Leaning mixture altitude
-
What altitude should I start leaning on the Turbo III?
-
@gruizmd In the real aircraft, you don't have to begin leaning until after you reach critical altitude and the turbo charger is no longer able to maintain sea level manifold pressure (29.92). But, unfortunately the current incorrect mixture behavior in MSFS will require you to start leaning much sooner than that. During the climb just look at the EGT gauge and occasionally lean the mixture as needed to maintain the EGT temp at about 100 degrees below peak, on the rich side of peak EGT (max power setting). After leveling off at cruise altitude, lean for peak EGT (max economy setting).
-
Thanks for the explanation. I was confused because I read that in a Arrow Turbo you would not need to lean until about 11,000’. The limitations on MSFS explain why I was losing so much power on my way up.
-
@gruizmd There is a fix for this which you might want to try:
https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/mixture-behavior-mod-for-turbo-arrow-seneca-v-and-turbo-bonanza/465225Maybe JF could use this? (hint Martyn
) -
I am trying to lean the mixture - however even at 31% mixture at 6000 feet - I don't see any change in the EGT needle. It just stays where it is. It only changes when I open / close the throttle. Is this a bug or did I do something?
-
@indrajitsg sounds like automixture may be enabled in the accessibility or assistance options.
-
@weptburrito - Thanks a lot. The auto-mixture was switched on. I don't know how it happened - along with a few other assist options. Probably the latest update reset it.
-
@indrajitsg Keep an eye on it, SU7 likes to continuously reset Assistance options to Easy for some people.
-
I understand it is a sim limitation that mixture must be leaned in a turbocharged plane before critical altitude. Last night I climbed to 16,000 (leaning as I went), leveled off, leaned to peak EGT, and set my MAP/RPM per the manual. However, I did not see the expected fuel flow at all. It was higher than it ought to be. If I set MAP per the fuel flow markings for 75%, 65%, etc, the MAP would be very much lower than the performance charts.
Anything I'm missing?
-
any updates here? would love to have this logic properly modeled...like the workaround which isn't ideal:
