Sadly, Texas Top Aviation is having to cancel it’s 2020 Santa Fe Fly In due to COVID. New Mexico has continued to implement travel restrictions, making it difficult for Texas Top Aviation to complete the event.
Mark your calendars now, though, as Texas Top Aviation has scheduled is 2021 Fly In. We are returning to the Lajitas Golf Resort in the Big Bend area of Texas. The event will be March 24th-26th, 2021. Stay tuned for more information. We hope to see you there!
The PT6 engine that’s found on the Jetprop and Meridian is designated a -21, -34,-35, or a -42A. The Continental engine on a Malibu is either a TSIO 520 or a 550. What’s the difference? Why should I care? Most pilots don’t understand the difference, but it’s pretty easy to understand…and it’s all about breathing.
Whether a piston or a turbine, the engine has a ratio of fuel/air that works best. For a piston model, we can make adjustments to this ratio by adjusting the mixture. In climb we use a richer ratio to help cool the engine, and in cruise we lean the mixture to save fuel since we don’t need the extra fuel for cooling (due to higher speeds which cools the engine). In the turbine, the ratio is set and there’s nothing that can be done about it…except climb to a higher altitude. But, more about that in a second..let’s go back to the piston discussion…
Piston: A Continental 520 engine and the 550 engine are flown exactly the same. On takeoff, both will develop 310HP (38″MP with the 520, 35.5″MP with the 550). So, why would a pilot want a 550 in his airplane as opposed to a 520? The answer is breathing.
A 520 is named appropriately because the engine displaces 520 cubic inches of air with each complete cycle of all 6 cylinders. To determine the displacement, just figure the bore (diameter of the cylinder) and the Stroke (how far the piston travels in the cylinder) and plug the numbers into this formula:
CID = Bore X Bore X 0.8754 X Stroke X # of Cyl.
Here’s the bore and stroke of the Continental 520 and 550 engine:
TSIO 520: Bore = 5.25″ and Stroke = 4″
TSIO 550: Bore = 5.25″ and Stroke = 4.25″
So, you can see the two engines are exactly the same except the 550 has a little longer stroke, and therefore displaces a little more air. Said another way…it the sucks the air into the engine a little better.
So, with this knowledge, the ability for the engine to breathe becomes a little more clear. Both a 520 and a 550 will perform exactly the same until the point that a 520 simply cannot suck enough air and begins to develop less MP as a result. For most 520 engines, this will happen somewhere around 18,000 ft. But, it is dependent upon a myriad of factors including: health of the engine, altitude, temperature, and atmospheric pressure. When the 520 hits this point, the throttle can be full-forward, but the engine will not develop full MP, but some number that is less. I’ve seen a max MP at FL250 in a 520 Malibu to be about 31″MP. So, you can probably guess that the rate of climb will correspondingly suffer as the engine develops less MP. How do we fix this problem? Enter the 550…
Since the 550 displaces more air, the engine will maintain max MP to a higher altitude. When the 520 begins to develop less power at about FL180, the 550 engine will be able to continue to maintain 35″ at a higher altitude. Make no mistake…the 550 will also hit an altitude where is cannot develop 35″MP, but this altitude will probably be nearly FL220. So, the 550-powered Malibu will reach cruising altitude faster than the 520.
But, at cruise both engines are pulled back to 30″MP. So, either engine will deliver the same cruise speed because they are both able to develop 30″MP at any altitude. Does it really matter if you’ve got a 520 or a 550 engine? Answer: not much. Both are excellent engines and both will deliver the airplane to the destination, but if the chosen altitude is above FL180, the 550-powered airframe will probably arrive a few minutes earlier. Which would I want if I were purchasing an airplane? It’s not a big enough deal, IMHO. I’d select the best airframe/engine/prop combination and not put much weight into the 520 vs. the 550.
