Tell me more please. My impression is that with some engines in some installations, it is very real. Seems like a couple of local C-340 owners paid for a lot of cracked cylinders. Maybe we were wrong in attributing it to shock cooling.
I had never heart of "The Step" until this thread, but I have to admit that this is something I do, and for the simple reason that it can take a very long time for my Cardinal to come up to cruise speed if I simply level off at altitude. So I typically go 50-100 feet high and come down to cruise altitude to speed up the process a little. I never thought the final cruise speed attained that way would be any faster. Assuming one did not get stuck on the backside of the power curve, it just flies in the face of basic physics to think it would be. So I have to agree with the Bravo Sierra assessment. (But it's fun to see someone do the "Mythbusters" shtick, and I enjoyed watching the AOPA video on this.)AOPA recently did an On the Step Test, their conclusion? "Bravo Sierra"
http://www.aopa.org/AOPA-Live?utm_s...ontent&utm_content=L2&utm_campaign=160429ALTW
AOPA recently did an On the Step Test, their conclusion? "Bravo Sierra"
http://www.aopa.org/AOPA-Live?utm_s...ontent&utm_content=L2&utm_campaign=160429ALTW
John Deakin has said that preventing the cylinders from getting too hot in the first place is what matters. However, this article might also be worth a read:Tell me more please. My impression is that with some engines in some installations, it is very real. Seems like a couple of local C-340 owners paid for a lot of cracked cylinders. Maybe we were wrong in attributing it to shock cooling.
Tell me more please. My impression is that with some engines in some installations, it is very real. Seems like a couple of local C-340 owners paid for a lot of cracked cylinders. Maybe we were wrong in attributing it to shock cooling.
That is why it's usually advised to maintain climb power as the plane accelerates to cruise speed, and only then to power back. Power back too soon and it's possible to never get on "the step" and fly for hours at a slower speed than the plane is capable of. I think that's also where the procedure of climbing a little above one's desired altitude and the accelerating in the descent to altitude came from, though in practice that should never be necessary.
Ha. I just watched that episode of AOPA Live today.AOPA recently did an On the Step Test, their conclusion? "Bravo Sierra"
http://www.aopa.org/AOPA-Live?utm_s...ontent&utm_content=L2&utm_campaign=160429ALTW
Don't let a cat get near a baby or it will suck the breath out of it.
Snopes supports it as an owt:Don't let a cat get near a baby or it will suck the breath out of it.
It's amazing what people will believe.Snopes supports it as an owt:
http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/catsuck.asp
That's another one that's in POHs....Must tap brakes before you retract the gear...
It is also something that can be very aircraft dependent. On some larger aircraft, tapping the brakes before retraction will leave you with flat tires on landing.That's another one that's in POHs.
It is also something that can be very aircraft dependent. On some larger aircraft, tapping the brakes before retraction will leave you with flat tires on landing.
On an aircraft like the B-25, the brakes are so strong and the tires so heavy that if you touch the brakes in the air, you can shear the stems off the tubes.Do what???
On an aircraft like the B-25, the brakes are so strong and the tires so heavy that if you touch the brakes in the air, you can shear the stems off the tubes.
On an aircraft like the B-25, the brakes are so strong and the tires so heavy that if you touch the brakes in the air, you can shear the stems off the tubes.
That's another one that's in POHs.
C-172RG and C-177RG are the two that I know of.Which POH?
C-172RG and C-177RG are the two that I know of.
I don't reach for Cessna POHs out of dogma; I do it because that's what's in the rental plane I happen to be flying that day.Factory POHs are notoriously poorly written. That is why when you go to Flight Safety or Simuflight for a type rating, they use their own, in house, written POH.........I have stacks of them. And, insurance companies don't typically insure a turboprop/jet without the pilots going to initial and recurrent.
So if you dogmatically reach for your Cessna POH, don't be surprised to see errors and OWTs.
Besides, FlightSafety and Simuflite don't have training manuals for 172RGs and 177RGs....I don't reach for Cessna POHs out of dogma; I do it because that's what's in the rental plane I happen to be flying that day.
I'm well aware that the advice in POHs is sometimes not the best procedure, but if I'm going to deviate from it, I feel that I need a reason to do so.
So if I can find a pilot with more hours than you who disagrees with you, would that make you wrong?Palmpilot has thousands of hours dealing with this exact thing and can speak from first hand experience.
So if I can find a pilot with more hours than you who disagrees with you, would that make you wrong?
Talk to any DZ or glider tow pilot, go from 13k to seal level with a 2500+ FPM decent, 15 times a day, year round, and than tell me about shock cooling.
How do they deal with it?Talk to anyone in alaska who has operated piston engines in -40 ambient. It's very real.
How do they deal with it?