From: David Megginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Alex Perry wrote:
> > That's a point. Once the engine stutters/quits due to carb ice,
> > you have to make it take a while for the ice to go away again.
> > ... and it takes quite a while ...
> Once the engine quits, it's too late for carb heat, isn't it
Matthew Law wrote:
I can't see the harm of a temporary and slight decrease in
power compared to what could go wrong if I didn't use it...
Fair enough. You have to weight it against the risk of forgetting to shut
it off in an overshoot, giving you reduced climb power and a tiny
possibility of de
David Megginson wrote:
Alex Perry wrote:
That's a point. Once the engine stutters/quits due to carb ice,
you have to make it take a while for the ice to go away again.
... and it takes quite a while ...
Once the engine quits, it's too late for carb heat, isn't it? If it's
only a partial blockag
Alex Perry wrote:
That's a point. Once the engine stutters/quits due to carb ice,
you have to make it take a while for the ice to go away again.
... and it takes quite a while ...
Once the engine quits, it's too late for carb heat, isn't it? If it's only
a partial blockage, we can simulate the e
David mentioned:
> Carb icing is common on humid days in certain Continental engines such as
> the one in the Cessna 150 and the old (pre-1967) 172, but it is very rare in
> engines like the Lycoming O-320 (used in the Warrior and post-1967 Cessna
> 172's). The warnings in the later 172 POH's a