Turbine world: So, how about the -21, -34/35, and -42A compare? Here, there’s big difference, but it’s still all about the breathing. A -21, -34/35, and -42A are all derivatives of the famous PT6 family of engines, and all are designed to be 1000+SHP engines de-rated to fit the airframe. For instance, the -42A engine is 750SHP when mounted on a King Air 200, but the same engine is derated to 500SHP when mounted on the Meridian. Ditto with the -21 and -34/35 engines…all are de-rated. So what’s the difference? Breathing…
At the lower altitudes all will develop their maximum rated SHP, meaning they will all develop maximum torque. And, down low there’s plenty of air to breathe so the engine has no problem developing that torque at a low ITT. But, as altitude is gained, the engine must suck more air to develop the same torque, and the ITT goes up. At some point in the climb (depending upon altitude, temperature, pressure, and IAS) the engine will not be able to produce max torque without exceeding Max ITT. At this point, the engine cannot breathe any more (suck in anymore air), and the power (torque) developed falls off. With the -21 engine, the power falls off quite dramatically because the engine simply cannot breathe well. It is a smaller engine and more air cannot be forced into the compressor section. For the rest of the climb the engine is “ITT limited” and the performance will suffer.
The -34/35 engine is a little bigger and will develop maximum power (torque) to a higher altitude. And, when the torque does drop off (as altitude is increased), the rate of decrease is less because it can breathe easier due to it’s larger size. Guess what? The -42A will beat out the others and develop max torque to an even higher altitude. With this decrease in torque available also comes a welcome friend…less fuel burn. Altitude is the friend of any turbine pilot, and he/she will climb to the highest altitude possible to save on fuel.
The end result is the -21 powered Jetprop will cruise at 238 KTAS (in the summer) with a fuel burn of only 28gph. The -34 will have higher torque than the -21 and will develop more SHP and will have a higher cruise (260 KTAS in the summer) with a correspondingly higher fuel burn (32gph). The -42A will be breathing easily at higher altitudes, and will develop the most torque, but with a fuel flow of 39gph. The Meridian (with the -42A) will not out-perform the -34/35 Jetprop in cruise purely because the Meridian is much heavier.
Just remember…fuel flow in a turbine is always commensurate with its ability to breathe and a turbine’s ability to breathe is a function of the engine’s ability to breathe.
With this knowledge…let’s check your understanding. Answer this question: Will a Jetprop cruise faster in the summer or winter? Remember, cold air is more dense than warm air, and an engine will develop power according to it’s ability to suck in air. More air available, more power available. Answer: Winter.
A good analogy: I’m a Cross-fitter (meaning I do crossfit workouts a lot). In the gym we have various workouts that test a person’s ability to perform. Guess who usually does the best? Right…the guy who can breathe the best. A person is nothing more than an engine…we intake air and combine it fuel and burn it to develop energy. In Crossfit, the person with the biggest engine (muscles that can develop power) that can sustain power (good aerobic capability) will win almost every time. The only variables then are genetics (how well-made is the engine), flexibility (you’ve got to be able to get into the position), and skills (there are more efficient movements). A good Crossfitter will work hard on mobility, skill, and try to increase the bodies ability to increase capacity through a tough workout.
To get maximum performance, the pilot cannot change the engines skill or mobility (at least not without an engine change!), but a thorough understanding of the how the engine breathes will help him/her use the power that is available to the fullest.
Joe Casey’s aviation story began in 1990 with his first flight near Nacogdoches, TX in a Cessna 172. From lift-off, Joe knew he would have a lifetime passion flying just about anything that will leave the ground…He was completely hooked.
Along with being an FAA Designated Pilot Examiner (DPE), Joe is an ATP/CFI-AHMG and Commercial Rotorcraft/Glider Pilot in the civilian world and also a UH-60/AH-64 Pilot-in-Command/Instructor/Examiner Pilot in the US Army Reserves. His passion for the last 19 years, however, has been the PA-46 Malibu/Mirage/Matrix/Jetprop/Meridian. Has has amassed over 6,500 hours in various PA-46 airframes and believe it to be one of the finest flying machines available for the serious cross-country pilot with an eye for efficiency.
