Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Beech Baron 58 Problem

Recommended Posts

Hi,I tried to fly the default Baron on fs 2002. While climbing out of 4000 ft it seems that I have not enough power to maintain a positive climb rate. With full throttle, max prop rpm, full rich mixture and 300 fpm climb rate I lose speed above 4000 ft until I stall the aircraft. That shouldn't be normal?? At www.raytheonaircraft.com the is a good performance sheet that shows a cruising altitude of 10000 ft -- but how can I reach this altitude??Many thanks for any comment, Thomas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

The problem is the full rich mixture. Start leaning! :) At 6,000' it's really noticeable if you're not leaning the mixture.At our airports here in the KSLC area which ranges from 4200-4600' msl, we're leaned before we even takeoff to get the performance we need. As an example, the real life Archer's mixture knob will usually be between 1/3 & 1/2 leaned before takeoff.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot for this hint. The Raytheon spec sheet as well as the FS2002 aircraft manual or Werner Schott's checklist (manbb58.zip) don't say anything about mixture settings. Does leaning only depend on the altitute? Does anybody know a specification or a rule of thumb how to generally handle the mixture on the Baron 58?many thanks, Thomas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but what do you mean with "feather proping"?Thomas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Thanks a lot for this hint. The Raytheon spec sheet as well as the FS2002 aircraft manual or Werner Schott's checklist (manbb58.zip) don't say anything about mixture settings. Does leaning only depend on the altitute? Does anybody know a specification or a rule of thumb how to generally handle the mixture on the Baron 58?many thanks, Thomas." Thomas,Gasoline has a specific air/fuel mixture ratio of about 14.5 to 1 for the efficient operation of an engine. This means that you want 14.5 lbs of air for every 1 lb of gasoline. As the density altitude increases a given volume of air has less mass (the weight is lower for a specific volume). This means that you MUST reduce the weight of the fuel you allow in to match the reduced mass of the air.If you create an oxygen starved condition (too rich) you will note a loss of engine rpm, so by slowly leaning the mixture (pulling the mixture knob out) you should notice an increase in engine rpm (without changing your throttle settings). If you go too far (too lean) the combustion chamber environment because oxygen rich and once again your engine rpm will fall off and eventually the engine will quit, once you've gone too lean.So the rule of thumb is to slowly lean the mixture for maximum gain in rpm. Rather crude, but effective.The modern automobile has an on-board computer with a rather complex fuel mixture mapping program that handles all of this automatically, and these systems have proven to be very reliable and exceedingly efficient, but these fuel management computers haven't caught on in aviation yet, which is kind of surprising to me!All of us pilots that fly here on the west coast (I live in Reno, NV) must be very aware of the difference between actual altitude and density altitude and knowing the difference can and will save your life, period. Having sufficient lift and for efficient engine operation, you must be aware of your density altitude at all times!Bear!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear, You will enjoy this and next issue of AOPA Journal in which are articles on mixture control. This month's article supports running on the slightly rich side of optimum--presumably for lower temperature and stress. Next month others will advocate running slightly lean of peak, my guess is to foster cleaner combustion and plugs as well as fuel savings. Looks like once again, we see life is a series of compromises and trade-offs (trades-off??) with plenty of people on each side of an argument.Dick Ball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In flight you can take the EGT as an indicator of mixture. Too low, it's too rich: excess gasoline cools off the mixture. As you lean the mixture the temperature goes up and reaches a peak which indicates the proper mix. However, it's safer to adjust on the ascending side of the curve (a tad too rich).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still maintain that FS2K2 exaggerates the effect of mixture controls though. The plane should be able to climb through 4,000 or even 6,000 at full rich without choking. If density altitude is high or you have full tanks of fuel, maybe not, but I think the Baron is particularly unforgiving. Also, as a real 421 pilot pointed out, turbocharged engines shouldn't be affected by altitude because the correct mixture is assured, but MSFS doesn't seem to model that.David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Bear I live in Reno, NV. The base altitude here is 4412 ft on the runway officially although in reality the runways here are sloped slightly, with dip in the middle as well. 