- Joined
- Apr 14, 2019
- Messages
- 2
- Reaction score
- 0
I have recently bought a turbo arrow III and am trying to get the engine altitude compensation (or not) straight in my mind.
If I go back to the Continental manuals for the TSIO-360-E(B) they give a pair of power graphs which show the delivered power increasing with altitude for a given MP/RPM setting c. 10% over the 20,000ft. So far much as I’d expected.
The Continental manual for the TSIO-360-F(B) has a very similar pair of graphs which ultimately result in a flat power curve with height for a given MP/RPM setting. These numbers line up well with those in my POH.
I was aware that many people say the POH numbers have been simplified but they do line up with the Continental manual. Has that been ‘simplified’ too, or is there another explanation for the flat response with altitude? As the 360-F is in other aircraft too do those aircraft POH align to the Continental manual or do something else?
Any thoughts much appreciated. I’m beginning to doubt my grasp of physics!
Ed
If I go back to the Continental manuals for the TSIO-360-E(B) they give a pair of power graphs which show the delivered power increasing with altitude for a given MP/RPM setting c. 10% over the 20,000ft. So far much as I’d expected.
The Continental manual for the TSIO-360-F(B) has a very similar pair of graphs which ultimately result in a flat power curve with height for a given MP/RPM setting. These numbers line up well with those in my POH.
I was aware that many people say the POH numbers have been simplified but they do line up with the Continental manual. Has that been ‘simplified’ too, or is there another explanation for the flat response with altitude? As the 360-F is in other aircraft too do those aircraft POH align to the Continental manual or do something else?
Any thoughts much appreciated. I’m beginning to doubt my grasp of physics!
Ed
