Shock cooling - and related damage. is it a myth?

Do we have a head banger with a ban hammer?

That article's already been brought up on here, and elsewhere. I'm done commenting on it.
 
Real question is lean of peak or rich of peak?
 
As someone who used to fly full time at a very busy DZ, watching CHT temps when decending at 3000+fpm, it's not only a good practice, it's expected.

Just think about the shrink rate between the aluminum fins and the steel insert.

Between cowl flaps and mixture, it isn't hard to keep the engine happy when dropping like a brick.

When I'm flying my plane with 6 expensive jugs, I watch those CHTs
 
Wow... that's a bold lead line

"
There's no evidence that big power reductions damage horizontally opposed aircraft engines by "shock-cooling" them. It's time to trash the myth so pilots can focus on real risks to their airplanes and engines.
"

probably time to trash articles like that instead
 
I was brought up in aviation with “yes, shock cooling exists”.

I flew skydivers and checks in a 310, Navajo, barons, senecas.... never had a cracked cylinder. That doesn’t prove anything other than it can’t hurt.

I do believe in shock cooling. I understand many don’t.
 
Wow... that's a bold lead line

"
There's no evidence that big power reductions damage horizontally opposed aircraft engines by "shock-cooling" them. It's time to trash the myth so pilots can focus on real risks to their airplanes and engines.
"

probably time to trash articles like that instead

As I said elsewhere, I find it interesting that some would consider a man who's a lawyer by training (i.e. a non-technical background) to be a highly credible source on a subject that is technical in nature.

Not saying that people with non-technical backgrounds can't be correct on technical items, but as an engineer who actually has been doing this a while and worked for an OEM running engines for a living, I have a harder time making such bold or definitive claims.
 
I was brought up in aviation with “yes, shock cooling exists”.

I flew skydivers and checks in a 310, Navajo, barons, senecas.... never had a cracked cylinder. That doesn’t prove anything other than it can’t hurt.

I do believe in shock cooling. I understand many don’t.

What DZ?

Not exactly the normal lineup there
 
What DZ?

Not exactly the normal lineup there
A small airport in CT. 7B9.
Actually midlifeflyer was getting his certs at the same time I was instructing and flying jumpers. I was not his instructor, but his instructor was a friend of mine.
Small world.
 
If Mike Busch says not to worry about it, that's good enough for me. I would really like to see any sort of evidence of damage from "shock cooling" from anyone. Doesn't seem to exist.
 
If Mike Busch says not to worry about it, that's good enough for me.
i have actually read a couple of articles where he says he keeps his under 30 instead of 50. from that it doesnt sound he is not worried about it.

now you have opened another can of worms about Mike and how he is wrong... for the record, i am trying to learn as much as i can from his book and seminars
 
If Mike Busch says not to worry about it, that's good enough for me. I would really like to see any sort of evidence of damage from "shock cooling" from anyone. Doesn't seem to exist.

Go talk to a DZO, they know what's up, but they really don't care if your bust juggs, doesn't effect their bottom line and time wise beers and women and turning loads take presidence over making an excel sheet for some PPLs about shock cooling.


Long and short it's really not that hard to manage your CHTs in the decent
 
i have actually read a couple of articles where he says he keeps his under 30 instead of 50. from that it doesnt sound he is not worried about it.

now you have opened another can of worms about Mike and how he is wrong... for the record, i am trying to learn as much as i can from his book and seminars
There’s a little fact and a little fiction in nearly every technical publication. Unfortunately the authors do their best to hide the facts about the fiction.
 
i have actually read a couple of articles where he says he keeps his under 30 instead of 50. from that it doesnt sound he is not worried about it.

now you have opened another can of worms about Mike and how he is wrong... for the record, i am trying to learn as much as i can from his book and seminars

Do you have the articles where he says that? Genuinely curious.

It’s been awhile since I read his series, but from what I recall it takes tremendous effort to get a temperature change that drastic.
 
Go talk to a DZO, they know what's up, but they really don't care if your bust juggs, doesn't effect their bottom line and time wise beers and women and turning loads take presidence over making an excel sheet for some PPLs about shock cooling.