Now, Joe has flown more than 12,200 hours in just about every imaginable environment. Whether providing initial/recurrent training in the PA-46’s, TBM’s, instructing in NVG’s in a UH-60 Blackhawk, flying the King Air series of airplanes, giving tailwheel endorsements, or taking kids flying for the first time, he simply loves flying machines and the people who fly them.
The PT6 engine that’s found on the Jetprop and Meridian is designated a -21, -34,-35, or a -42A. The Continental engine on a Malibu is either a TSIO 520 or a 550. What’s the difference? Why should I care? Most pilots don’t understand the difference, but it’s pretty easy to understand…and it’s all about breathing….
We have all seen the little first aid kits that a pilot can get to carry in an airplane. It usually has some bandaids, maybe some gauze, and some antibiotic ointment. Very helpful in the even that your paper VFR chart cuts your finger when you are unrolling it.
What happens if you crash in a harsh environment and you have some actual injuries to take care of?
Enter the Guardian Seven Trauma G7-Alpha Trauma and Egress Kit. It literally is a First Aid Kit on steroids.
Guardian Seven Trauma has put together a kit that contains just about anything you need to take care of an injury from an airplane crash. Plus, the kit only weighs less than 2 pounds. It easily mounts in an aircraft and can be opened with only one hand.
The kit contains:
Want to upgrade your first aid kit? Visit Guardian Seven’s website to order the G7-Alpha kit.
First Aid Kit on Steroids We have all seen the little first aid kits that a pilot can get to carry in an airplane. It usually has some bandaids, maybe some gauze, and some antibiotic ointment. Very helpful in the even that your paper VFR chart cuts your finger when you are unrolling it. What…
I took a Piper Malibu to Cabo San Lucas a few weeks back. This was my second trip flying to Mexico, but the first where I arranged everything. Cabo is a beautiful place and the MMSL airport is a fabulous facility. For those who haven’t been fying to Mexico before, MMSL is the place to go. The folks there are extremely helpful and do most of the paperwork for you. You just have to pass along your information to them.
Flying to Mexico and back out is different than flying in the US. First of all, don’t forget your passport. The authorities on both sides frown upon that. You’ll probably get sent back to the US (or sent back to Mexico if you are on your return trip). Your aircraft also needs, Mexican insurance (talk to your US insurance agent) a radio license, and a customs decal.
Second, you’ll have to file an ICAO specific flight plan for flying to Mexico. This is available on Foreflight now, but I really like Fltplan.com’s way of doing it. I don’t fly internationally enough to remember what everything means, but Fltplan.com does a great job of walking pilots through the the different classifications. It’s almost impossible to get confused.
Third, you have to fill out an eAPIS form. This has to be done at least 24 hours prior to departure from the US, but it can be done as far in advance as you’d like. If your departure time changes or your passengers change, you can edit the eAPIS form to bring it current.
Flying to Mexico IFR is a lot simpler than flying VFR. I have only flown IFR and it is very easy. I’m already on a flight plan, already squawking a discreet code, and already on radar, so there really isn’t any way I can mess up the ADIZ penetration. I really recommend going in and out of Mexico IFR instead of VFR.
Once you land in Mexico, you have to close your IFR flight plan. The tower doesn’t do this for you. After clearing customs, you’ll have to pay a landing fee and sign your flight plan confirming you have arrived and closing it out.
When departing, you have to file another eAPIS 24 hours in advance. Wherever you plan on clearing Customs in the US, you’ll need to call the Customs office no less than 1 hour, but not more than 23 hours before arrival. It’s called an Advanced Notice of Arrival.
You’ll need to fill out a paper flight plan before departing, clear customs again to leave, then away you go.
