What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

New to me-10..and have lots of questions...

mdmba

Active Member
Hello all...recently picked up a -10 and have a few questions...that id love any/all input. Newish pilot, got PPL 13 mths ago, so still have lots to learn.
1. It has a Hartzell BA CS prop. On TO, push prop forward, then 2500 for climb till cruise alt...lets say 7500ft. Then pull back to what?? Buddy told me, BA like to spin, and were computer designed to be at 2500. True/false? Pulling back to 2300 rpm...pro/cons?
2. Cruising at 7500ft now..and MP pushed forward...gets about 21-23 or so, cant really remember exact MP at this alt. So another buddy tells me at cruise alt to pull MP back till you get the first hint of a drop in MP, and leave it there, if full forward, just wasting gas....so what is the best thing to do at 7500 cruise alt, getting set up for XC trip.
3. CH #2 tends to get 'hot' in the climb, gotta keep nose down, only climb at 500fpm and full rich to keep it cool. Any other suggestions?
4. Flying w 2 ppl and no baggage, tends to be nose heavy, only dropping 2 notches of flaps..so i don't run out of elevator....ill add 50lb ballast next trip..any other thoughts?

FYI: IO-540, w EFII system

Thanks in advance:
 
Best way to answer your questions would be 5-10hrs of transition training with Mike Seager or similar RV CFI
 
So another buddy tells me at cruise alt to pull MP back till you get the first hint of a drop in MP, and leave it there, if full forward, just wasting gas....so what is the best thing to do at 7500 cruise alt, getting set up for XC trip.
:

The best thing to do is to use the red knob thingy to adjust the mixture to where you want it. (Your friend's advice helps in certain carbureted aircraft, like 182s. Not applicable to a fuel injected -10.)

May I ask, do you have a high performance endorsement? It's required for this airplane.

Please go see Mike S or other RV- experienced cfi. The -10 is a sophisticated airplane, and shouldn't be flown by what buddies tell you.
 
I second what Brian and Bob have stated. Please get some transition training and have these discussions with a CFI familiar with RV10s.

With that said, I'll provide a little information.

1. I fly LOP and cruise at 2300 RPM all the time. I may get there 10 or 15 minutes later, but I save a ton of money.

2. Whether its 7500 AGL or MSL, I suspect that the MP will need to be left at full power. You're not wasting fuel at altitude, but then fuel flow isn't directly controlled by MP setting. You engine isn't making full power due to reduced oxygen. You may only be able to maintain 22 or 23 MP or even less if higher. Then you want to set your mixture to the appropriate ROP or LOP setting.

3. Normal. Lower nose when CHTs get hot. You may also want to take a look at your baffling. But as a non-builder, you really need to understand the cause and effect of any change you make before you start making the changes.

4. Many carry some sort of ballast in the back. I did initially, but now I only have about 10lbs in the baggage area most trips. I mostly fly with just two people in front. I've never run out of elevator authority, but then each aircraft may not perform the same depending on a variety of differences.

Mike Seger will take some time to get scheduled. I don't know if Vic Syracuse will be doing any transition training. Otherwise, find an older CFI that is high performance rated. Have them explain the complexities of a CS prop. It may only take a few hours, but it will be time well spent.

I'm not sure what you mean by two notches of flaps. That depends on what you define as your starting point. Many of us keep the flaps at 0 degrees, the raise to -3 degrees in cruise. I seldom use flaps unless I'm going into a short or soft field, or attempting to follow a Cub all the way in from Ripon. :eek: If you're using full flaps, you're going to be in for a surprise if you go around. This is something you'll want to experience during RV-10 transition training. If you aren't prepared, it could startle you.
 
Many of us keep the flaps at 0 degrees, the raise to -3 degrees in cruise.

You guys in -10's use flaps for cruise? Forgive my question, I'm a low time pilot and have never encountered this. I'm curious, can you elaborate?

If you're using full flaps, you're going to be in for a surprise if you go around.

Curious about this as well, what happens?
 
Note

Note that the OP said it has an EFII system so it probably doesn't have a " big red knob" for mixture...
 
You guys in -10's use flaps for cruise? Forgive my question, I'm a low time pilot and have never encountered this. I'm curious, can you elaborate?

Yes, in the reflex positon which is -3deg (ref to the chord line). This is the "full up" position that you will rig during the build so that the ailerons and flaps are together in trail. The 0 deg positon is slightly below the aileron trailing edges and is useful for shortening the takeoff roll.