Long and short it's really not that hard to manage your CHTs in the decent

i actually did. my A&P also manages 2 DZ planes and recommends against chop and drop and to carry some power to the ground/close to the ground. I also spoke to the flight school where i trained - they have 4 172's that goes up a zillion time a day and do simulated engine out, high speed dive, spiraling decent ... you name it .. all day long and do not have a closet full of jugs in the anticipation of cracked jugs. as i said.. conflicting information everywhere.
 
Do you have the articles where he says that? Genuinely curious.

It’s been awhile since I read his series, but from what I recall it takes tremendous effort to get a temperature change that drastic.

i have been trying to find it myself since i posted, it could be in his manifesto book. i will go home and check. i agree it takes a lot, like a high speed decent to get to over 60 degree registered on JPI at least
 
i have been trying to find it myself since i posted, it could be in his manifesto book. i will go home and check. i agree it takes a lot, like a high speed decent to get to over 60 degree registered on JPI at least
Could perhaps it it be more prevalent in a twin because if the higher speeds..??
 
i actually did. my A&P also manages 2 DZ planes and recommends against chop and drop and to carry some power to the ground/close to the ground. I also spoke to the flight school where i trained - they have 4 172's that goes up a zillion time a day and do simulated engine out, high speed dive, spiraling decent ... you name it .. all day long and do not have a closet full of jugs in the anticipation of cracked jugs. as i said.. conflicting information everywhere.

Does a the AP fly for the DZ too?

Just saying DZ ops are the most demanding, 13k to near 0 in the least time possible to full power climb, often hot loading, 7 days a week, that's the test of tests. 2deg F per second max was what I recall, also many JPIs will flash "CLD", guess it's all a big hoax lol

Like I said, don't worry about it, the economy could use the cash.
 
I am also curious at what rate the engine actually does cool on shut down. One would think that the airflow would aid in this, but an engine not developing power even though stationary cools quicker based on the article.

“In fact, the real shock cooling comes at the end of the flight when you pull the mixture to idle cutoff and the CHTs drop at more than 100 degrees per minute right away—yet every engine goes through that sort of shock cooling and manages to survive it.”

That seems hard to argue if true.
 
I managed to "shock cool" my A65 New Year's Day by adding carb heat. Oil temps dropped 15 degrees in seconds. No CHT gauges on board, so I'm not sure about the cylinders. Got my attention, though.
 
I am also curious at what rate the engine actually does cool on shut down. One would think that the airflow would aid in this, but an engine not developing power even though stationary cools quicker based on the article.

“In fact, the real shock cooling comes at the end of the flight when you pull the mixture to idle cutoff and the CHTs drop at more than 100 degrees per minute right away—yet every engine goes through that sort of shock cooling and manages to survive it.”

That seems hard to argue if true.
But you have no airspeed for the cooling. These engines are aircooled, which is a function of airspeed. Plus the higher you are, the colderctge temps.
 
I fly Cherokee 140's. I don't pull back the throttle until turning base, because let's be honest in a Cherokee 140 descending with the throttle pretty open is the only time you see a decent speed. ;)
 
If Mike Busch says not to worry about it, that's good enough for me. I would really like to see any sort of evidence of damage from "shock cooling" from anyone. Doesn't seem to exist.
Mike Busch is one helluva salesman but he likely has far less actual mechanical knowledge than most (all?) A&Ps here. Don't get me started on the completely stupid chit he's claimed to be "fact" over the years that he's later backed off from.

The Cessna Pilots Assn is currently dying a slow death since Jahn Frank died. Mike was heavily involved with that organization over the years and many of his stupid statements (that I'm aware of) were made on that forum. I'm confident that Mike is eagerly anticipating the day when the forum history is lost (if it isn't already) so his history will be lost with it.

Putting Mike on a pedestal is quite naive and misguided.
 
But you have no airspeed for the cooling. These engines are aircooled, which is a function of airspeed. Plus the higher you are, the colderctge temps.

Right, I’m just going off the article saying 50* a minute was a challenge in flight, yet 100* a minute on the ground is the norm.
 
Since Engine Engineer @Ted DuPuis won't restate what he's said in the past I will:
3) Descent/landing

The primary consideration here is the old question of shock cooling, and whether it is best to pull the power back slowly or if it matters. As with above, dynamic counterweights don't like rapid changes in power, but certainly going from cruise power to idle in around 1-2 seconds won't hurt anything as far as counterweights go.

