banner
banner

29 Mar 2024, 02:27 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 212 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 08 Feb 2016, 23:50 
Offline



 Profile




Joined: 03/05/14
Posts: 2848
Post Likes: +2868
Company: WA Aircraft
Location: Fort Worth, TX (T67)
Aircraft: 1969 Bonanza E33C
You want book single engine numbers and switch to NA engines?

Turbines are technically naturally aspirated... :scratch:


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2016, 06:26 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 09/05/13
Posts: 125
Post Likes: +7
Username Protected wrote:
Turbines are technically naturally aspirated... :scratch:

Hi Max,

This is a fantastic analogy. Recently I was also thinking as to how a turbine engine relates to a piston engine. I thought that they are normally aspirated... the compressor performing similar function to pistons, compressing air, no turbos in front of either. Stuff is expensive though.
Someone here will certainly say that turbines are "turbocharged".

:cheers:

KW


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2016, 11:16 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 07/11/11
Posts: 2252
Post Likes: +2214
Location: Queretaro / Woodlands
Aircraft: C525 BE40 D1K Waco
Username Protected wrote:
We'll see in March whether they can teach me anything, or perhaps I might teach them a thing or two.


KW - I may get some flak for saying what I'm about to say, but for the record (and to save myself some remorse) I hope there is a small chance it might make something click. Regardless of the alphabet soup you show in your signature, a professional always has something to learn - and does not need to show-off. A suboptimal platform coupled with unrealistic expectations driven by arrogance may be what is needed to start a Crashtalk thread.

In all your years flying for the airlines you must have learned that recurrent training adds some value. The attitude you have going into Simcom implies the experience will be a complete waste of time and money. There is also a reason why it is very difficult to find a Navajo that has not been upgraded. The Navajo benefitted tremendously from upgrades like the Panther conversion allowing the less than stellar factory plane to perform in an acceptable manner. Aviation legends or not, some BT-folks with useful experience and insight have tried to help you reason through this to no avail. I hope there will be an "aha" moment sometime before you embark on this endeavor.


Last edited on 09 Feb 2016, 20:13, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 09 Feb 2016, 17:45 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 05/14/11
Posts: 830
Post Likes: +576
I wasn't going to jump into this grease pit, but...

Krzysztof, although I'll never be accused of being politically correct, I like to attempt to be subtle in recommendations, as I have over these conversations thus far. Hypothetically, let's just pretend I have considerable experience in many facets of aviation. In my 50+ years in and around commercial aviation, I've ridden more than one piston multi-engine airplane into the dirt on one motor - and have miraculously even managed to save a few following an engine failure on takeoff. There's a good reason these airplanes have two engines on them. They don't fly worth a %#$@ on one... even if you do everything right. There is always an 'oh crap' moment when it happens for real, there is appropriate reaction time (check for simple glitch/or feather correct fan), there is less than optimum conditions, there is less than factory new performance. And there is always Murphy's Law.

When you go get some training in this thing, you'll witness for yourself the abysmal performance and how rapidly and methodically you have to think and react to have a "successful" outcome following an engine failure at liftoff. [Meaning: Stay Alive - not necessarily FLY]. I would recommend training in both the simulator and then the aircraft. What these other experienced folks are trying to tell you is that unless you have some altitude, speed, a 'clean' light-weight airframe and the stars in alignment, you will need to abandon your attempt to climb a sick airplane from almost ground level. These craft will lose speed very quickly and snap roll (vmc) in a heartbeat in those conditions, while you're still trying to figure out what just happened, and which engine actually failed. I know this for a fact. As a young co-pilot (pilot-not-flying), we cartwheeled across a field at night and then almost went over a cliff into a river, because of it.

You obviously have a great wealth of experience yourself, and have surely done your due diligence in the books. Perhaps you have forgotten how horribly most of these piston twins actually perform on one engine. Once you get some good recent training and do this stuff again for real, you will remember what everyone is trying to say. Folks are just concerned for your well being. Piper or not, you're a fellow aviator and now a "Beechtalker". We want you around for a while.

BTW... none of the above is hypothetical.

:bud: Best, Mark


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 15 Feb 2016, 11:40 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 01/14/12
Posts: 2070
Post Likes: +1492
Location: Hampton, VA
Aircraft: AEST
This isn't the best video but it makes my point on the inner hear doors:
http://youtu.be/90LIdcGbdVg

They open to allow the gear to extend, and then close to reduce drag, they open to allow the main gear to retract, as well.

That is why drag goes up, and S/E climb goes down when the gear is selected "up"

_________________
Forrest

'---x-O-x---'


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 19 Feb 2016, 16:55 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 09/05/13
Posts: 125
Post Likes: +7
Neat video. Thanks for posting Forrest.

KW


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 15 Mar 2017, 22:15 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/15/11
Posts: 2388
Post Likes: +1055
Location: Mandan, ND
Aircraft: V35
As long as we are resurrecting this thread from the dead, I want to respectfully submit that Jesse and Mark (and others) are right about the accelerate go. It won't do it.

I fly a -325 multiple times per week. Winter is great. Summer is interesting. Our policy is gear down until blue line (99). Anything below blue line OEI is a trip down hill. Even at blue line with the gear, cowl flaps and flaps out it is a trip down OEI. Like others mentioned the inner gear doors open upon retract. In a -325 normal takeoff is 15 degrees of flaps. Cowl flaps are open except on the coldest of days.

