New 400A Engine Anti-Ice procedure

[400A]

Just as a follow up, we had the opportunity to follow the new procedure for engine Anti-ice on the 400A.

At FL350 when we activated the engine Anti-Ice without reducing power, there was no temperature change at all on our aircraft. The N1 reduced 2.5% which ended up being the exact setting for MCT with engine Anti-Ice on. We slowed from .76 to .73 mach. We never even had to touch the throttles.

Just FYI.

 

[aucfi]

Ok, non jet-pilot question.

does MCT = Max Continuous Thrust?

 

[B1900FO]

Yes, it does mean max continuous thrust...

 

[SabreFlyR]

Just as a follow up, we had the opportunity to follow the new procedure for engine Anti-ice on the 400A.

At FL350 when we activated the engine Anti-Ice without reducing power, there was no temperature change at all on our aircraft. The N1 reduced 2.5% which ended up being the exact setting for MCT with engine Anti-Ice on. We slowed from .76 to .73 mach. We never even had to touch the throttles.

Just FYI.

Have they published an official change to AFM yet? I've been watching for it but have not gotten anything in the mail yet.

Had to try it out also a few weeks back at FL390, pretty much the same result you saw.

 

[400A]

Have they published an official change to AFM yet? I've been watching for it but have not gotten anything in the mail yet.

Had to try it out also a few weeks back at FL390, pretty much the same result you saw.

I do not have the printed AFM revision yet either. All I have seen in writing is the safety communique.

 

[dogedog]

The official change to the AFM has come out, we received ours a couple of weeks ago

 

[SabreFlyR]

The official change to the AFM has come out, we received ours a couple of weeks ago

Typically I get an email from Raytheon when these changes come out, I'll check into it on Monday.

Side note, If you have not heard fuel heater mod is due out soon, will relieve the requirement for prist so I'm told.

 

[Choppy]

Yeah, that will be economical!

 

[400A]

Yeah, that will be economical!

True, I heard it was going to be VERY pricey.

Might be worth it though if you operate alot where prist is difficult to come by.

Being that Raytheon wants $15K to give me the runway numbers for a 200lb MTOW increase, I can't wait to see what they want for something with an actual part and mechanic required.

 

[SabreFlyR]

True, I heard it was going to be VERY pricey.

Might be worth it though if you operate alot where prist is difficult to come by.

Being that Raytheon wants $15K to give me the runway numbers for a 200lb MTOW increase, I can't wait to see what they want for something with an actual part and mechanic required.

Yeah it'll be pricey, wonder if our support plus program will cover it? Not doing the mod may have a negative effect on the value of the plane that is much more than the cost of doing it, guess time will tell. I will most likely do it, simply because we do a lot of Mexico and Caribbean trips.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Just as a follow up, we had the opportunity to follow the new procedure for engine Anti-ice on the 400A.

At FL350 when we activated the engine Anti-Ice without reducing power, there was no temperature change at all on our aircraft. The N1 reduced 2.5% which ended up being the exact setting for MCT with engine Anti-Ice on. We slowed from .76 to .73 mach. We never even had to touch the throttles.

Just FYI.

Just as a guess, I'd say that the "below 90%" requirement for turning on the anti-ice probably is a throwback to the Diamonds, as they didn't have electronic fuel controllers. In that case, tapping the bleed air from the engines would cause an increase in ITT that might exceed limits.

The EFC's, on the other hand, keep ITT relatively constant, making the appropriate reductions in order to keep ITT within limits.

Fly safe!

David

 

[Guitar rocker]

True, I heard it was going to be VERY pricey.

Might be worth it though if you operate alot where prist is difficult to come by.

.

Like Europe for example.

 

[400A]

Just as a guess, I'd say that the "below 90%" requirement for turning on the anti-ice probably is a throwback to the Diamonds, as they didn't have electronic fuel controllers. In that case, tapping the bleed air from the engines would cause an increase in ITT that might exceed limits.

The EFC's, on the other hand, keep ITT relatively constant, making the appropriate reductions in order to keep ITT within limits.

Fly safe!

David

I think you could be right, however my friend claims their Diamond temps don't move either.

 

[Beechjetr]

Maybe it's a leftover from jt15d-1's (ce-500s)?

I agree with the engine ice on/power reduction. Out beechjet and another I've flown are within .2% of the new MCT.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Maybe it's a leftover from jt15d-1's (ce-500s)?

Wasn't a requirement on those.

Fly safe!

David

 

[Beechjetr]

I remember from intitial, one instructor was a T-1A guy and he said the <90% req. was also to prevent to much "shock" to the bleed air system. That was the only time I've ever heard that.