The old rule of thumb with shock cooling is to reduce power 1" per minute to keep temperatures reducing at a reasonable rate.

Now, there are a few things to keep in mind here. The first one is that, if you are doing what was outlined above to keep your CHTs/EGTs/TITs low and happy, that will also mean that the difference between operating temperature in cruise and at a descent/approach power is minimal. I think that the shock cooling issue probably came up more with turbo engines that were being run hot and hard, and were therefore more susceptible to damage from a rapid temperature change. Meanwhile, an O-360 seems to have no problem getting power cut to idle rapidly all day long in the pattern with students. Either way, the theory about shock cooling is that it will typically manifest itself not in cylinders falling off, but gradually with decreased longevity over time, cracks in the crankcase, etc.

My opinion is that gradual power reductions and allowing your temperatures to drop slowly to prevent what is known as "shock cooling" makes sense, regardless of whether or not it is the plague some make it out to be. Again, it's more professional and passengers like it more. Plus, it makes sense that letting the engine - the whole engine, which goes beyond the CHTs, EGTs, and TITs - cool gradually can only be beneficial for it, or at the very worst not help at all. So I would advocate decreasing power at 1"/minute roughly, and behaving as though shock cooling does exist.

I also typically will push the mixture full rich (gradually) and/or open the cowl flaps when the landing gear comes down. Gear slows the plane down, and then pushing the mixture to full rich helps to keep the engine about where it was for CHTs despite the reduced airflow, and also reduces EGTs/TITs, and lowers internal combustion pressures, cooling the pistons. An engine monitor is the biggest asset you can have in helping to determine what the true temperatures are in your aircraft. Most factory gauges aren't particularly accurate and give you limited information at best. As an example, the engine monitor in the Aztec taught me that when I put the gear down I should open the cowl flaps to full to keep the engines cool. On the 310 there are no cowl flaps, so I push the mixtures rich.

There's no point in me trying to explain it as he already has and quite well in this sticky:
https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/com...to-make-your-engine-last-while-running.56295/

Now let this thread and topic die.
 
Mike Busch is one helluva salesman but he likely has far less actual mechanical knowledge than most (all?) A&Ps here. Don't get me started on the completely stupid chit he's claimed to be "fact" over the years that he's later backed off from.

The Cessna Pilots Assn is currently dying a slow death since Jahn Frank died. Mike was heavily involved with that organization over the years and many of his stupid statements (that I'm aware of) were made on that forum. I'm confident that Mike is eagerly anticipating the day when the forum history is lost (if it isn't already) so his history will be lost with it.

Putting Mike on a pedestal is quite naive and misguided.
Let's not turn this into a bashing game. Whether he is a salesman or not doesn't matter, every successful person is a sales man, one way or another. He does makes some great point, for example not descending with a full mixture, lycoming has the same recommendation during winter ops and it makes sense. However, POH says keep it full rush. Who do i listen to? The POH that was written 40 yrs back with a single EGT gauge? Or the people who are making a case of finding out what your system is telling u when have an engine monitor? I have also heard recommendations from A&P s that say, always keep EGT below 1425 for O-360. That doesn't make any sense when u have a zillion probes telling u individual cylinder and exhaust temp.


Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
Let's not turn this into a bashing game.

Stating simple facts is not "a bashing game." I've been reading Mike's writings for 15+ years now.

Whether he is a salesman or not doesn't matter, every successful person is a sales man, one way or another.

I couldn't disagree more. Salesmen are people who can look you in the eye, lie to you, and make you truly believe they're your best friend and being honest.

Anyone can sell something that they truly believe in but it takes a salesman to blow smoke up you azz and make you like it.
 
Stating simple facts is not "a bashing game." I've been reading Mike's writings for 15+ years now.



I couldn't disagree more. Salesman are people who can look you in the eye, lie to you, and make you truly believe they're your best friend and being honest.

Anyone can sell something that they truly believe in. It takes a salesman to blow smoke up you azz and make you like it.
And i assume per your opinion whatever he says is complete garbage. Got it.

Let's talk about low wing vs high wing now

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
Put an engine monitor on your own plane and go find out about your flying habits and cooling trends. You might learn something.
 
Back
Top