Leaderboard

If anyone watches Flight Chops on YouTube, I flew with him a couple months ago. He just dropped the video featuring N221HP.

Well I have selected the winning image. But I may wait to announce it until I have the painting done. Again, I want to thank all of you that took the time

Lol. Well, long story. I had a perfectly functional crank step. @carusoam first inspired me to work on this for the vacuum crowd because of the mini actuators I used for our Auto-Lean product and @cliffy inspired me to do it for the guys with a broken cable. I thought it would be a weekend project and then I was committed (or I should be). I’ve now been flying it since January. One of the side benefits is that the install actually comes out lighter than stock (can I call that a speed mod?). It also retains the “cool factor” of the retractable step. I have addressed the previous concern of a jammed step through a simple overload spring. The system is FAA-PMA approved and I have a letter from the FAA supporting this as a minor alteration. That said, I submitted enough paperwork for an STC, including structural analysis. I still need to update our web site, but kits available for sale now....with a short lead time to build some stock. Rob

I don't believe 2700 is a problem for the engine. But what you're really talking about is running at max power for an extended period of time. Again, probably not an issue as long as you're rich enough. And by that I mean 100 degrees or more rich of peak. But burning that much fuel means that you'll likely pay for that extra speed with an extra fuel stop or more which will kill your time A to B. The best way to get more speed out of these Mooneys is not to go faster... it's to burn less gas and skip a fuel stop. I think you might be better off at Carson's speed and deep LOP.

Newbie here - I usually read and learn, but can't pass on the chance to put in a plug for my favorite place in the Southeast... If you and the wife are open to something a little rustic and out of the way, check out the Big South Fork National River and Recreation Area https://www.nps.gov/biso/index.htm. Fly into KSCX (Scott County Airport) which has an Airpark - The Big South Fork Airpark https://www.bsfairpark.com/ The Big South Fork National River and Recreation Area is nearby and has cabins available via private owners , or I think that the Air Park has a guest house. Crossville TN nearby has the Cumberland County Playhouse to satisfy any cultural urges (not certain of the schedule...). There is also a nice BnB in an area called "Historic Rugby". AirNav lists courtesy transportation as being available, I am not certain of Rental Car availability, but I bet the folks running the Airpark would be accommodating and helpful in that regard. I grew up in the area and it is stunningly beautiful in the Park. John (Future M20 J/K owner)

What’s the opinion on this acquisition? I really like Fltplan.com for filing flight plans and hate to see Garmin mess it up. Any thoughts? Lee

CAMI will have the PROTE chamber at the Mooney Summit VII next year for our hypoxia training. It has taken me 6 years to get this done, now we are on their schedule!

Flew up to Tune (west of Nashville) for brother's bachelor party. Great flight even with a 0500 wheels up!

To bring this Topic to a positive end, I can Report "Mission completed" I had to remove the whole lower interior side Panel including the air vent in the foot room (correct?) to get Access to the fuel Sender. And indeed: All but one screws had the insulating washer installed. The last had not!. After isolating the screw my simple "continuity tester" still showed me a Connection between the housing and my screws. But that effect came from the nearly empty tank. Using an Ohmmeter gave me about 9 Ohms. Now the fuel gauge Shows the full range! I am happy! Thank you for all your help!

One data point: I have been commuting from Calif to Texas for 13 years in a '64 e with the io360a1a. Usually 12k' eastbound and 9500' west bound, and usually WOT and 2700. 8 hours eastbound with one fuel stop and 9-10 hours westbound with two fuel stops. I lean to between 100 degrees rich to sometimes peak egt. Most times I lean for for max airspeed/best power. My engine was overhauled in 1986 and has 2800 hours smoh, 6000 total time on it.. Compressions are 79 on all 4. I change the oil every 25, filter every 50. In that time, one cylinder had a "tuliped" exhaust valve that was replaced at 1400 smoh. It was not burnt or anything, so most likely a defective valve. If you don't have the a1a engine then you may have counterweights, and I have seen those cause problems in other 360's going over tbo. 2700 is relatively low rpm designed for longevity afaik. I have heard that racers spin these up to 3200 routinely.

Oh Stewardess, I speak Jive......

