Engine TBO

[crownvic]

Hello everybody & happy new year ,

after nearly 70 engine hours my engines are again in poor condition.
I don't know why it happens. Because they are running all the time within the given parameters.

Somebody makes the same experience ,or reaches higher engine hours before they went into poor condition

with regards

[Jacques]

Yes, the run out pretty quick! Best I've managed is somewhere between 100 and 150 hrs.... They were using so much oil I had to do Continental flights only. After a short time they were fairly pouring oil out! It would be nice if A2A re-visited this one aspect to bring the wear and tear more in line with normal for the time. They DID have a fairly short life early on...I don't have specifics on hand. I made that a goal, to really run the engines well within limits, not too lean on mixture, etc. to see just how far I could get. I might try that again, soon.

[AviationAtWar]

Has anybody had one fail in flight just from age/condition? I had one just over 80 hours in very poor condition/overhaul recommended that just kept flying. I was waiting to overhaul it because I wanted it to fail in flight but ended up having multiple fires on a short field takeoff fully loaded so I had to overhaul all four.

[Jacques]

No, now that you mention, just from getting tired of pouring oil into them and having it pour right back out! Then again, I guess that would warrant rebuilding on its own, yes? I mean, if you are on a long enough flight and you have to choose to feed three moderately okay engines and one poor condition engine and the oil was getting critical, I guess I would let the one poor one go with no oil, and when the reservoir was dry then it would fail. But I can never seem to let it go that far!

[crownvic]

How often you guys use the "automatic flight engineer"?
Because that guy is a little bit rough to the engines but i can't miss him during difficult manouvers(take off,go around).

[Jacques]

Not much, really. I control mixture, MP and RPM, so I guess he only handles the fuel, and turbos during takeoff, but I take that over as well once climb is established around three thousand feet. You're correct, he definitely likes to run the turbos harder than I prefer!

[AviationAtWar]

Lately I've been letting the flight engineer handle temps and the turbos. He does seem to run everything harder and hotter than I would, it would be worth doing an extended test to see if the engines do last longer controlling everything myself as much as possible.

[Scott - A2A]

We use an accelerated TBO on the 377 - 500 hrs max.

The following creates the most wear:

Power
Wear is an exponential curve with power, so understand when you are pushing 67" on this aircraft, those engines are wearing multiple times more than even a high cruise. As soon as you get off the ground, raise gear and reduce to METO power

Heat
This wears similar to power, as the wear curve is exponential. Engines heat up rapidly on takeoff. I like to slowly apply full power and keep a shallow lift and climb, if the runway is long enough. Making faster, less steep “cruise climbs” will help your engines last much longer than slower, steeper, and hotter max rate climbs

Shock cooling
This is a debatable subject, but as long as the jury is out, the rule of thumb is you don’t want to see more than 50° F per minute (28° C which the 377 uses) cooling of your cylinder head temps. Shock cooling most often happens when a pilot, starts the descent by quickly pulling back too much power. For me, I pull back no more than 3” at a time, then let the temps settle, then more reduction if necessary max 3” each time. Also, you can use your cowl flaps to help prevent shock cooling.

Shock cooling can also happen if you run the engine temps way up high after a heavy takeoff and drop the nose and pull power way back in an attempt to cool them off. Think gradual all the time with your throttles.

Also, the same applies to the turbo than does the throttle. Anything that rapidly reduces power can easily cause a shock cooling situation.

Lastly, never forget your ADI.

I hope this helps,
Scott.

[Jacques]

Hi Scott,
That is very useful and welcome information! So the goal for me is ~500 hours. I think I see one area for improvement and that is in your emphasis on small reductions in power, no more than 3 inches and then a pause to stabilize. I throttle back slowly and steadily, but with no pausing, to my desired cruise setting.

[crownvic]

Hmm...
as i discribed previously i always run them(engines) as careful as possible. But under certain circumstances(take off,go around,short final) you have to move the throttles forward or backward to keep the aircraft flying. And you have to request all the power available.
In my opinion, if you consider the operational limits of that engine and doesn't request high(or wrong) power ratings too frequently, the engines don't have to worn out so fast.
I have no idea how to reach nearly 500hrs TBO, if i fly the aircraft how it hase to be used(passenger, cargo flights under realistic conditions).
Because that it is therefore this beautiful simulate aircraft was made...right
But don't get me wrong, this B377 is the best sim aircraft i ever saw. It is only that thing with , in my opinion, hypersensitive engines that is confusing me

[Scott - A2A]

I wouldn't worry too much about what number is the ideal one. I personally like, in simulation, engines wearing out faster than in real life, since we just don't have that much time. Just use your last number as the one to beat.

Scott.

[n421nj]

Most fun I have is experiencing an engine fire while cruising along in the b377. The sounds, the vibrations, the crew and passengers screaming. Total immersion. Every dull flight is a disappointment on fsx.