A36 Bonanza Anemic Climbs

[GLMS_NC]

1. Full throttle. Keep it firewalled until you get much closer to planned altitude. Don't back off in the climb early on. You need 2700 RPM and full manifold pressure.

2. In the climb unless you are performing a take off at high altitude, keep that mixture full rich. No need to cut the mixture here. Keep the cylinder heads cool, and get max performance. You need to gain altitude quickly on a take off.

3. Book says 10 degree climb attitude, correct?

4. Confirm you are getting 28GPH from your fuel pump at max RPM. Has your fuel system been calibrated and compared to your gauge?

10 degree attitude, 2700RPM, Full rich, and 28GPh fuel flow you would see better than 700' per minute in a climb. Even at higher altitudes.

To the comment about leaning and running LOP, you don't need to get to 8,000 or 9,000 in order to run LOP. If you are flying a continental big bore, they are holding a webinar June 2 to discuss this in more detail. This is not hangar talk - this is the engine manufacturer, and Bill Ross does a great job sharing information on proper LOP operations.

 

[Henning]

Duh....

I mentioned full rich for the climb out at full power while down low.

I climb LOP, I just leave the RPM up and throttle WFO. You know me, there's only two positions for a throttle.

 

[weilke]

Also, there have been accidents attributed to combined STC's on one airframe. Individually, they tested out fine, but nobody tested them when combined with others.

Well, there was the 337 in NJ where the NTSB decided to question the combination of STCs rather than ascribing the accident to 'terminal dumbassery'.

 

[N801BH]

I climb LOP, I just leave the RPM up and throttle WFO. You know me, there's only two positions for a throttle.

Yup...

I have personally witnessed your snowmobile riding style........

 

[Henning]

Yup...

I have personally witnessed your snowmobile riding style........

You don't really know how a machine balances until it's airborne, and that's stuff you need to know right away.

 

[denverpilot]

Don't assume things. It's not an education issue and I agree with you more than you realize. I don't think 2,500 rpm "saves" the engine. I bring it back because my pax don't have headphones.

Why not? Old head clamps are cheap.

dB level in the cabin isn't that much different between those two, anyway. They're going deaf at about the same rate.

Unless you're talking non-human pax, not at least handing them a beater David Clark seems kinda wrong.

 

[Aaronk25]

Could just trade it for a MOONEY.

 

[Cpt_Kirk]

Could just trade it for a MOONEY.

I don't own it, and I do fly a Mooney as well.

I prefer the Mooney.

 

[Aaronk25]

I don't own it, and I do fly a Mooney as well.



I prefer the Mooney.

Oh come on I was looking for a more dramatic response than that. Just kidding, I have a m20j and the need for a six seater is ever increasing but the useful load on the a36 makes it a 4 big person and bags plane. And white the higher GPH I don't wanna trade gas for bags.....

 

[Henning]

Oh come on I was looking for a more dramatic response than that. Just kidding, I have a m20j and the need for a six seater is ever increasing but the useful load on the a36 makes it a 4 big person and bags plane. And white the higher GPH I don't wanna trade gas for bags.....

If you really want 6 people and bags and range, you need 450hp to haul all the weight, it's market for which the R-985 was built., and it does the job well. The A-36 will do a reasonable job with 6 people though if you apply weight management techniques and limit leg range. That actually works out reasonably well for a lot of people. Most of the time people fly GA solo or 2 up when traveling long distances, and usually you can't make more than 2-3 hrs in a full plane before some needs to use the restroom.

 

[bflynn]

I found an A36 POH online - pulled the performance chart out. What I read, at 7000' DA full throttle, 3400 lbs, nice summer day at 30C, leaned to 20 gph, the expected climb performance pretty much 700 fpm.

Of course it's been a few years since I last did this so I might have made a mistake with the chart, I was never that good with it in the first place. And this chart might not apply to your aircraft. But if it does, it sounds like you're in the right neighborhood.

