operational safety considerations are paramount, the Lycoming shutdown has been very successful at stopping lead fowling especially on the O-235 engines as well as being SOP for all the SEP aircraft on the airfield.

Or worse the student doesn’t lean the engine within an inch of its life. Lines up and despite the detonation manages to get airborne. Not to worry its only 10 grand to get it repaired.

I think A and C 1800rpm on shut down seems quite sensible.

Do continental offer any such advice?

This dialogue is a bit like the Airbus vs the Boeing crowd…

Airbus: the pilot does not need to know how, why or even what the airplane does…he just needs to provide minimal required inputs with minimal required info displayed to him, and let the machine do its thing (remember the one about the future Airbus crew: pilot +dog, the pilot to monitor the systems, the dog to bite the pilots hands in case he touches something)

Boeing: the pilot has to ultimately always be in control: even if sometimes he does not understand everything, he has to be able to retain control and see what the machine is trying to do all the time

Which is safer? I tend to believe most pilots are capable and it is a matter of the system not being good enough to train or motivate them, or otherwise willing to push them out. Let the pilot be in control. I agree, too much info too soon may provide the wrong effect, but we have so many tools nowadays to teach better even minimising flying hours…Perhaps the issue is I do not run a school for a living and then I do not fully understand the problem?

heck, if a 20YO could manage an F4U or a B17 after 25 hrs 70 years ago…why cant we get it done today?

Last Edited by Antonio at 10 Jan 21:24
Antonio
LESB, Spain

Antonio wrote:

Boeing: the pilot has to ultimately always be in control: even if sometimes he does not understand everything, he has to be able to retain control and see what the machine is trying to do all the time

Actually, this is no longer a good analogy, new Being bosses & mgmt are now all-in on fully automated aircraft, even more keen than Airbus on no pilot at all

Last Edited by Ibra at 10 Jan 21:46
EGSX, United Kingdom

I haven’t read the whole thread, but my guess is that in the case of non-turbo engines, it is to avoid fouling the plugs.

Now I see the point was elaborated on; I also suggest we all lean heavily when taxiing. The main argument against is of course the “forget to enrich” before departure problem. I have forgotten (caught it on the roll) and don’t know what to suggest, except that if you automatically lean, you tend also to enrich automatically when you should.

Last Edited by WhiskeyPapa at 11 Jan 03:28
Tököl LHTL

I Currently hold both Boeing & Airbus type ratings and at the end of the day the only real difference is it’s much easier to eat a crew meal in the Airbus.

A_and_C wrote:

Oh dear clearly in 40 years in the business 17,000 hours flying and holding a maintenance licence I have learned nothing at all about flying or engines.

A major reason why I think we have a better quality of debate here than the other place (beginning with an F) is because people here tend to let their reasoning stand for itself rather than trying to reinforce it by willy-waving their hours/years of experience.

Ideas stand on their own merits, not on the logbook time of a person suggesting them.

Not leaning properly on the ground just shows ignorance. Yes a student could screw up by failing to go fully rich for takeoff, but they could also screw up by setting the trim incorrectly, entering the wrong runway, not setting flaps when they need them, etc. Why is mixture, in particular, so complex and so likely to lead to a screw-up that it has be mitigated against by running the engine in a sub-optimal fashion? It’s not complicated, but many instructors just don’t know enough about engines to use it properly – so they don’t. Inertia in the system and rules designed for the lowest common denominator.

EGLM

Ibra wrote:

new Being bosses & mgmt are now all-in on fully automated aircraft, even more keen than Airbus on no pilot at all

Oh, no! We are doomed!

As a fool-proof method for pre-take-off leaning I make sure that

a) Immediately before taxi, I try to accelerate beyond 1500 rpm with the lean mixture and it just dies, this shows it is lean enough to ensure I dont take off
b) I have full rich on my checklist before run-up

Antonio
LESB, Spain
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top