Leaderboard

I started to tighten the generator belt.... Found the generator bolts were loose. Removed those, discovered generator bolts were wrong type. Ordered proper bolts Examined Generator mounts, saw they had oval holes. Removed mounts, welded up, and re-drilled new holes While it was out, saw generator looked old, so sent it for rebuild. While waiting for rebuild, ordered a new voltage regulator While installing Zeftronics, old wire broke, installed new harness Belt looked worn, so removed prop and installed new belt Eventually put it all back together, and the belt was now tight. A typical Mooney project, IMO

Scott, that's part of the difference between E- and C-models! I don't have an analylzer, just factory single point, but a friend's F almost matches your climb rate/temp, which is much better than a C can achieve. We just don't have the power for that. I'm happy to see 1000+ FPM at takeoff, but that's at 100 MPH not 120. My limiting factor is usually Oil Temp getting to the top of the green line. Hot summer days can take a long time to reach altitude, climbing at <500 fpm for several thousand feet. So far, I've not had any CHT issues. Full Throttle, Full Prop, Mixture Full Rich until at least 5000 msl, then I sometimes remember to lean for my Target EGT. Outside of hot summer days, I can go from turning the key to level cruise, trimmed, power set and leaned, at 7500-9000 msl in ~15 minutes, which is good enough. "Cruise climb" is used when I have to climb from one cruising altitude to another, not for when I'm leaving an airport and climbing to altitude. In the winter, I follow (100 mph - Altitude in thousands) for airspeed in the climb; in the summer, I increase airspeed/reduce climb rate to keep Oil/CHT in the green. Our 180-hp, carburetor-equipped Cs cannot match a 200-hp, fuel injected E/F in the climb. . . . .

+1. An area of extreme vulnerability in mountain flying is landing, as well. Wind shear induced by CAT or mountain waves can pull jets, twins and singles down at speeds over 6000 fpm. A big part of mountain flying is the decision making process leading up to and through the flight. High winds and turbulence don't discriminate between aircraft, and the difference between a rocket and an E model is pretty small once you look at what the weather/winds can do. The extra power of a rocket may just delay your impact a little... The extra power of a turbine might not even be sufficient in some cases. I guess my point is more that its very wise to take a class in mountain flying and spend some extra time going over winds and prog charts prior to mountain flying. The more power the better, but it won't make you invulnerable by any stretch of the imagination!

There may not be a cetified 4 seat airplane that can take you as far on the fuel, without going less than 120 knots. I dont even think the RV-10 can do it.

18", 90 KTS with approach flaps in and gear down is what I have been trained to do. On descent I go 13" for a precision approach and 11-12 for a non-precision. Works out to 500 / 700 fpm descent if the plane is trimmed properly in approach configuration.