There are a lot of really fun getaways in Mexico and flying there doesn’t have to be difficult. When you have the right information, flying to Mexico can be a breeze!
I took a Piper Malibu to Cabo San Lucas a few weeks back. This was my second trip flying to Mexico, but the first where I arranged everything. Cabo is a beautiful place and the MMSL airport is a fabulous facility. For those who haven’t been fying to Mexico before, MMSL is the place to…
A History Lesson
11 years ago, in April of 2009, the Avidyne Corporation unveiled the much bally-hooed Release 9, or R9 as it is commonly known, as a hardware replacement for the Avidyne EX5000 Entegra system in Cirrus Aircraft. The Entegra system was way outdated by that point. Even though Avidyne was the first company to put together a glass PFD in a single engine piston airplane, the company had quickly fallen behind Garmin in keeping up with the ever changing technology landscape.
Rewind to 2008. Cirrus had been going strong with the Avidyne Entegra since the SR20 and SR22 went to full glass in 2003 (a PFD and an MFD; prior to that, Cirrus aircraft only had an MFD with steam gauges and a Sandel Electronic HSI). Cessna, on the other hand, vaulted past the Avidyne Entegra and went straight to the Garmin G1000 in it’s aircraft, starting in 2004 with the 182 G1000 and 2005 with the 172 G1000. Beechcraft and Columbia went to the G1000 (Columbia started with the Avidyne as well) in 2005.
Garmin’s technology in 2007 was so much better than Avidyne’s technology that Cirrus decided to switch. I’m sure there were many promises made by Avidyne to Cirrus about what Avidyne was working on (the R9), but the G1000 was out there, available, and being used in a lot of different airplanes with very good results.
So, in 2008, Cirrus made the switch from the Avidyne Entegra to the Garmin G1000, dubbing it the Cirrus Perspective by Garmin avionics package. Avidyne finally got the R9 to market in 2009, but by that time, Piper was the only airplane manufacturer left putting factory Avidyne panels in their airplanes, and they switched to G1000 later that year.
The R9 is a fabulous product. It’s fully integrated, has great graphics, has fully redundant displays, a QWERTY keypad (which, by the way, Garmin didn’t do for another 8 years), and a lot of other neat features. There’s a bit of a learning curve, but it’s a really good product for what it is.
Avidyne, though, was late to the game with their technology. By the time it debuted in 2009, all the GA aircraft manufacturers had long since switched to the Garmin G1000 and weren’t looking back. That left Avidyne with the retrofit market for the many different Avidyne Entegra Cirrus aircraft out there. The only problem was, the retrofit was $80,000 ($95,000 if you wanted to throw in the DFC 100 Autopilot, which is a must have) and not many owners were up for paying that much money, then or now.
To sum up our brief history lesson, Avidyne knew the Entegra needed to go, but couldn’t get the R9 out quickly enough to convince anyone to stick with Avidyne products. The retrofit market didn’t amount to many sales, so Avidyne doesn’t even make the R9 anymore.
As a side note, I really, really like the Avidyne R9 and am sad that it didn’t make it into more airplanes.
So, when the Avidyne Entegra starts to have issues, what’s an owner to do? Keep reading!
There is Hope
There are thousands of Cirrus aircraft out there flying with the Avidyne Entegra instrumentation, which is basically 20 year old technology (I’ve had a computer engineer tell me the programming in an Entegra is Windows 98 tech). These things are going to start having problems at some point (many already have), but what solution do owners have that is cost effective and get’s them new technology?
Remember that little company named Garmin? Well, they have come through again. Announced this summer, the Garmin G500 TXi is now certified as a replacement in the Cirrus Avidyne Entegra equipped aircraft. This means pulling out both the PFD and MFD and replacing them with the G500 TXi on both sides. Engine data is also displayed on the G500TXi MFD, including the percent power and TIT indications, if equipped.
