Regarding powerplant management and leaning: Lycoming says that it is not possible to over lean one of their engines at anything less than takeoff power. I've flown a bunch of big continentals, too, and we leaned them failrly hard(with only 3 failures in 20,000 hours). Got to keep these engines hot--until you're ready to shut them down.
What's a "big continental?" I didn't know Continental ever made any. Are you talking bout the radials? Even those were small.
Lycoming doesn't say anything about being unable to harm the engine by leanign at less than takeoff power. Less than 75% power, perhaps. But operating at takeoff power settings, especially higher manifold pressures with a mixure adjacent to lean, can damage the engine in high compression engines, thorugh detonation. Operating lean of peak, properly done, produces cooler temperatures, and does not...and lower power settings.
You don't need to keep those engines hot. You do need to control temperature change. However, leaning is really irrelevant to this topic, and isn't what was being addressed with the subject of throtle enrichment. In that case, it's a design feature to prevent detonation at higher power settings. If you've leaned for takeoff in the enrichment range and reduce power, you've leaned back too far at that point, and need to enrichen the mixture. This is applicable to carbureted engines utilizing an enrichment valve...not all do...and this isn't a function of the pressure carburetor.
You may be thinking of autorich and autolean which are entirely different functions that do apply to pressure carburetors...something with which few posters here will have had any experience.
Sounds like a throw back to the presssure carb days. Still one of the best methods around when properly set up.
What's a throw back to pressure carburetors?
If you're referring to enrichment, that's a mechanical fact for certain carburetion systems on many small carburetors used in light airplanes. It's a flat on the throttle cam which allows more fuel physically at full throttle, resulting in a richer mixture...the enrichment is purely a function of the physical position of the throttle.
I never care what the neighbors think. They bought a house next to an airport. Screw them until an official abtement procedure tells me otherwise, and even still that will almost always be a max percormance climb to a certain altitude or a lateral procedure.....NEVER A POWER REDUCTION AT LOWER THAN NORMAL ALTITUDE.
Normal altitude could be 5', it could be several hundred feet...that really depends on what's being done at any given time. You really need to start caring what the neighbors think...it's that kind of ignorance that leads to loss of flying privileges, animosity toward airports, loss of airport properties, etc. Exercising noise abatement practices is a good professional practice...even when someone isn't forcing you to do it. Doing it becasue you are a professional, rather thann having your arm twisted is...the prrofessional thing to do.
Now, pulling power back before the gear comes up (<200agl) is silly. I don't care what the airport neighbors think. They live with it and hear it all day, every day. What is 15 seconds of "tolerating" my little IO-360 gonna matter, when a 757 departed just three minutes prior?
Your cessna 185 is going to be more abrasive and annoying with supersonic prop tips than the stage III 757 for one thing...but you shouldn't be pushing your light piston single out too close to that departing 757 anyway. Do you really leave your gear down until 200 in the air? Why on earth would you do that? Positive rate, gear up. Breakaway thrust, positive rate, gear up, and any power reduction appropriate to your operation...is okay.
The point with the rental comment was that people who choose to operate more in the interest of noise and cost considerations will end up in a smoking hole. These things can be considered, of course, but "positive climb; gear up; power back" is not safe IMO. To modify an old joke, if it's being a good neighbor you're interested in: Have you ever heard the noise made by a small airplane crashing in to a house?
I have heard that sound. Have you? I also put out the burning airplane, crimped the torn and draining fuel lines by hand, and removed the battery after securing the site and pilot. What has that to do with the price of tea in china? If you're suggesting that a power reduction will result in crashing into a house, even as a joke, then you're making a ridiculous suggestion...just as you are when suggesting that making a power reuction will put someone in a smoking hole. Not so.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't some of the newer aircraft even tell you that full power is "okay" all the time. I seem to remember a new mooney that had that in the books.
That would really depend on the aircraft, powerplant, and the circumstance. Operationally, even where permissible, one may have no need, nor desire to run at full power all the time.
One aircraft I flew had a standard mission fuel burn of 200 gallons per hour. However, at takeoff power, burn went to 600 gallons of avgas per hour. Remaining at takeoff power was never done any more than necessary...we liked our fuel tobe available for the mission, rather than pissing away for no good reason. Reduce power when necessary, where necessary, as your mission profile dictates. Reducing after takeoff does not mean you are going to die.
I could go on for hours, but make one power change at a time(after initial climb power change), and none within 60 seconds of each other(M.P., R.P.M, Mixture) especially in a descent. Maybe we should start a new thread for this.
No basis exists for separating a throttle position change from a RPM change by one minute, nor a RPM change froma mixture change by one minute, nor a mixture change from a RPM or throttle position (manifold pressure) change by one minute...no factual basis at all You could start a thread on it, but it's a guesswork type of policy...a feel-good sort of thing with no grounding in reality. It ranks up there with oversquare myths, the myth that an engine fails at the fist power reduction, etc.
