garytex

I had an IO-360 A1A done by John Jewel Aviation in Holly springs Arkansas (and be advised there’s another jewel aviation out there that you can look up by accident) that now has about 200 hrs. Used new Lyc Cylinders and new case. It’s great. He is also a good place to go if you want to keep low time cylinders as he has his own cylinder shop. Only one mechanic assembles your engine. Price was very reasonable, great value.

Nothing? I get water in the same place in my 67F, but had never chased it down to the opening latch. As a matter of fact my cover is over that latch so that doesn’t make sense. There’s a little vent pretty close to that same spot down near the wing fillet that I had suspected. Opinions?

Mine on an F is stupid loud, especially on TO. I wonder if a teenage hangar elf has been at my flame tubes?

The above is good advice

The only variable pitch (as opposed to constant speed) prop that I know of was on the first year of production Belanca Cruismasters, the 14-19 series, around 1949-50. Pilot set the pitch, and engine would slow if climbing and speed up in a dive. Lycoming O-435 engine. Airplane was tube and rag taildragger with RG like a DC3. Triple tail and really pretty wood wings. Next year and thereafter produced with an O-470 and CS prop. This was a follow on to the 14-17 series powered with 150 or 165 hp Franklin engines, some with Aeromatic props that would automatically shift to a higher pitch after leveling off. Fuselage was designed to be a lifting body, made for really Art Deco looking plane. Still see a few around.

My advise would be to seek a more local airplane. Close means that you have lots less sunk costs in running all the pre-buy traps. Have patients, learn to land in someone else's plane, something will probably turn up locally while you are learning to land.

I found a 170 (4 place 145 hp taildradder Cessna high wing) much easier to learn to land (not counting the ground run) than the 150 (two place trainer). Landing well involves both decelerating and going downhill at the same time. The process of understanding how to wind up with no excess energy (speed) at 0 feet above ground level was easier for me to understand in the slightly heavier wing loaded 170. I kept getting blown around in the 150, masking learning the process. I think a 180 Hp 177 with two folks aboard would be great to learn in. Free means less pressure to learn fast-- thats also great. Grab it!

The weather channel weekly planner is pretty handy too

The observation that observation of comming trouble spots has avoided problems is so spot on. And it's just mechanicly and physically a little harder to do on the Mooney. Then there's the mental problem of "seeing". We've seen all this stuff before so it's not worth looking at again. Sometimes I have a hard time getting in the right frame of mind to look. I'll play a couple of mental games. One is to pick a perspective and look at every thing in the field of view: every connection, every attach point, mating surface, every gasket, every fastener, every Tye rap. Then move and do it again. Another trick is to follow every system to its distal points. Another trick is to get somebody else to look at your motor. I see stuff on my friends engines that they don't see and vice a versa. All of these are very worthwhile exercises that can save money and prevent breakdowns, increase dispatch reliability and safety. Lots of eyes passed over that hose fitting, it was a while till someone saw it.

I still don't understand how/why a 231 with no intercooler would be 20 - 25 kts faster than the RayJay F. Are they that much slicker? 10 hp sure isn't going to make that speed difference. Must be lots slicker, either that or maybe the comparison is 'book' vs 'real world' speeds.

Bellville has it right. Check the lines in and out. Look at takeoff EGT's see if they make sense vs indicated fuel flow. Bends in the line take the top off indicated FF at high flows. Also look for missing fuel at fill up. Maybe the missing 2 gallons is the unrecorded take off low indicated fuel flow. Some of the ways I puzzled my way through the same issue, albeit with less gauge under reporting. "Fuel injection is more even cyl to cyl but the FF sensor is only measuring total flow. It's possible the sensor is not installed properly... the tubing must be straight near the sensor. " Flowscan is the go to fuel flow meter in the marine world. They use multiple air bladder pulsation dampners with the exact same flow sensors JPI uses. There needs to be a few inches of straight line in and out of the flow sensor. We aren't going to carry around the weight of the dampners so need to install per the directions. Or understand when and why the gauge is lying.

Most folks who successfully adventure work up to it stepwise, and have an old hand teach them the basic first steps and rules of the game. It's when we jump and find ourselves unexpectedly in over our heads that we wish we hadn't. That kind of flying sounds fun, but scary, and as a flat lander neophyte with no old hand around, not for me right now. That being said, gliders ride mountain waves for hundreds of miles, it would be really cool to use them on our trips. Even 200 fpm would be good for 20 - 30 mph, wouldn't it? Any old hands out there care to share the basics? Thanks, Gary

What we really need is his technology on that horrible square bellows intake.

Well I would like to hear how yours turn out, and 'How much costee?' I'm hoping to find ailerons where I can go look at them, or talk to someone I trust who says "they're straight" If a C aileron will fit I have one exchange for 16 lbs of Hogdon Tightgroup smokeless powder. Great way to do business. Gary

M20Doc. Just looked at the Williams site. I think that these are the reskin guys that I have a bid from. I'll check. Jetdriven had some ailerons reskinned that did not come out straight, and the reskinners said "sure enough, we do not guarantee them to be straight". Part of the reason I'm seeking alternatives.