Man that's a pretty thick barrel amazing there is enough pressure to cause a separation like that. What's even more amazing is I figured out how to copy just one photo and paste it onto a reply.

We flew to Mackinac Island this summer and really had a great time. But we stayed in Saint Ignace which is about 4 minutes by Mooney from the Island. We stayed in a great Airbnb which was something like $65/night. Also landing and parking overnight at Saint Ignace (free) gets you access to a crew car. We were told to keep it over night and as long as we needed it. It was a super cool '82 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme. The wife and I cruised around with the windows down playing the theme from Shaft.

The "Gear up!" anticipation was also killing me! A true nail biter for Mooney Drivers!

Maybe you should have them do it on the ground first, just in case they’re bad at math. [emoji2]

Oh boy - this thread gives me flash backs. Good for you Dan and well done! I had a comparable incident in April. A full engine out emergency, (dead turbo), smoke in the cockpit and a dead stick landing. Starting at 16,500 ft. The cause was entirely different, but there were similarities. I was close enough to an airport that I was soon 12k over the target emergency landing airport, doing steep spirals to come down asap because I too was worrying about a fire - but I was dead stick but there was some smoke - not a lot - but also the smell of burin (but it was just burnt oil). Then I too made essentially the same decision as you - I had one last turn I could have made for a better approach to landing but I elected to land right away skipping one last turn and I too came in very hot but thanks to speed breaks I managed to make a reasonable stop with some runway to spare to a nice uneventful landing. Oh boy - good for you and good for me - to be posting "how lucky" we are. Knock on wood for both of us good buddy!

Yeah, I put my hand on the Johnson (bar) and it takes no time at all to get it up. Seriously....since we had it serviced.

The golden age of GA is right now. Lots of serviceable airframes are available at reasonable prices. You can navigate with inexpensive consumer electronics that will also show you weather and traffic with inexpensive avionics. Lots of experimental gear is becoming available for the certificated fleet, and you don't even have to keep getting a medical. You only ever need pass the dread 3rd class medical once, and then you can transition to the much more facile Basic Med. There's a crapload of win going on right now.

The battery version in my Christen Eagle still runs after 7+ years. I know, it’s a miracle. Maybe the occasional 7G’s helps. ( No, not me. My son.)

I'm more of a long shot, but I might have to fly down to Dallas and then back up to AR or MO, may be able to divert, but waiting on business schedule. I a probably 3/10 chance that it comes in by next week.

I fully agree, but I doubt that many who complain about the gear being difficult are waiting until cruise to put the gear up. The inner gear doors probably also make a big difference, but again, how many who are complaining have those? My point was that anytime "reasonable" time during initial climb out, it should be easy to put the gear away unless something has changed from the factory.

I was thinking something similar and I would likely not be flying with that much ice anyway, that said, I have addressed this concern through the mechanical implementation of an overload spring that yields to overloads, but remains stiff for normal ops.

What I think will change my decision is what, if any, integrations will occur with these vendors. If Garmin introduces the GFC 500 and it integrates with the Aspen either initially or is being planned, it would factor into my decision. I wouldn't want to add a G5 just to manage the autopilot.