 

[weilke]

I found an A36 POH online - pulled the performance chart out. What I read, at 7000' DA full throttle, 3400 lbs, nice summer day at 30C, leaned to 20 gph, the expected climb performance pretty much 700 fpm.

That looks like the diagram for up to serial #926, so it would be a 285hp IO520 equipped plane.
His plane is different in two ways, it has a 300hp IO550 and it weighs 500lb more than that book number.

 

[bnt83]

That looks like the diagram for up to serial #926, so it would be a 285hp IO520 equipped plane.
His plane is different in two ways, it has a 300hp IO550 and it weighs 500lb more than that book number.

Air conditioner, IO550, all the goodies = fat airplane

That being said, from an earlier post I came to the conclusion that the gross weight was 3910, that being the case comes out to 13.03 pounds per horsepower fully loaded.


My Cessna 150 with younger me (180#) and 60 pounds of fuel would be around 1210 pounds and on a cool day a 100 horsepower climbed just a tad slower than mentioned above.

 

[bflynn]

That looks like the diagram for up to serial #926, so it would be a 285hp IO520 equipped plane.
His plane is different in two ways, it has a 300hp IO550 and it weighs 500lb more than that book number.

I don't know his aircraft, which is why I said the chart might not apply.

There's a plus and a minus Does the 15 hp offset the 500 lbs? I'm not a Beech guy so I can't determine. Seems like the hp might just offset it or maybe not quite offset.

Without seeing the performance chart for this specific airplane we can't tell for certain, but it appears that 700 fpm is not a completley unreasonable climb rate for a Bonanza during the summer.

 

[weilke]

I don't know his aircraft, which is why I said the chart might not apply.

He said its a 99 model with tip-tanks and VGs which means he has a 300hp IO550 and a MGW of 3910lbs.

 

[bflynn]

He said its a 99 model with tip-tanks and VGs which means he has a 300hp IO550 and a MGW of 3910lbs.

Good trivia that I'm quite sure I won't remember.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Im seeing at or near the correct fuel flow for the PA, corrected with the boost pump on Low, if need be.

That might be part of the problem. On mine, and I believe all IO-550s, you should not have the boost pump on for normal operations. Mine has a noticeable drop in power with the low boost pump on; the high boost is a guarded red switch because if everything is still in one piece the high boost will run it so rich it quits.

If the fuel flow is too low for takeoff, it should be fixed by an A&P rather than running the pump.

What are your EGTs/fuel flow at takeoff?

 

[Cpt_Kirk]

Oh come on I was looking for a more dramatic response than that. Just kidding, I have a m20j and the need for a six seater is ever increasing but the useful load on the a36 makes it a 4 big person and bags plane. And white the higher GPH I don't wanna trade gas for bags.....

Ha. If you have a JPI and GAMI injectors, you can very closely match the speed/gph you see in the Mooney running LOP.

I was doing ~160 true at 13.8 ROP today (2350rpm) 11,000msl)). The engine doesn't have those injectors and REALLY doesn't like it when you try to pull it LOP.

That might be part of the problem. On mine, and I believe all IO-550s, you should not have the boost pump on for normal operations. Mine has a noticeable drop in power with the low boost pump on; the high boost is a guarded red switch because if everything is still in one piece the high boost will run it so rich it quits.

If the fuel flow is too low for takeoff, it should be fixed by an A&P rather than running the pump.

What are your EGTs/fuel flow at takeoff?

On some takeoffs, the FF is correct, on others it's fixed by running it on LOW. I may be wrong, but I believe I read that was an option under Normal Procedures in the POH. There is no noticeable power loss with the addition of the fuel pump. Believe me, if there was, I'd turn it off.

I was light(er) departing out of Louisiana today. I ran 2,700rpm up a few more thousand feet and was doing much better in the climb (800-900 initially).

The cause for concern was just being new to the type with all of the goodies and heavy on departure. It seems to be performing exactly as it should.