Curious about this as well, what happens?

A very large pitch up motion.
 
1. It has a Hartzell BA CS prop. On TO, push prop forward, then 2500 for climb till cruise alt...lets say 7500ft. Then pull back to what?? Buddy told me, BA like to spin, and were computer designed to be at 2500. True/false? Pulling back to 2300 rpm...pro/cons?

The only hard core limitation would be a published propeller restriction. I note four listings for the RV-10, so you'll need to ID your engine and propeller combination:

http://hartzellprop.com/wp-content/uploads/159-0000-R60-WA.pdf

Beyond the vibratory realm, there are many combinations of MP, RPM, and mixture to experiment with. It depends on what you wish to achieve. For example, theory says maximum range would be found at the highest acceptable MP, lowest RPM, and LOP. Maximum speed would be found with high MP, high RPM, and best power mixture, roughly 125 ROP. Highest speed for least fuel is probably mixture at peak EGT or slightly leaner, WOT, and RPM to adjust range, at an oxygen altitude.

2. So another buddy tells me at cruise alt to pull MP back till you get the first hint of a drop in MP, and leave it there, if full forward, just wasting gas....

Nope. Any drop in MP is pumping loss. With EFII, the little twist knob on your panel controls mixture.

3. CH #2 tends to get 'hot' in the climb, gotta keep nose down, only climb at 500fpm and full rich to keep it cool. Any other suggestions?

Dozens. Might want to start with a check of mixture balance, recently described in post 10 here:

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?p=1192591

I would only add that many terrific flight instructors are poor at engine management, so make no assumptions.
 
Last edited:
A tremendous help in understanding engine management would be to take the APS engine management course out of ADA, Oklahoma. They have an online version as well as a live course. I did both soon after buying a Bonanza - it also has a 6 cylinder fuel injected engine (Continental, but principles are all the same).

Nothing helped me more in understanding all the parameters of engine management. Even something as simple as adjusting full power fuel flow (more important in Continentals as TCM recommends lower values than the APS guys) can make a big difference in cooling in climb. Balancing fuel flow to all cylinders is also very important (look up GAMI spread as a starting point) if you want to run lean of peak - which you will if you take the engine management course.

Engine management course here: https://www.advancedpilot.com/

If you look up John Deakin / GAMI redbox on google you can find tons of information on this topic, but it's not as well organized as the course itself.

FYI - no need to pull power back at altitude. If you learn to run LOP you'll get good efficiency running "WOTLOPSOP" (look it up) per APS training - at 7500 feet you're around 65-70% power max so it's reasonably efficient. If you experiment with prop setting you'll find where the prop is smoothest and you get the best overall performance/efficiency. My Bonanza was happiest at 2500. I never pulled RPM back until established at cruise altitude (also per APS recommendation).
 
Last edited:
more info

thanks so much for some advice thus far. To answer a few questions posted towards me, Yes i did transition training w Mike S..2 times...1 for my RV8 TW and w him for the RV10. I know him well, and i consider him a really good friend, he's even on my cell phone contacts, but I don't want to bug him all the time, so i posed a question for the hive here..(Hi Mike, i know you're reading this...Shout out to you buddy) so yes, i have done training and am have HP endorsement.
2. I got my PPL 13 mths ago and have 400+ hr already, have 150+ hrs in TW RV8...if you want a new adventure, go land an TW-8. Fun times. (200+ in 172, 150+ in Carbon Cub)...yes i fly, but never to embarrassed to ask for questions from the Vans Community.
3. My 'buddies' are both CFI, airline pilots etc, and each have 20,000+ hrs.
4. Has EFII, so no red knob, but same 'sort of' thing, i understand concept.
5. Yes, i have done the go around w full flaps during...get ready to push on stick asap.

Has anyone heard that BA prop likes to be at 2500rpm? Or does my buddy (CFI, flight engineer) tell me bad info? So at alt cruising, rpm can be ?????..what do most guys set rpm at cruise? obvious fuel usage changes

So at cruise alt, So best to keep throttle full forward?

Thanks again for feedback and advice. I love to learn!
 
never to embarrassed to ask for questions from the Vans Community.

Anytime you ask a question on a public forum be prepared for a slew of answers and advice... On constant speed planes I take over full everything and trim back to 2500 and MP no higher than 25 500' up. For cruise I bring it to 2300 and MP to 21 or so... adjust periodically as needed.

Now I've been flown with other pilots that do it different....
 