The cost for the panel? Two 10.6″ G500 TXi’s run about $16,000 apiece for the units, not including labor. $32,000 for a brand new panel isn’t terrible. Plus, the G500 TXi’s work with the DFC90 autopilot if the Cirrus is already equipped with it. If not, the Garmin GFC 500 autopilot is now approved for the Cirrus at a relatively low price of $7,000, including the servos.
Still have the original Garmin 430s in your Cirrus? Upgraded to the Avidyne IFD 540/440 stack? Put in dual GTN 650Xi’s? Put in a GTN 750Xi? All are compatible with the G500 TXi panel.
Want to upgrade everything? It does get kind of pricey at that point, but for just equipment, the cost for a complete panel conversion is somewhere in the area of $65,000 plus labor, still below what the R9 cost, but not cheap either. That would include 2 G500 TXi’s, 2 GTN 650Xi’s, a GFC 500 Autopilot, and all the engine monitoring equipment that the G500 TXi would need.
Thankfully, some new technology has finally come to the Generation 1-3 Cirrus. Oh, and by the way, your steam gauge Cirrus is fully upgradable as well.
Want to read more? Check out Garmin’s website.
A History Lesson 11 years ago, in April of 2009, the Avidyne Corporation unveiled the much bally-hooed Release 9, or R9 as it is commonly known, as a hardware replacement for the Avidyne EX5000 Entegra system in Cirrus Aircraft. The Entegra system was way outdated by that point. Even though Avidyne was the first company…
I got the privilege of going to the EAA AirVenture at Osh Kosh this year. It was my first Osh Kosh experience. I’ll be the first to tell you, walking in the gate on the first day is mildly overwhelming. There are people and stuff everywhere. Airplanes, tents selling everything from airplane parts to mattresses (I wasn’t really sure how mattresses tied to flying), vendors, colleges, and loads of people.
After I gathered myself from my initial shock, I set out to explore all that I could. I spent most of the first morning walking around the different manufacturer’s tents, getting a gauge on all the new airplanes I could never afford and only hope to ever fly.
The short of it is, the Cessna/Textron Denali is going to be stellar once it gets completed. The Epic E1000 (if it ever gets certified) might take a large market share from TBM, though they will have an uphill climb. The Cirrus Vision Jet is very cool and should be a relatively simple step up for SR22T owners. The Pilatus Jet is huge. Finally, the Diamond DA62 would be my below 12,500 airplane and the Piper M350 would be my pressurized plane. Money being no factor, of course.
I decided to take in the entire airshow on Day 1, all 4 hours of it. Upon realizing I would be very stiff necked if I did that each day for the three days I was there, I decided on Day 2 to check out some seminars and learn something. I took a seaplane ground school course on Day 2, then listened to a NASA presentation on electric airplanes and low boom sonic jet technology (how to make supersonic passenger flight quieter).
The end of Day 2 at Osh Kosh had to be the highlight. I got to hang out with Cub Crafters at the 51WI grass strip just north of the OSH Class D airspace. There was a free BBQ and I got to take a ride in a Carbon Cub. My landing from the back seat was a bit rusty, but still a very cool experience. Buzzing the BBQ area in tandem was pretty neat.
Day 3 brought some cooler temps and some clouds. We walked out to the vintage airplanes, spending the morning gawking at Cessna 195s and Wacos. Then I took the plunge to explore all the vendor hangars. My idea was to walk around and see if I can find some interesting and innovative technology. Well, after 2 of the 4 hangars, my head was spinning, so I decided to watch the rest of the airshow to let my brain drain out a bit.
3 Days was a good amount of time to spend. I don’t think I could have stayed all week, but only a day or two wouldn’t have been worth it. I flew up with a former student in his TBM 700, which was a very nice way to travel. We landed and stayed in Green Bay (KGRB), which was super easy and low stress. Had a great tailwind on the return and made it to Houston non-stop.