Today, leaving my destination I chuckled to the right seater. Summer is back, or at least well on the way. 6500' runway and I was still 100' off the deck 3/4 the way down the runway coaxing the darn old gal to accelerate to blue line. If one of them failed you are damn right I am chopping the throttles. It staggers into the air on two. Once you get above 110ish it will start to gather itself up and fly. Lose one then and you are A-OK. But you also have several hundred feet of altitude by then.

Not to be an ass, but I know what I am doing if one fails below blue line and before gear and flaps are retracted. Fly one at gross and then tell me what you would do...

I love the Navajo and think it is the greatest plane ever made. ;) But a hot-rod it is not. Just like my Expedition is not my Cobra.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 18 May 2017, 11:02 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/21/17
Posts: 38
Post Likes: +2
Here is a video. Check it out, especially the last take-off.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQeBHSsL56o

This competent Austrian pilot handles engine out with aplomb.

The OP didn't invent here anything. He merely posted what the competent authorities - such as Piper - are telling us to do in their POHs.

M


Last edited on 19 May 2017, 05:09, edited 2 times in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 18 May 2017, 19:32 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/25/11
Posts: 9168
Post Likes: +17159
Location: KGNF, Grenada, MS
Aircraft: Baron, 180,195,J-3
Mark,

If you are using this factory demo video to instruct us, perhaps you should also point out the parameters under which the video was taken. They are easily recognizable, but I'll give you first chance to demonstrate your knowledge.

Jgreen

_________________
Waste no time with fools. They have nothing to lose.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 18 May 2017, 19:56 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/25/16
Posts: 1819
Post Likes: +1382
Location: 2IS
Aircraft: C501
Username Protected wrote:
Here is a video. Check it out, especially the last take-off.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQeBHSsL56o

This competent Austrian pilot handles engine out with aplomb. You can do it too, but it takes a lot of practice.

The OP didn't invent here anything. He merely posted what the competent authorities - such as Piper - are telling us to do in their POHs.

M

Aren't those single power lever with autofeather?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 19 May 2017, 09:25 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/25/11
Posts: 9168
Post Likes: +17159
Location: KGNF, Grenada, MS
Aircraft: Baron, 180,195,J-3
Mark,

I see that you have visited BT since I posed my question on the parameters of the video that you posted for our instruction.

I also see that one of your most "popular" posts was "Which Plane For High End Multi-Engine Training", which would certainly give the impression that you are an accomplished ME instructor. But! from your comments, I see a significant disconnect between your actual knowledge and such experience.

We "regulars" here on BT are here to share knowledge. I am just top water bait compared to the wealth of knowledge and experience possessed by others here on BT. But before I place credibility in the comments and posts of "newbies", I expect some evidence of credibility on their part.

So, I am respectfully going to ask that you provide some evidence that you are an experienced pilot whose opinions should be taken into account.

I can find only one Mark Barnes in the USA that has instructor credentials. That could be an error. Please allay my doubts.

At this point, I have every reason to believe that you are a troll.

Jgreen

_________________
Waste no time with fools. They have nothing to lose.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 19 May 2017, 10:03 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 08/01/11
Posts: 6691
Post Likes: +4354
Location: In between the opioid and marijuana epidemics
Aircraft: 182, A36TC
I am a newbie with twins. Have flown several. Currently in a Seneca. With just full fuel, myself and instructor on a warm, not hot day, the plane barely gets 200-250 fpm. At gross I doubt it would climb at all. This airplane is simply underpowered. Yet a Seneca supposedly has a single engine service ceiling greater than an MU2. A normally aspirated Navajo is really short on hp. Turbo's are not a great solution either. A Navajo Panther or RAM twin Cessna must really get quite warm on one engine when climbing at Vysse. It is difficult to find a twin, short of a turbine that has better than adequate single engine performance.

Even a Lear loses about 70 percent of its climb ability. In flat land, no problem. In the mountains, you better pay attention.

_________________
Fly High,

Ryan Holt CFI

"Paranoia and PTSD are requirements not diseases"


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbo Navajo to Normally Aspirated Navajo Conversion
PostPosted: 19 May 2017, 11:29 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/31/10
Posts: 13101
Post Likes: +6969
Username Protected wrote:
I am a newbie with twins. Have flown several. Currently in a Seneca. With just full fuel, myself and instructor on a warm, not hot day, the plane barely gets 200-250 fpm. At gross I doubt it would climb at all. This airplane is simply underpowered. Yet a Seneca supposedly has a single engine service ceiling greater than an MU2. A normally aspirated Navajo is really short on hp. Turbo's are not a great solution either. A Navajo Panther or RAM twin Cessna must really get quite warm on one engine when climbing at Vysse. It is difficult to find a twin, short of a turbine that has better than adequate single engine performance.

Even a Lear loses about 70 percent of its climb ability. In flat land, no problem. In the mountains, you better pay attention.


Panther Navajo has redesigned cowl openings and a large cowl flap which doesn't add much drag at Vyse. No temp problems in AZ. I normally depart with cowl flaps closed.

The 421C has the most efficient cooling design of all. Temp is almost never a consideration when properly tuned.

These engines are not similar to your TC with regards to temp and performance.


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 212 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024

.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.tat-85x100.png.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.one-mile-up-85x100.png.
.AAI.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.aircraftferry-85x50.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.lucysaviation-85x50.png.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.aeroled-85x50-2022-12-06.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.pure-medical-85x150.png.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.tempest.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.daytona.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.