A tremendous help in understanding engine management would be to take the APS engine management course out of ADA, Oklahoma. They have an online version as well as a live course. I did both soon after buying a Bonanza - it also has a 6 cylinder fuel injected engine (Continental, but principles are all the same).

Not all. General engine management principles are universal, need to be learned, and APS is a good place. However, specific operational details (exactly which knob to diddle and when) can vary a lot. Continental constant flow injection is nothing like the Bendix-style typical on a Lycoming, and neither shares anything with the SDS-based pulse width systems.

As for the scary red box, an RV-10 pilot with a normally aspirated 540 might be better off consulting the Lycoming engine chart. See "Limiting Manifold Pressure For Continuous Operation" on the left chart. It assumes best power mixture, so there is no need to run silly rich; any setting to the left of the line is safe at ~150 ROP. If it won't cool (assuming mixture balance), you have an airframe problem.
 
Not all. General engine management principles are universal, need to be learned, and APS is a good place. However, specific operational details (exactly which knob to diddle and when) can vary a lot. Continental constant flow injection is nothing like the Bendix-style typical on a Lycoming, and neither shares anything with the SDS-based pulse width systems.

As for the scary red box, an RV-10 pilot with a normally aspirated 540 might be better off consulting the Lycoming engine chart. See "Limiting Manifold Pressure For Continuous Operation" on the left chart. It assumes best power mixture, so there is no need to run silly rich; any setting to the left of the line is safe at ~150 ROP. If it won't cool (assuming mixture balance), you have an airframe problem.


I think his point was for the OP to get formal training, we're getting into the weeds here.

To the OP...

This:

Best way to answer your questions would be 5-10hrs of transition training with Mike Seager or similar RV CFI

Then go to the APS school. Internet formus are a great place for discussion, but there is a lot of bad information too. Start with those two rounds of formal instruction, then go from there.

I recommend searching Pelicans Perch on Avweb too... he's written a lot of good articles on engine management, as has Mike Busch.
 
update

I had a great chat w EFII owner..and he answered all of my questions.

Thanks again for all the input...

Im at Auburn WA(S50)
 
Then go to the APS school. Internet formus are a great place for discussion, but there is a lot of bad information too. Start with those two rounds of formal instruction, then go from there.
I recommend searching Pelicans Perch on Avweb too... he's written a lot of good articles on engine management, as has Mike Busch.

Perhaps a bit off topic, but I find the above amusing, in a perverse sort of way.

Forums have a bad rep, no question. The place is full of sock puppets with no signatures, advertisers with claims, and folks who are just honestly ignorant, in the dictionary sense of the word. However, the internet also provides a link to accurate information, in great depth and detail, often at no cost.

Then we have magazines, and information for sale. Although we tend to believe what we read and buy, some of it is no better than the forum average.

So who should you believe? Nobody. Ask for supporting data, or dig it out yourself. Trust but verify.

Allow an example. In a previous post, I brought up the "scary red box". Let's look at an iteration of the box, the "red fin", from a Mike Busch article, Sport Aviation, December 2012. Note the dire caption. Woe to those who operate in the "abusive purple zone"!



Look hard at the numbers. The chart doesn't begin until 85% power. The bible according to Busch says that at 85%, anything leaner than 225F ROP is in a caution zone, and 175F ROP is abusive.

Now look at raw data from a public document anyone can download. It's from the FAA dyno at Hughes, running an IO-540K, accepted as a detonation-sensitive example of the Lycoming NA sixes. The data was taken with 245F oil, 100F+ inlet air, and the test cylinder at 475F CHT...conditions much more severe than any reasonable pilot would allow in the field.



How odd. Even at 2700 and WOT (28"+), it turns out best power is around 125 ROP, deep in Busch's "abusive zone". Running at 225 ROP, as advised, simply means reduced power.

Let's get oversquare for the fixed pitch pilots, 2350 and 28"...hard against the Lycoming charted "Maximum Manifold Pressure" line.



Gosh. Again we see that even under the most severe pro-detonation conditions, 125 ROP is perfectly fine, and richer is just an expensive power reduction.

Still think the internet is always bad, and famous writers are always good?
 
Last edited:
Well as long as we're going off topic...

Busch isn't talking about immediate damage in that diagram, he's referring to long term health of the cylinders. His "danger zone" is where long term damage is occurring, not necessarily imminent doom and destruction. I've never heard him say or write that there is immediate danger in the red zone, just that time spent there is time off the back end of the engine. APS teaches the same, backed up with data. EGT/ICP/CHT all correlate, CHT being the biggest determining factor in long life.