A few closing observations:
If Stratos Aircraft is ever able to bring this to market, it sounds awesome. 400 knots, single engine, single pilot, with 6 seats. Being a single engine jet, similar to the Cirrus Vision Jet, it’s 100 knots faster, plus with the airflow and engine technology, it doesn’t have that big V Tail in the back, thereby reducing drag. I have a feeling it would find a good market, but the certification process is a bear to get through. Just ask Epic.
This is a legit airplane. Lots of thought was put in to the design of the Mako by the new Lancair organization in Uvalde, TX (KUVA). The airplane was extremely comfortable, capable, and pretty cool. The stick is in the center, with throttles on the side (where the stick would be in a Cirrus or Columbia). AC, full Garmin integration, and the cool factor of the nose gear retracting, but not having a gear handle. Higher useful load than a Cirrus or Columbia, it would be a great alternative (and cheaper) to one of it’s certified competitors.
There is a lot of new avionics technology hitting the market. Dynon, beloved by experimental enthusiasts, is finding a foothold in the certified world with some neat panels. It will be an uphill battle to take on Garmin, but there is some potential in the retrofit market to offer a cheaper alternative to the Garmin TXi.
Speaking of the TXi, I played around with the 10.7″ panel at the Garmin booth. It is extremely intuitive. Garmin did a great job of making it a simple touch screen interface, easy to use, and easy to learn.
Avidyne is pushing their iPad integration with the IFD 100 iPad app. It ties via Wifi or Bluetooth to an IFD 550 or 440 navigator, giving an additional screen in the cockpit to work with. You have the ability to modify flight plans and such on the iPad and it will show up on the GPS units.
All in all, Osh Kosh was an experience I’m glad to have finally experienced. I don’t think I would go every year like some folks, but every few years, especially when my sons are older, seems like just enough for me, but not too much.
All Photos Courtesy of William Day, copyright 2018, All Rights Reserved
I got the privilege of going to the EAA AirVenture at Osh Kosh this year. It was my first Osh Kosh experience. I’ll be the first to tell you, walking in the gate on the first day is mildly overwhelming. There are people and stuff everywhere. Airplanes, tents selling everything from airplane parts to mattresses…
As was the case with the Class B Airspace around Houston several months ago, the Class B Dallas airspace has been overhauled as well. These changes were implemented at the last database update on September 18th. If you’ll be flying into any of the Dallas airspace airports IFR, make sure you have current charts and your GPS databases are updated.
According to AOPA, 14 SIDs and STARs were deleted, a number of new procedures were added, and changes were made to most of the other remaining procedures. The new procedures in the Dallas airspace consist mainly of RNAV procedures for turboprops and jets, so most GA aircraft won’t be affected by those. The legacy procedures that remained in place over went changes, including new frequencies, so piston aircraft going into the Dallas airspace are still affected.
From AOPA, departures from Dallas Love (KDAL) that file their flight plan with special equipment /G in their flight plan will automatically be given an RNAV departure procedure. This does not appear to affect piston aircraft as all the new RNAV SIDs in the Dallas airspace are for turboprops or turbojets.
The reason for the changes to the Dallas airspace? Similar to the changes in Houston, these airspace changes are meant to streamline departures and arrivals in the Dallas airspace area, reduce controller workload, and give continuous descent angles for arriving high altitude traffic.
Don’t be surprised the next time you are in the Dallas airspace area if you receive a clearance that states: “Descend via the arrival.” In that case, just check the chart and aim for the appropriate altitudes at the appropriate fixes. As we move closer to the ADS-B requirement, I believe we will see more and more of these terminal procedure overhauls, so be prepared and keep those charts and databases up to date.
As was the case with the Class B Airspace around Houston several months ago, the Class B Dallas airspace has been overhauled as well. These changes were implemented at the last database update on September 18th. If you’ll be flying into any of the Dallas airspace airports IFR, make sure you have current charts and your…
