Advanced pilot seminar

[Nick Bailey]

I just returned from the3 day Advanced Pilot seminar at the GAMI facility in Ada, OK. Going in, I was expecting a complex, engineer oriented aproach to engine use and management. complete with complex, esoteric proceedures and data. What I got was one of the most clear, concise and articulate explanations of how an engine really operates and how to run it safer,cleaner, cooler and more efficiently.
In short,it was one of the best, if not the best learning seminar I have ever attended. The quality and amount of information presented, as well as the presentation format itself, combined to make every minute interesting. . They unquestionably achieved their course title, "Engine Management Made Easy".

Beginning with a "fun test' and then a question list to allow everyone to ask any question about engine use and management, the nonstop delivery of information began. The promise by Walter Atkinson , John Deakin and George Braly to answer every one of those questions, as the seminar progressed, was fulfilled by the last hour.
In discribing the goal to truly make the weekend simple and easy, John Deakin, is his unique self deprecating style, described himself as a lazy, penny pinching pilot, who never wants any more complication or cockpit chores than absolutely necessary.
John, George and Walter each took turns disseminating the info on the various topics. Each proved to be extremely knowledgable, animated, passionate about the materials presented.
The other concern I had was that this would be a marketing soapbox for GAMI JECTORS. I don't believe that any of the three presenters ever mentioned or even alluded to GAMI JECTORS except in response to questions about them. This seminar was not in any way about GAMI products.

However, if someone was not a graphic engine monitor believer before this seminar they certainly would be after. Several real life, real time catastrophic engine failures were exhibited as seen on an engine monitor. Recognized early enough by proper monitor interpretation, lives were saved. If you had an engine monitor before this course, you realize how unbelievably valuable this tool is. If you didn't have one, you will make it your next purchase.

In the end there is no question that I am now a much more in formed, safer,lazier and cheaper pilot. So, WOTLOPSOP to all you ROP ers out there. I will now be cruising LOP, after "the big pull" at 17-18 gals per hour, same speed as you, with cleaner, cooler, longer lasting engines. And if I do start to have an engine problem, I'll recognize it long before it can hurt my engine or me.
Thanks John Walter and George.

[Guy Paris]

Nick,

Nice article. What altitude, MP, and RPM are you at for the 17 to 18 GPH? guy...

[Jerry De Santis]

Hi Nick, Read your posting with great interest. No doubt that lop done correctly saves fuel and may extend engine life. I have a 1975 P337G and I tend to operate ROP. I sure do burn more fuel. Average about 26 to 27 GPH. I now have more than 2300 hours on my engines and they are still running strong. I fly quite a bit, average more than 250 hours a year. Sounds like your counting you chickens before they hatch. When you get 2300 hours operating LOP, let us know. BTW, I have a P=model, turbo charged and I only had to replace one turbo charger thus far. Good luck and I really hope your engines will last as long as mine.
Jerry
N34EC

[Jim Rainer]

Nick - two questions that didn't get answered: Is your 1975 337 a "P" or Turbo or just normally aspirated and secondly, did you have engine monitors before you took the course?

GAMI injectors will be required to make LOP work. My normally aspirated engines run too rough LOP. The injectors would smooth things out, I believe. My average fuel burn, block to block, is 20 gph. I fly about 100 hrs in a busy year. I don't have engine monitors but wish I did. I don't know that even if I had monitors and GAMIs whether or not I'd fly LOP. I do know that at 100 hours per year, LOP wouldn't pay for the equipment and training. I think Jerry DeSantis has the right idea - fly a whole lot each year. I don't fly enough and don't expect my engines to run much beyond TBO, LOP or ROP.

I am glad you got so much out of the seminar. Sounds really worthwhile if one is the least bit interested in LOP operation.

[FRED-E]

JERRY:
Well you have me beat my engines only have 2100 ea. on them, I guess I gota get flying more !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fred N358

[Kevin McDonnell]

I'd like to add my two cents worth on this subject...

I took the course about a year ago and completely agree with Nick's review. We are taught a lot of irrational things during our training. Often there's no data (only old wives tales) to justify the action. This course skewers a few sacred cows - and backs it up with data.

One point worth noting is that the course is not meant to convince you to run LOP, but rather it will show you that the window in which the POH tells you to run the engine is the worst abuse you can give it. The lesson is: either run it richer than 125 ROP or LOP, but not between LOP and 125 ROP (for greater than 65% power settings).

How do they justify this heresy? Simple. They demonstrate the CHT's, valve temps, and peak internal combustion pressures (aka theta PP) *all peak* in that "recommended" zone. If you want to be gentle to that engine, you'll operate it either richer or leaner.

It's widely believed that you will burn valves by operating LOP. They demonstrate that the valve and CHT temperatures are lower LOP vs. the "POH way." They also show actual burned valves to you and explain how they ot that way (hint: it’s not because of anything the pilot is doing).

And just to show how entrenched this "you'll burn you valves" thinking is, then pose the simple question: Which is hotter, 50 dROP or 50 dLOP? Most will answer: 50 dLOP is hotter because it's burned into everyone's head that LOP is hotter. By definition, both of these temperatures are 50 degrees cooler than peak, and therefore *must* be the exact same temperature. But we don't let go of our old wives tales easily.

When you see that the valves and the CHT are cooler at 50 dLOP, and the theda PP is lower, you have to start asking yourself: How is that worse for my engine?

One very important thing I took away from this course was that the POH cruise climb fuel flows are not rich enough. I now do my cruise climb at full rich (roughly 20 GPH on each engine, '77 P337) and can clearly see the engine is much happier ("cooler") this way.

Don't assume this class is only for those looking to run LOP. If you want to run ROP, you will still learn a vast amount of information. For example, you'll see how to interpret engine monitor readings to diagnose pre-ignition, detonation, and even worn valve guides. This course is a gold mine.

[Ernie Martin]

For those interested in LOP operation, you should also read (if you haven't done so already) the thread entitled "Rich of Peak (ROP) vs Lean of Peak (LOP)", especially the two references cited in the 4th and 5th messages.

Ernie