Fairchild Club Forum

> I never used the procedure because I felt it complicated the start
> process, and left the door open to forgetting to put the mag in "BOTH"
> after starting. Needless to say I'm rethinking my starting procedure.
>
> Tom
> Hanford, Ca.

On Sunday, May 29, 2005, at 11:21 PM, John Amundsen wrote:

> I follow the procedure in the Fairchild manual to spin the engine over
> with the mags off until enough momentum is gained and then switch to
> the left mag. I thne switch to both. I have forgotten to switch to
> both, but catch it on my engine runup. I pull the engine through
> before trying to start the engine.

After pulling the engine through 12 compression strokes by hand, I
crank the engine with the left mag energized and switch to both after
starting. I do this because only the left mag has an impulse coupling
and I want to avoid the possibility of a kickback if the right mag
fires at 25 degrees before TDC at cranking RPM. I dont want to operate
the mag switch while cranking because I am afraid of overshooting the
"Left" position and energizing the right mag (either by switching to
"Right" or between indents, which energizes both).

:Dan
:NC81323

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Danielle"
To:
Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: [fairchildclub] Catastrophic engine failure


> The E-80 Eclipse starter clutch is set for 285# for the Ranger. You are
> correct about radials. I flew C-47's in 'Nam. Our procedure was to turn
> the engine and count blades - 18, I believe - then turn on the mags. This
> might not be a bad procedure with the Ranger. Don't know why the Ranger
ops
> manual doesn't call for it.
> ----- Original Message -----

Being as the Ranger is a four stroke cycle engine ( the last time I looked )
two full rotations of the engine should cover all the cylinders. I have a
fair amount of experience on the R-2600 Wright (B-25), the Pratt & Whitney
R-2800 (Douglas A or B-26) and more experience than I wanted on the Pratt
R-4360 (KC-97). On the three bladed props, six blades would do the job,
eight on the four blades and four blades should do it on the two bladed
Rangers. I pull mine through to save the starter a little extra work.

Bob

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Danielle"
To:
Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 7:35 PM
Subject: Re: [fairchildclub] Catastrophic engine failure


> The break was just where it shows in the photo. I believe the starter
> clutch would have slipped if it had encountered the lock. The problem
> probably started with any other cylinder firing first. This is all just
> conjecture, though. It could have just been a microscopic crack or flaw
in
> the rod casting. I'll probably never know.
>
> Mike
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jan Servaites"
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 1:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [fairchildclub] Catastrophic engine failure
>
>
> > Did the rod break near the wrist pin area? It looks like a clean break
> > right across the I-beam. Do you think that just the power of the starter
> > against the hydraulic lock could bend a rod? I would think not unless
> > one of the cylinders fired?
> >
> > --
> > Jan Servaites (Dayton OH - The Birthplace of Aviation)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> Hi Folks,
>
> My '29 Great Lakes replica is powered by a 200hp Ranger. On 23 May
> while at a cruise setting of 1950rpm, the No.6 connecting rod
> broke. I have posted a new photo folder (Engine Destruction) to
> show the folks here the results of the incident.
>
> I was able to land in a hayfield without further incident.
>
> I am the third owner of this aircraft and the engine has only about
> 80 hours on the clock. The engine was certified when installed (per
> the FAA) but I have no history on the overhauler.
>
> My best guess is that somewhere, sometime in it's past, the engine
> was started with a minor hydraulic lock in the No. 6 cylinder which
> bent the rod slightly. The damaged rod continued to degrade until
> it gave up the ghost with the pictured results.
>
> Guys, it's imperative to pull your Ranger's through all cylinders
> before EVERY start (Warners too). If one jug is tight, STOP. Pull
> it through in reverse to dump the oil into the intake or pull the
> plug. My practice is to pull the engine through even if I'm only
> shutdown for a 15 minute refuel. You only have to do this kind of
> damage once to get a chance to test your off-field landing skills.
>
> Fly safe,
> Mike in Oregon

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Danielle"
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 7:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [fairchildclub] Catastrophic engine
> failure
>
>
> > The E-80 Eclipse starter clutch is set for 285#
> for the Ranger. You are
> > correct about radials. I flew C-47's in 'Nam.
> Our procedure was to turn
> > the engine and count blades - 18, I believe - then
> turn on the mags. This
> > might not be a bad procedure with the Ranger.
> Don't know why the Ranger
> ops
> > manual doesn't call for it.
> > ----- Original Message -----
>
> Being as the Ranger is a four stroke cycle engine (
> the last time I looked )
> two full rotations of the engine should cover all
> the cylinders. I have a
> fair amount of experience on the R-2600 Wright
> (B-25), the Pratt & Whitney
> R-2800 (Douglas A or B-26) and more experience than
> I wanted on the Pratt
> R-4360 (KC-97). On the three bladed props, six
> blades would do the job,
> eight on the four blades and four blades should do
> it on the two bladed
> Rangers. I pull mine through to save the starter a
> little extra work.
>
> Bob
>
>