 

[Aaronk25]

Ha. If you have a JPI and GAMI injectors, you can very closely match the speed/gph you see in the Mooney running LOP.

I was doing ~160 true at 13.8 ROP today (2350rpm) 11,000msl)). The engine doesn't have those injectors and REALLY doesn't like it when you try to pull it LOP.


On some takeoffs, the FF is correct, on others it's fixed by running it on LOW. I may be wrong, but I believe I read that was an option under Normal Procedures in the POH. There is no noticeable power loss with the addition of the fuel pump. Believe me, if there was, I'd turn it off.

I was light(er) departing out of Louisiana today. I ran 2,700rpm up a few more thousand feet and was doing much better in the climb (800-900 initially).

The cause for concern was just being new to the type with all of the goodies and heavy on departure. It seems to be performing exactly as it should.

I got jpi 830, gami and powerflow. It's 160kts at 11000 on 10.1gph

Or 165-167kts at 8000 on 11.3gph if rop and that's only enough ROP to get peak speed about 40rop. The power flow changes a lot of engine operation such as it only likes 25lop max and best speed at 40-50rop. Before the power flow with gami it liked wider end of the spectrums. Sorry for hijack.

 

[Cpt_Kirk]

I got jpi 830, gami and powerflow. It's 160kts at 11000 on 10.1gph

Or 165-167kts at 8000 on 11.3gph if rop and that's only enough ROP to get peak speed about 40rop. The power flow changes a lot of engine operation such as it only likes 25lop max and best speed at 40-50rop. Before the power flow with gami it liked wider end of the spectrums. Sorry for hijack.

I meant you can see similar performance numbers in the Bonanza with those mods, not a Mooney. My mistake.

 

[weilke]

You shouldn't need the boost pump to get full takeoff FF.

 

[Henning]

You shouldn't need the boost pump to get full takeoff FF.

Correct. On the 310, there was an AD that had the low pump in the wings on full time though. High was strictly for emergency FI and for priming.

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

That might be part of the problem. On mine, and I believe all IO-550s, you should not have the boost pump on for normal operations. Mine has a noticeable drop in power with the low boost pump on; the high boost is a guarded red switch because if everything is still in one piece the high boost will run it so rich it quits.

If the fuel flow is too low for takeoff, it should be fixed by an A&P rather than running the pump.

What are your EGTs/fuel flow at takeoff?

The low speed boost is there for "HOT" starts and to prevent vapor lock, as needed. It is not needed otherwise nor is it used for takeoff like in the Pipers. The high speed will in most cases put too much fuel into the engine and cause it to quit.

Lots of engines are adjusted on the low side for take-off power and need a few more gph, or richened, to help cool CHTs.

 

[RotorAndWing]

Correct. On the 310, there was an AD that had the low pump in the wings on full time though. High was strictly for emergency FI and for priming.

What AD is that? And what "low pump in the wings" are you referring too?

 

[taters]

Yup...

That extra 200 RPM's will make a BIG difference...

full throttle and Prop..theres a reason the green arch in those guages goes to the top....

2500/25" makes that engine cringe....

 

[Henning]

What AD is that? And what "low pump in the wings" are you referring too?

Not sure, don't have the papers anymore. The previous owner pointed it out and was why pumps could be heard running as soon as the master went on. Might have been an MSB.

 

[RotorAndWing]

Not sure, don't have the papers anymore. The previous owner pointed it out and was why pumps could be heard running as soon as the master went on. Might have been an MSB.

What you are hearing are the recirculation pumps in the aft end of the main fuel tanks. Those are wired through the L&R landing light circuit breakers.

For older Cessna's that was an AD 69-14-01, later models came from the factory configured that way.

The purpose of those pumps is to recirculate fuel in the main tank to prevent fuel disruption at high angles of attack and low fuel levels.

It's explained in the POH's and AFM. Anyone who has operated 300 and 400 series Cessna's knows this, and anyone who has worked on these planes knows this.

See post 45 here