Turbo Normalizing vs Turbocharging (182 Turbo RG)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- The difference between operating a turbo normalized aircraft vs a true turbocharged aircraft. While they may sound similar, they are very different in function, operation, and engine longevity.
New Videos Weekly!
For more information, be sure to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE!
Visit us at the link below!
www.skywagons.com
For more general information, click the link below!
www.skywagons.c...
And I’m the guy that now owns this airplane! Everything is exactly as Mark is saying.
Best explanation I’ve heard on turbos.
Mark,
You have some of some best informational Aviation content on RUclips !! keep doing the great work!!!
Great explanation
Hey Mark, nice to see you on RUclips! Great video, I always wondered what the difference was. It's almost been five years now and I'm still flying and loving the Aussie RG. It's really been a great plane!
An easier way to explain it is that the turbo replaces what normal atmosphere loses as you gain height.
This is excellent !! Thank you
Great explanation about TN. Thanks.
Thanks, this was very informative, I very much appreciate it. You probably inadvertently also put the final sales nail in with this towards a t182rg vs an arrow.
OK Great. Thank you, it is a popular misconception.
Well explained. Thanks!
how many times can you squeak some closed wastegate for short field take offs? asking for a friend lol
Very Nice. Helped out a lot.
My uncle had a non turbo welded gear Skylane. He did not like to cruise at high altitude and he usually operated at sea level. He made the right choice to skip the turbo,
And your point is ?
Even if it is only turbo normalised, there is still extra heat because you can’t compress air without heating it.
Thank you sir!
You are welcome!
great video!!!!
Question: From what I gathered on this video, it seems that turbochargers are not helpful until reaching a certain altitude? If that's the case, why are ground bound machines such as tractors, trucks, cars, etc. equipped with turbochargers?
It's not related to altitude but to power developed. Under 6000' the Cessna engine doesn't need a turbo to develop the power required to reach 2400 RPM (max power for a given propeller) because the air/fuel ratio (15:1) can be obtain at atmospheric pressure.
Over 6000' the air is less dense therefore the 15:1 air/fuel ratio can't be sustained, resulting in a power drop and RPM drop; fortunately the pilot has room to increases power because when he pushes the throttle further the turbo kicks-in and squeeze some compressed air into the mix, allowing to keep the 15:1 ratio and the propeller spinning at around 2400 RPM - that's why turbo airplanes have a higher ceiling than non-turbo.
On the ground, variations in air density aren't a critical factor. If an airplane can develop around 2400 RPM without a turbo, then additional power wouldn't be useful (you can only rotate a prop so fast, after which it breaks). On a tractor however, the driver can change gear and use this extra power to create more torque and climb a steep hill for example. Also, for equal power, turbo engine are generally more fuel efficient than naturally aspirated engines (with some drawbacks but that's another discussion).
Hope this makes sense.
@@Virtualmix Thanks. Everything you said makes sense, but I'm still thinking of applications like the Cessna 188 Ag Husky from years past. I believe the only difference in it and the 188 Ag Truck was turbocharging and 10 more hp, and of course they generally worked just above ground level, usually at low-elevation regions. So, I do believe there's a benefit of turbocharging at or near sea level as well. Otherwise, they wouldn't be installed on performance cars, tractors, heavy trucks, etc.These units don't normally operate in any high altitude conditions, yet still yield more performance than their normally aspirated counterparts. Agreed?
@@nocotton Yes, they can absolutely make use of more power at sea level, simply install a bigger propeller that produce more thrust and get better performance. On the Cessna in the video, the to manufacturer could have installed a bigger propeller but choose instead to use that extra power as a reserve for higher altitudes when the power starts to drop.
@@nocotton - It's just a matter of ramming as much air as possible in so you can ram more fuel in too. The limiting factor in an aircraft at lower levels them becomes the design limitations of the propeller, which obviously doesn't apply to land vehicles so they can use the extra power where an aircraft can't. It's only the maximum permitted output that's limited, not the maximum available.
My Dad drove Centurion tanks in the 50's, powered by the RR Meteor engine (basically a Merlin without superchargers), but the first ones he drove had an actual Merlin, and nobody was impressed when they had to give up that extra 'something'.
Will the turbonormalized motor fit beneath the cowl on a 185 with a 540 alread installed? Or does it require a totally different cowl from the NA 540? Thanks.
Any manifold pressure higher than local ambient altimeter pressure is turbocharging…
Any manifold pressure equal to local ambient altimeter pressure is turbonormalizing….
How it is done becomes irrelevant.
Could the normalized turbo also be described as an auto turbo?
Are older turbo normalized fixed gear 182s around?
Great explanation about TN. Thanks.