JasonC wrote:
Assuming there is no thermal issue why wouldn’t you run MCP
Noise, fuel burn, exceeding Vno (in my case)…..
boscomantico wrote:
How could one expect to have any really singificant empirics for the Centurion engine, which, in the pverall Picture (number of millions of flight hours), it is still an exotic engine?
The fuel consumption can be assumed to be linear to the output. Then, it’s more an airframe question what a good power setting is in terms of MPG.
Sure, I was only referring to the engine longevity aspect.
My longest flight in a DA42 (to date) was 5:40 airborne, 73% powered 147 TAS at 4000ft (kept low due to headwinds). We were burning 11.2 USG/hr.
This ‘fly faster to stay away from 50Hr’ is something even I think about in the Warrior. But here’s a question based on ignorance: how would the single engine performance look for a failure at the mid point in terms of fuel available? OK, OK I know: in a single you’re swimming in the South Atlantic. But would this aeroplane be able to complete the trip single engine?
Aveling wrote:
This ‘fly faster to stay away from 50Hr’ is something even I think about in the Warrior.
My cost under FAA regulations for an oil change, which is the principal item serviced every 50 hours on my similar Lycoming powered plane, is about $1/ flight hour. I actually change my oil/filter every 25 hours, raising the price of that service to $2/flight hr. Obviously, I could not save money by going faster given the square law which governs fuel consumption per trip as a function of speed.
boscomantico wrote:
Sure, I was only referring to the engine longevity aspect.
@Boscomantico, I think one or more engine users have in house infrastructure and staff set up to deal with the need for costly periodic service and replacement. Research activities could (hopefully) reduce that cost by extending the intervals – real time diagnostics etc. on heavily instrumented aircraft that would support component and engine replacement based on early prediction of failure, and possibly influence operational practices. I guess its possible the practical results of that activity, if any, may get distributed to the field in the future but I don’t believe the commercial engine OEM or standard category aircraft are involved.
This ‘fly faster to stay away from 50Hr’ is something even I think about in the Warrior. But here’s a question based on ignorance: how would the single engine performance look for a failure at the mid point in terms of fuel available? OK, OK I know: in a single you’re swimming in the South Atlantic. But would this aeroplane be able to complete the trip single engine?
https://www.euroga.org/forums/aircraft/419-some-info-on-the-da42?page=25
See some posts starting #248 through 270.