Understand, I am not endorsing the position the author takes. I am simply putting it out for discussion (as he has). I think most people who have experience with the intercooler setup would agree that the 252 settings or the STC manufacturers’ adjustment recommendations are a place to start, but they underpower the engine. Why? Here is what the author (Paul Millner) says: ”If you actually put a turbocharged engine on a test stand and then observed the effect of the intercooler, you’d find that, say, 32 inches of MP and 200 degrees of induction air input deliver almost the indentical horsepower of 32 inches of MP and 120 degrees of induction air. ”So unlike obeying the restriction of the STC and reducing manifold pressure so many inches per 10 degreess of cooling, leaving the manifold setting alone delivers the same power, with safer-for-the-engine conditions. How? ”Remember when I explained how the intercooler imposes an insertion loss on induction air pressure, but no worries, the turbo control system will compensate? There are no free lunches. It turns out that the addional back pressure on the engine exhaust from the wastegate closing just a little bit to maintain induction pressure through the intercooler reduces engine power output just enough to offset the increase that would otherwise occur from the denser charge, It may not be obvious why such a conservation-of-engine output effect would occur but for efficient intercoolers, that’s the relationship.” He is obviously writing with an automatic wastegate in mind, not the semi-manual Merlyn, but the point is still the same. The point is real, and to translate a little, what he is talking about is that sufficient drag occurs in passing the induction air through the intercooler (its a radiator with fins) to cause back pressure in the exhaust, which reduces the horsepower output of the engine at a given MP and fuel setting. To achieve the same power requires adjusting MP up, basically back to the setting you started with before cooling the induction air. (I am talking ROP ops here.). This is, in fact, the great fallacy of turbo engineering, that it is “free” to put a turbo in the exhaust, or in this case to put an intercooler in the induction air stream. Exhaust back pressure reduces power output. The turbo oviously still helps, it adds to power output, but it is not a 100% efficient, free lunch. Nor is the intercooler. The gist of the article is that aftermarket intercooler designs are not very well tested. The adjustment tables are set up making assumptions that are not true, particularly the one above, that the insertion of the intercooler in the induction air stream has no negative effect on power output and only has the positive effect of lower induction air temp. One little hint that applying 252 charts is not correct is something I learned from an exchange with Paul Kortopates on this site a couple of years ago. The 252 chart uses 36” for max power, at least that’s what I recall from looking at one a decade ago. However, the STC for the Turboplus comes with special fuel flow set up instructions. The max MP used to set up full power fuel flow varies a little depending on OAT, but essentiallly, the document uses 37” for max power, not 36”. Now, the other issue it seems to me, is that the engine obviously is working harder to put out a given BHP than it was before you inserted the intercooler. I don’t think it would be smart to simply not adjust MP downward and the author does not make that recommendation. What he is saying in the article is that intercoolers, especially aftermarket intercoolers, are not quite as nifty as their advertising says. PS if anyone did not follow it, the mechanism by which increased drag in the intercooler creates back pressure in the exhaust, is that in order to overcome the drag, the turbo must work harder. In a fully automatic wastegate system, where the MP has been set to, say, 32, the system compensates by closing the wastegate a little and making the turbo work harder in order to generate the same 32" of pressure, and the turbo working harder, creates more backpressure in the exhaust, requiring the engine to work harder to push the exhaust out. In the semi-automatic system (the Merlyn), the same thing happens. If you manually set the MP to 32", the wastegate will close a little more in a system with an intercooler, than in a system without an intercooler, in order to make that 32".

Complete kit is listed on our web site at $350. This includes actuator, cables, turnbuckle, springs and some other hardware....oh and a detailed installation manual. Only a few additional pieces of minor hardware are required.

One thing to consider... If two hours is your comfort limit... taking out as much vibration as possible might be a good idea. Getting the prop dynamically balanced at the rpm you intend to cruise at may make some sense.... Best regards, -a-

I’ll see what I can do when im back in my office. Unfortunately the previous flights we’re short duration local flights and formation flights. It’s difficult to gather much from that data. It is beefy but it’s also aluminum. That is the exact area that see the stress from every combustion cycle. Literally millions of cycles over the life of the cylinder. Aluminum fatigues and will fail eventually. High temperatures can speed the process along. Many early 231 pilots were miss informed, had only one factory CHT probe, and ran the engines hot. I’m assuming these cylinders were abused in a previous life. I hope the other 4 hold together cheers, Dan

Juice to the starter is governed by the length and thickness of the wire. Bigger wire for longer runs and no loss of voltage . Look up the chart in 43.13

Triple Tree is next week.

Mackinac Island. Nice airport (KMCD), horse drawn carriage into town. No cars on the island. Absolutely beautiful in September/October. https://www.grandhotel.com/

My prior post was premature and totally inadequate for the response I have received from all of you. Again, thank you for all the thoughts and support.

Everything else being equal I would not choose a 390 over a 360, but I would take a roller tappet IO-360 over a legacy engine.

Before or after you were summarily thrown out., you’ve been on the hit list for quite sometime now.

Seems like someone here got the IO-390 during overhaul when they first came out. His writeup and performance were uninspiring. Wonder if the Search box will find it? It was definitely one website upgrade ago, if not two.