'Full rich' is NOT used on take-off here, because of the altitude. Right form the time of engine start up the mixture is leaned. With experience one can simply yank the mixture control out an inch or so, but for the perfectionists there is a method to lean the mixture in the POH. For the Cessna 172 at the time of the runup (after taxiing to the runup area so the engine is warmed up) a certain number of engine and magneto checks are performed with engine rpm's at 1700.To precisely lean the mixture (already leaned grossly before engine start up) first set the rpms to 2000 then lean until rpm's drop slightly by turning the mixture knob. From there turn the knob toward rich settings with the thumb and index finger by quarter turns 3 or 4 times. The rpm's should go back up. And you're all set. Throttle back and continue the checklist. In flight, once you are 3000 ft or more above airport elevation it is wise to check the mixture again following POH defined procdures using the EGT as a guide. In planes without such equipement simply lean the mixture making sure rpm's and loss of engine power do not occur. Too lean and knocking in the engine could occur. Too rich and one uses alot of avgas and also one loses precious engine power. Again, normal take off procedures at mountain airports such as KRNO are done with a plane with a mixture already leaned from the time of start-up!Bob S Reno, NV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Autofeather...Sorry about that, it was on the King Air 350 and not the Baron.But anyway, there is a setting (switch/lever) on the King Air that says AUTOFEATHER and its regarding the prop. I was wondering what AUTOFEATHER meant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>I still maintain that FS2K2 exaggerates the effect of >mixture controls though. The plane should be able to climb >through 4,000 or even 6,000 at full rich without choking. If >density altitude is high or you have full tanks of fuel, >maybe not, but I think the Baron is particularly >unforgiving. Also, as a real 421 pilot pointed out, >turbocharged engines shouldn't be affected by altitude >because the correct mixture is assured, but MSFS doesn't >seem to model that. >David MicroSoft messes up almost everything in its AC. I fixed the Fuel Air Mixture table soon after FS2K came out. In part, I referred to real Power vs Mixture curves. I also knew from my flying expence that engines don't almost die at 5000 ft with a full rich mixture. Yes, you reminded me that turbocharged engines shouldn't need to have the Mixture changed with altitude. Since the carburetor/fuel injector sees the same MAP regardless of altitude (below the critical altitude). MS claims many of it's MSFS staff fly real AC. I don't think I'd chance flying with anyone who doesn't know enough about real AC to get things right in their AC models. They also got the Carb Heat RPM drop way too high in FS2K2. Runway Rolling Friction is too high, etc. etc. etc.-Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>> MicroSoft messes up almost everything in its AC. I fixed >the Fuel Air Mixture table soon after FS2K came out. In >part, I referred to real Power vs Mixture curves. I also >knew from my flying expence that engines don't almost die at >5000 ft with a full rich mixture. >> Ron, you mention that you fixed the curves. Is that something that any of us can do? If so, how? Thanks!David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When autofeather is armed, the prop will automatically feather if an engine loses power. It's one less thing for the pilot to verify and perform manually at at critical time, therefore slightly reducing the chance that you'll end up a smoking hole in the ground.Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks to everybody for sharing your experience and all the hints. As you could see, I'm not (yet) a real pilot but I'm interested in real aviation and "how it really works". I learned a lot from you guys :-). Thanks again, Thomas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>> MicroSoft messes up almost everything in its AC. I fixed >>the Fuel Air Mixture table soon after FS2K came out. In >>part, I referred to real Power vs Mixture curves. I also >>knew from my flying expence that engines don't almost die at >>5000 ft with a full rich mixture. >> >Ron, you mention that you fixed the curves. Is that >something that any of us can do? If so, how? Thanks! >David Yes. You need Aired. Method 1: Just load a prop AC AIR file with a good TBL 507 "Torque Factor vs Fuel/Air Mixture" and "Copy to Clipboard" in the Aired menu (right click). Then, load the AIR file you want to improve and use the menu "Replace From Clipboard" when highlighting TBL 507. The 'improved' Mixture table should then be set in the AIR file. Save it and give it a try. I think all of Steve Small's FS2K+ reciprocating engine AIR files have such improved tables. Steve released an improved FS2K2 Barron some time ago, but it may be hard to find nowadays. Certainly my AIR files have this change, but they aren't generally available. However My FS2K2 172SP UG is floating around. ===============Method 2: However, one can pretty well fix TBL 507 by simply increasing the 'y' value at the extreme right 'x' value of '0.13'. Looking at the default Barron, I see 'y' is set to 0.000 at this rich mixture point. I increase it to at least 0.70 or 0.80. This table shifts left as altitude is gained and the Mixture table decreases the engine Torque toward 0. Not realistic, as a Fuel:Air ratio of 0.13 (Air/Fuel = 7.7) is approached an engine should still have quite a bit of power. At 'x' = 'y' = 0.95 in the default Barron. Increasing 'y' to 0.98 would also be reasonable. But, it's the last value that really makes a difference here. Note: you can hit 'y' on the KB in Aired and then edit the y value directly. Same for 'x' to edit the x value (when needed). This change may reduce the EGT accuracy at low altitudes, but the improved Mixture effect is far more important as far as I'm concerned. Ron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron,Thanks for the help. It's a bit over my head at the moment but I'm guessing it will make sense when I get into aired. As for the turbocharged engine, how would you go about negating the fuel:air factor for realism sake?David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> MS claims many of it's MSFS staff fly real AC. I don't >think I'd chance flying with anyone who doesn't know enough >about real AC to get things right in their AC models. >> They also got the Carb Heat RPM drop way too high in >FS2K2. Runway Rolling Friction is too high, etc. etc. etc. >Ron, I do believe you'd give non-pilots the impression that the default models don't behave anything like real aircraft. But in fact, we know they do; at least to the point of getting from airport to airport with out any real difficulties . They're just not up to exact specifications, specific