George, even you would have to agree that the most diligent pilot is "ham-handed" as long as there is a manual mixture control....even with top notch engine monitors it's like performing brain surgery with an ax and a flashlight.
No I don't have to agree. It is just not that hard to keep the engine within the limitations of CHT and Oil Temp, especially with an engine monitor with hi/lo limit alerts. Above 75% power full rich, below 75% power lean to rough and than enrich. With a EGT gauge, lean to peak than enrich to 100F ROP. Done deal. I just don't see the burden.
jet drivers long ago lost the ability to fiddle with "mixture control" in a turbine for good reason (fewer puddles of molten metal, etc.)
I am a jet driver. True fuel controllers on a turbine engine is way too complicated to do manually. Second I can fly my RV with out thinking of engine management, despite the prop, throttle, mixture controls on the panel. I can see 350HP turbo-charge piston twin engine with gear, flaps, cowl flaps, pressurization controls, 8 levers sticking out the center stand, etc... where FADEC would be more of a benefit, but a single engine fixed gear simple plane, not so much.
the last time you could buy a car with manual engine management was in the 1920s. how often does the average person wear out pistons/valve guides/bearings in a modern car? 2000 hours = appx 100,000 miles, i.e. not even close to being worn out. heck, most cars now have 100k service intervals for major items
Apples and oranges, the affect on engine life from better fuel distribution and ignition is only a small part of the picture. You are not changing the mechanicals of the engine. Also aircraft air-cooled engines and car engines are totally different application and design, and for very good reasons.
if FADEC lives up to it's promise, we could see TBO's approaching 3000 or more hours for the venerable Lyclone designs.
It will just not happen. Fuel and ignition will not reduce wear appreciably and you make several other good points below. It is like putting a GPS and DVD player in a 55 Chevy, it is still a 55 Chevy. By the way the 55 Chevy is way cool and does not need the GPS and DVD player.
...the only problem is that it takes most of us 10-20 years to put 2000 hrs on an engine, hence we don't see the immediate benefit beyond slightly better gph.....most folks will never reach TBO thus never return the total investment in FADEC at current prices.
What kills most Lycoming is dis-use not mis-use. Piston engines in freight operations go to TBO easily because they fly every day, and they are used, abused and put away wet.
FADEC is a hard sell at $5500...but not so bad *IF* it prevents cracked cylinders or burned valves along the way to TBO
As long as you operated your Lycoming with in the recommended CHT of less than 400F, have oil temps in the 190-205F range and fly often, you will do wonderful things for your engine. As far as leaning if you lean aggressively on the ground (taxi) and do a short leaned-out run-ups before shut down, after the flight, you will do great things for your engine and plugs. Leaning in flight is not hard, but to screw up in my opinion is hard to do, with the warning about leaning below 75% power and maintaining the CHT and oil temp in mind. If you never fly, overheat, don?t change oil, taxi full rich, lean above 75% power and run near peak EGT you will have problems. FADEC can?t solve all this for you. No doubt it will do a little better job and save some work load but is it worth it. Depends. I like the control my engine. What else do I have to do. Also at 150 hours a year avg on my RV is not much. If it was for a plane used in commecial ops, flown daily, it may be worth it.
at $3000 things would be MUCH more interesting ...but aerosance doesn't seem to grasp this reality yet