I flew for a 135 operator with turbo charged IO-550's that can validate his operating principles (we never cruised richer than -50). Multiple engines made it to TBO with no issue, only to be torn down and reported as still looking new inside. Sadly, one led to the loss of an airplane as its factory new replacement catostrophically failed at 180 hours (connecting rod failed, went through crankcase).
 
Last edited:
Busch isn't talking about immediate damage in that diagram, he's referring to long term health of the cylinders. His "danger zone" is where long term damage is occurring, not necessarily imminent doom and destruction.

Trust by verify. Look at the numbers. At 2700 and full throttle, the horsepower difference between 125 ROP and 225 ROP is 291 vs 285. That's a 2% power reduction in return for a fuel consumption penalty of 14%. Now consider if 2% can make a significant difference in the long term health of a cylinder. Remember, this issue has nothing to do with cruise. The scary red box deals with climb power...overall, a short term use.

I've never heard him say or write that there is immediate danger in the red zone, just that time spent there is time off the back end of the engine. APS teaches the same, backed up with data.

Long term wear data for red box observance in climb? In God we trust. All others are asked to bring supporting documents.

Again, this has nothing to do with LOP cruise.

EGT/ICP/CHT all correlate, CHT being the biggest determining factor in long life.

Make of list of all the ways CHT can be reduced, then consider....why would anyone choose fuel? The answer is because all the more sensible choices are locked by certification.

We have experimental freedom, but often waste it on self-flagellation. You want to hear a definition of insane? It's a guy worrying about the red box, while step climbing a high performance airplane at reduced power and some ridiculous fuel burn to keep CHT down, behind a 540 with bumped compression, cold air induction, and an EI with advanced timing.
 
Last edited:
Long term wear data for red box observance in climb? In God we trust. All others are asked to bring supporting documents.

Again, this has nothing to do with LOP cruise.

I like the analogy!!!

A piece of data I have been in search of is documentation of Cyl failures vs. CHT.

anyone help me out?

Various sources have been spitting numbers around but no data showing the failures. Just because some source says the metal in the head becomes 1/2 strength at 400 deg. F. does not mean it has not been designed to handle continuous operation at some higher temperature. I am not in disagreement with running cooler....I only want data supporting the correlation. I hope this is not too far off topic from the OP :eek:
 
Last edited:
Flight Test Data helps

To the OP:

Did the original builder/ owner provide their flight test data or POH?

If either exists, you might find answers to some of your questions. A close read will be required; a POH might be lifted text from another (unverified) source, and gundecked test data could misleading as well.

If either document does not exist, my "glass half full" perspective is that you have a wonderful opportunity to learn your airplane in detail.
 
Trust by verify. Look at the numbers. At 2700 and full throttle, the horsepower difference between 125 ROP and 225 ROP is 291 vs 285. That's a 2% power reduction in return for a fuel consumption penalty of 14%. Now consider if 2% can make a significant difference in the long term health of a cylinder. Remember, this issue has nothing to do with cruise. The scary red box deals with climb power...overall, a short term use.



Long term wear data for red box observance in climb? In God we trust. All others are asked to bring supporting documents.

Again, this has nothing to do with LOP cruise.



Make of list of all the ways CHT can be reduced, then consider....why would anyone choose fuel? The answer is because all the more sensible choices are locked by certification.

We have experimental freedom, but often waste it on self-flagellation. You want to hear a definition of insane? It's a guy worrying about the red box, while step climbing a high performance airplane at reduced power and some ridiculous fuel burn to keep CHT down, behind a 540 with bumped compression, cold air induction, and an EI with advanced timing.

Agree, climbing like that is idiotic. MB would say the same.

It's evident you've never read any of MBs stuff (or talked to the guy in person, he's pretty prompt to answer email, maybe go yell at him in person) because you're arguing against points he's never made, which is making your posts completely incoherent. You sound like "1+1=purple!!!!!"

All the data is out there to support his principles of engine management. It's in every engineering and physics book I've ever owned for starters.
 
Last edited:
It's evident you've never read any of MBs stuff ... because you're arguing against points he's never made...

Obviously I have, and in this case, posted the publication and month. This isn't a debate about Mike's overall value, or my reading.

Please examine the caption below his red fin illustration, and the text of the article. Perhaps you could explain why climbing an NA Lycoming at 85% and leaner than 225 ROP is "highly abusive", given it is necessary to obtain rated power?
 
Back
Top