My Mooney descends great with the gear and flaps out in a slip. Don't ask me how I know.

Got mine in the mail. Installing as annual progresses along with the Trutrac autopilot as soon as it is available. Got 2 new "Halo" headsets to go in also! Have the uavionix left wingtip ADSB on the table ready to install also. Waiting for the right side "IN' solution as soon as it is available. Will have my Briitian Accutrac system for sale later this year.

I just last week pulled out the original Whelen strobe/ incandescent assemblies and put in the Orion 600 LED wing tip light replacements. They do look sleek. Lower current, 3 pounds lighter. Yep, 1 AMU.

Looks like the flight I did in my M20J to test up to 17,500 I was doing about 200FPM at 0C, 30.15. Garmin was saying a DA of 19240ft and 128 KTAS once I was level. I did it as a step climb so I didn't really keep track of how long to get up there. I was solo with about 3/4 tanks of fuel.

Hah! i have 45 min of eurcouope time in my logbook. I think all of it was climbing to pattern altitude.

O2 debt affects different people differently. Fitness level and even age have much less to do with it than you would think. Both my brother and I seem to function pretty good up high, but I've had passengers that couldn't talk right past 18K. Cruising at FL200 with another pilot, we tested the effect of taking the mask off while the other pilot flew the plane. The difference between the two of us was night and day.

I had my M20C to 16,500 once... barely. So I sold it and now fly the 252 above 20K ft. every chance I get.

17500 with no oxygen in a mountain wave over the Rockies. Made a couple of IFR legs at 16000 with oxygen. This was in a 67 M20F. It performs quite well at those altitudes, you should try it more often. Posted from beautiful French Polynesia. Flew the Mooney the first leg.

And if your pic doesn't win, John is also donating a commission of a painting of your plane at the Mooney Summit VI's silent auction! Thanks John for your generosity. Some lucky Mooney owner will have a really nice painting!

Once I was flying right seat in my friends Citation. We were flying from Mesa Gateway to Palomar CA. We watched a Mooney taxi out and take off. We farted around for a while and finally got around to firing up the jet. We taxied out and flew to Carlsbad. We landed and parked the jet. We looked out and saw the same Mooney land. The moral of the story is; you don't need a faster plane, you just need to stop farting around the airport.

Ken, your glowing posts about your 231 over the years is a major reason I determined one would fit my mission. Where was all the twin talk back then? That could have saved me a lot of trouble. I actually was planing on getting a Barron after my accident. I don't have a multi rating so I called a school that I new had a Barron. At the time it was down for a new engine and they didn't expect to finish it for 1-1/2 months. That time allowed me to think hard about the next airplane. The Mooney just feels right to me. And as it turns out, getting insured after a total loss isn't easy. I honestly don't think I could have got insurance on a twin. Cheers, Dan

Ken, I agree with your analysis, but I also thought it came across as gloating- particularly on a board dedicated to Mooney Pilots. (And I'm very sure I've got more multi-engine hours than you have, so I'm all the more sure that you're right, just not your tone.)

A couple of my favorite photos. Jim Simmons, Cheshire, CT

go look at this topic and look at the schematic I attached. I just solved a similar issue. Your outboard sending unit wire connected to the inboard sending unit is grounded somewhere. Something on the inboard sending unit housing is grounded. Has the inboard sending unit been removed recently? Has the wire from the outboard sending unit been disconnected and reconnected recently? C

I’ve not run into that before, but it would not like it. Is it possible the oil or grease is just so congealed that the vacuum can’t muscle through? Mine had many years of gunk and does make it more difficult to move. In my experience, if the the step is that iced up, then the plane was too iced up to fly as well. Depending on the actuator I end up with and the amount of ice, it would either muscle through, blow a fuse or pop a breaker (if you opt for that) or break the actuator. As someone suggested, adding smarts or clutch would work but adds cost. I suppose I could also add a self resetting thermal fuse, which may not cost that much, will consider that.

All the old Mooneys are under the same type certificate, so if it is in the parts manual it should be fare game. Just show all the part numbers removes and added, the new W/B and send it in. Mooney got it approved years ago.