Jomac,

There's a world of difference between a factory engineered turbo system and one that's been added to an existing installation.

Also, in my experience, Lycomings with turbos seem to be a good deal more durable than similar size Continentals. Of course, Lycs tend to be more robust engines in any case.

MTV

Nitrous

Have had them on different aircraft 260 HP-470 182 amphib, 2-300 hp 520's 185's a 350hp-540Lyc Bonanza, 2 200hp 360's Seneca, 2 380 hp 541 Lyc 56TC barron
4 of them were manual, the rest had automatic wastegates
I love them, the speed you get above 10,000' is fantastic!!
If you are not paying attention to be able to adjust the Turbo, then ya probably should not have one!!
Have never had to overboost one.
We had the 185's for ski operations above 10'000'.
Not sure why any one is carrying turbo pressures on let down?? Why would you and if you did not, you don't have to worry about that part!
Climb out is great WOT, keep adjusting the turbo knob to your boost limit or even just sea level power, nice to be able to have 75% at 12'500 cruise!!
Just bought a T310Q.
Building a 360 lyc in a glastar with manual/auto wastegate.

Guess I'm the oddball out here!!
My .02 well worth it too!!

I'm with you . Manual turbo is the shiznit.

In addition to the "second throttle" type of manual wastegate (ala Ray Jay) after market systems, there have been some factory turbo installations which are manual. There are two kinds that know of:

The TR182 we owned had the wastegate linkage attached to the throttle, so that the first movement of the throttle opened the carburetor's throttle and the second movement closed the wastegate. It was necessary to watch the MP on take off to make sure that it wasn't over-boosted. It had a pop-off valve to prevent severe over-boosting that theoretically prevented engine damage, but it was set enough higher than maximum permitted boost that if it were to be relied on regularly, I suspect damage could occur. I over-boosted once, on a go around from a short strip at 1000' MSL in Ohio, when I misjudged the winds (or they changed, I'd like to think) and had to go around. Habit: I just shoved the throttle to the wall, heard the pop-off valve open, and brought it back to take off power--by that time I'd already cleared the trees.

The Mooney 231 that I flew regularly for a couple of years had a "fixed wastegate". At lower altitudes, it was also necessary to watch the MP on take off to prevent over-boosting. It also had a protective pop-off valve, and again it was set high enough above maximum take off power that there'd likely be damage if it were regularly relied upon. I think lower end Pipers with turbos, such as the Turbo Arrow, had similar set-ups.

The big difference was that the critical altitude with the Cessna version was much higher than the critical altitude with the Mooney version, "critical altitude" being the altitude at which sea level power could no longer be maintained. Operationally, there wasn't any difference.

Automatic waste gate controls, such as the larger Cessnas and the Mooney 252 have, are a whole lot nicer from a pilot operation standpoint, than any manual control. They really reduce pilot workload significantly, especially on take off. On a narrow strip, having to keep an eye on the MP while staying centered was a little problematic. My method with the manual systems was to advance the throttle to about 4" less than the full MP take off setting, so that as the turbo wound up, it wouldn't over-boost. With automatic systems, The throttle is simply pushed in all the way, and the only issue is not advancing the throttle too quickly, or it will do what can be often heard when pilots aren't careful, a sort of waaaaaAAAAAaaaaa sound as the controller does its job.

Cary

M6RV6 wrote:Have had them on different aircraft 260 HP-470 182 amphib, 2-300 hp 520's 185's a 350hp-540Lyc Bonanza, 2 200hp 360's Seneca, 2 380 hp 541 Lyc 56TC barron
4 of them were manual, the rest had automatic wastegates
I love them, the speed you get above 10,000' is fantastic!!
If you are not paying attention to be able to adjust the Turbo, then ya probably should not have one!!
Have never had to overboost one.
We had the 185's for ski operations above 10'000'.
Not sure why any one is carrying turbo pressures on let down?? Why would you and if you did not, you don't have to worry about that part!
Climb out is great WOT, keep adjusting the turbo knob to your boost limit or even just sea level power, nice to be able to have 75% at 12'500 cruise!!
Just bought a T310Q.
Building a 360 lyc in a glastar with manual/auto wastegate.

Guess I'm the oddball out here!!
My .02 well worth it too!!

From that number of airplanes, sounds like you're either 107 years old or you cycle airplanes pretty fast......sorry, couldn't resist....

MTV

I think I'd trust a STC addition of a turbo as much as a factory install. They keys would be to understand the plumbing schematic well, have and understand an engine monitor, and understand the CHT/mixture relationship. All you're doing is fooling the engine into thinking it's operating in dense air while ensuring it doesn't get too hot in the thin air available for cooling. It doesn't matter if it's factory or a field install of an approved system, you have to operate within the limitations of the airframe (cooling). You usually need to adjust the angle of climb for cooling. I don't know any that can sustain Vx, or even Vy.

I can't afford the TAT offering for my 185 right now, but if I miss it badly enough, and my fortunes improve, I'd trust them.

Pinecone wrote:I think I'd trust a STC addition of a turbo as much as a factory install. They keys would be to understand the plumbing schematic well, have and understand an engine monitor, and understand the CHT/mixture relationship. All you're doing is fooling the engine into thinking it's operating in dense air while ensuring it doesn't get too hot in the thin air available for cooling. It doesn't matter if it's factory or a field install of an approved system, you have to operate within the limitations of the airframe (cooling). You usually need to adjust the angle of climb for cooling. I don't know any that can sustain Vx, or even Vy.

I can't afford the TAT offering for my 185 right now, but if I miss it badly enough, and my fortunes improve, I'd trust them.

You bring up a serious issue, the tendency of turbo'd engines to run pretty hot. Every one that I've flown had to be carefully flown, and in olden times, that wasn't as easy as today, because we didn't have the sophisticated engine monitors that are available today. Both CHT and TIT (turbine inlet temperature) had to be watched carefully, and that often meant running at climb speeds well above Vy, and cruising at altitude with the cowl flaps partially open (or as Mooney liked to put it, "in trail") because of insufficient cooling air at the lower air density of high altitudes.

One year I rented a Turbo Arrow and flew it for about 28 hours on a "tour the Midwest" excursion. That was probably the worst one I have flown, for running too hot, with the Mooney 231 a close second. The only way to keep the Arrow reasonably cool was to throttle back to a pretty low power setting. Our TR182 actually ran pretty "normal", and Vy was possible most of the time except on pretty warm days--as long as we kept the mixture pretty rich. The T210 was OK at flight level altitudes, but getting there had to be done in a pretty shallow climb.

There are certainly places where a turbo is a pretty nice thing to have, but for many folks, it's an unnecessary luxury for the kind of flying that they do.

Cary

I have a manual wastegate normalized 0-540 Lyc in my M-5.
I don't find it harder to manage than any other of the aircraft I've been lucky enough to fly.
I tend to montitor engine parameters very closely anyway. Job hazard I guess.
Anyhow, if you spend anytime high or hot, you will adore the performance.
It really feels like cheating when you get to dial up MP.
I purchased this plane specifically for the turbo. Absolutely zero regrets.