> GUYS, THE INFO I HAVE ON THE RANGER IS TO PULL THE
> PROP THROUGH SEVEN (7) BLADES TO CLEAR OIL FROM THE
> CYLINDERS. MY THOUGHT IS, IF 7 IS GOOD, 14 SHOULD BE
> BETTER. NORMALLY, I DO NOT GET ANY OIL RUNNING OUT THE
> STACKS. HOWEVER, OCCASIONALLY, THERE WILL BE A GOOD
> BIT OF OIL DRIP OUT OF THE EXHAUSTS. THAT'S WHY I KEEP
> A RATHER LARGE DRIP PAN UNDER THE ENGINE. AFTER
> PULLING THE PROP THROUGH, LET IT SIT FOR 3 OR 4
> MINUTES TO SEE IF OIL IS PUSHED FROM THE CYLINDERS.
> BETTER THAN A BENT ROD OR BLOWN HEAD.
>
> BOB DUNN bobaviator@y...
>

> --- In fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com, BOB DUNN

> > GUYS, THE INFO I HAVE ON THE RANGER IS TO PULL THE
> > PROP THROUGH SEVEN (7) BLADES TO CLEAR OIL FROM THE
> > CYLINDERS. MY THOUGHT IS, IF 7 IS GOOD, 14 SHOULD BE
> > BETTER. NORMALLY, I DO NOT GET ANY OIL RUNNING OUT THE
> > STACKS. HOWEVER, OCCASIONALLY, THERE WILL BE A GOOD
> > BIT OF OIL DRIP OUT OF THE EXHAUSTS. THAT'S WHY I KEEP
> > A RATHER LARGE DRIP PAN UNDER THE ENGINE. AFTER
> > PULLING THE PROP THROUGH, LET IT SIT FOR 3 OR 4
> > MINUTES TO SEE IF OIL IS PUSHED FROM THE CYLINDERS.
> > BETTER THAN A BENT ROD OR BLOWN HEAD.
> >
> > BOB DUNN bobaviator@y...
> >
> Bob, how many revolutions of the crank shaft does it require to

> all cylinders, in any 4 stroke engine?
>
> And if that engine is a direct drive, with a two blade prop, how

> blades would that be?

> --- In fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Downey"
> wrote:
> > --- In fairchildclub@yahoogroups.com, BOB DUNN
>
> wrote:
> > > GUYS, THE INFO I HAVE ON THE RANGER IS TO PULL
> THE
> > > PROP THROUGH SEVEN (7) BLADES TO CLEAR OIL FROM
> THE
> > > CYLINDERS. MY THOUGHT IS, IF 7 IS GOOD, 14
> SHOULD BE
> > > BETTER. NORMALLY, I DO NOT GET ANY OIL RUNNING
> OUT THE
> > > STACKS. HOWEVER, OCCASIONALLY, THERE WILL BE A
> GOOD
> > > BIT OF OIL DRIP OUT OF THE EXHAUSTS. THAT'S WHY
> I KEEP
> > > A RATHER LARGE DRIP PAN UNDER THE ENGINE. AFTER
> > > PULLING THE PROP THROUGH, LET IT SIT FOR 3 OR 4
> > > MINUTES TO SEE IF OIL IS PUSHED FROM THE
> CYLINDERS.
> > > BETTER THAN A BENT ROD OR BLOWN HEAD.
> > >
> > > BOB DUNN bobaviator@y...
> > >
> > Bob, how many revolutions of the crank shaft does
> it require to
> fire
> > all cylinders, in any 4 stroke engine?
> >
> > And if that engine is a direct drive, with a two
> blade prop, how
> many
> > blades would that be?
>
>
> Right you are Tom......that would be 720 degrees
> and 4 blades. An
> exception is a Caminez, all cylinders fire in 360
> degrees of crank
> rotation. But that's not really a crankshaft...more
> like a camshaft, but it is a standard 4 stroke
> engine. The other
> factor in counting blades is PSRU (propeller speed
> reduction units).
> Big geared radials would take even less blades to
> make the minimum
> 720 degrees of crankshaft rotation...I.E. @2:1
> (Rotax 912 is 2.21:1)
> ratio, prop needs to
> go 'round once for all cylinders to pass thru firing
> stroke. Of
> course more doesn't really hurt...unless the P lead
> fell of that left
> mag and.......
>
>
>