power & drag curves, or exact responses to all flight conditions. The exactness is not required for the average consumer, and I still maintain that it's not Microsofts responsibility to provide "exactness" with all it's specific default models. If someone needs or requires more duplication of the real thing, then 3rd parties are the way to go!I don't want anyone to leave here believing MS has overly exaggerated features such as leaning, to the point of being totally wrong. They've done leaning requirements in steps of approximately 2000' instead of following exact "curves", but at least the requirement is there! As mentioned previously by me and others, I'd never think of takinf off or flying at altitudes from 4000' to 6000' at full rich. The partial loss of power at 4200' in a Cessna 172 (160hp or less)with three people aboard could be disasterous. These planes are "gutless" as it is at these altitudes, and loosing some horsepower because you left the mixture control at full rich certainly won't help.Items-- MS DID get right ---------- at least the "feel" of requiring right rudder through the takeoff & climb phase in a single engine aircraft. The exactness of specific torque, slip stream, & P-factor might be off, but the effect is there. Much better than most other, if not all GA simulations. I can only think of some military ones that are as good or better. At least MS requires a "solid" foot on the right rudder, without all of the sudden getting "squirrely" & changing directions!L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I still maintain that FS2K2 exaggerates the effect of mixture controls though. The plane should be able to climb through 4,000 or even 6,000 at full rich without choking. If density altitude is high or you have full tanks of fuel, maybe not, but I think the Baron is particularly unforgiving. Also, as a real 421 pilot pointed out, turbocharged engines shouldn't be affected by altitude because the correct mixture is assured, but MSFS doesn't seem to model that.David"That's not entirely true. My instructor also flies charter flights on a daily basis in a B58 and I've spoken with him about this very thing as it kind of bothered me in FS2k2. He told me that he's witnessed anywhere from a 100 to 200 RPM drop (depending on weather) when climbing through about 4500 ft. He usually will not fly any higher than 8500 ft on most of his charter flights as the aircraft's performance degrades much more after that altitude. Even at 8500 ft, he says that he has the throttles pretty much full forward just to maintain normal cruise. (about 165 to 170 KIAS)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron, I do believe you'd give non-pilots the impression that the default models don't behave anything like real aircraft. But in fact, we know they do; at least to the point of getting from airport to airport with out any real difficulties . You said it, at least from point A to point B. In this aspect one might as well load FSII on the ol' Apple II in such a way boring it might get with FS. MSFS teaches one the basics of flight from airport to airport. Unfortunately that's all IMHO. For some of us wanting that sparky something more, FS does not stand first....the "feel" of requiring right rudder, spurred by Ron's comment, >FS2K2. Runway Rolling Friction is too high, etc. etc. etc. Did you ever try some emergency procedures with the Baron, like critical or any engine out? Then sit back and enjoy the Zero Rolling Friction ice skating competition of FS while trying to taxy the Baron with one engine (in opposite of the high rolling friction during take-off Ron mentioned, which you and I discussed in another forum). Not to mention that one can't get any FS nosewheel steerable GA aircraft to wheelbarrow when not properly trimmed (like nose-down) for take-off (most common mistake of all beginner pilots).FS is nice, but a such good performer as trainer it isn't on the other hand as well as you try and make it. I still maintain that it's not Microsofts responsibility to provide "exactness" with all it's specific default models. And they claim: "As real as it gets."? I can't disagree with you more! 3rd Party for an off-hand simulator like X-Plane perhaps, but not this full-fledged commercial software developed by teams that have teams.Pieter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gary,It's a good thing your instructor doesn't fly in mountainous country if he won't go above 8500ft with a Baron. I own and fly a 1965 B-55 Baron that has smaller engines than the B-58 and I fly at 11000 and 12000 cruise altitudes all the time. And of course the throttles are going to be wide open up there if the aircraft does not have turbochargers. My normal cruise setting at those altitudes is wide open throttles and 2300rpm which gives me about 55% of the rated engine power and a true airspeed of 207mph.Ed Weber a.k.a tallpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Did you ever try some emergency procedures with the Baron, >like critical or any engine out? Then sit back and enjoy the >Zero Rolling Friction ice skating competition of FS >while trying to taxy the Baron with one engine (in opposite >of the high rolling friction during take-off Ron mentioned, >which you and I discussed in another forum). Not to mention >that one can't get any FS nosewheel steerable GA aircraft to >wheelbarrow when not properly trimmed (like nose-down) for >take-off (most common mistake of all beginner pilots). > :-lol :-lol :-lol Notice I didn't attempt to bring in the engine out senario. Try some of Steve Smalls air.files for this. BTW--- in all seriousness, since I did try quite a number of engine out scenarios when going for the multi-................... I really don't feel that PC cockpits work all that well for engine out practice anyway. No sensing of yaw, no knobs/levers in their proper places for quick reactions, etc. It's just too "fake" & I have no sense of "impending doom" either!!L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this