Leaderboard

I know I’m an outlier with a Bravo that runs well LOP. I do run Tempest fine wires and GAMIjectors with a 0.3gph spread, and work at staying on top of the ignition system condition and timing. Running at 2200 RPM also helps with LOP ops and I’m happy with the speeds I get. As was said, to each his own. For me it isn’t the fuel savings as much as it is the cleaner running and the lower CHTs. The plugs are always clean and the cylinders and valves always look great through the borescope at oil changes. Time will tell on the engine longevity but all indications are good and I’m optimistic.

You may need new o-rings. Cap seal no is supposed to be pressure tested, IIRC at annual. if you change the o-rings get the blue floursilcone ones. @OSUAV8TER carries tham and the Marsh Bros washers are nice, but not cheap for what they are

One actually, it holds the rotor head on. I’ve never head of one failing, but if it did, it would be bad. There we’re a few Swashplate failures on the AH-1 Cobra, came from the Army installing Kaman 747 semi symmetrical rotor blades to increase useful load, problem is the center of pressure moves aft with increase in angle of attack on a semi symmetrical rotor blade, this back fed pressure into the swashplate that it wasn’t designed to handle. The rotating portion of the swashplate would stop rotating, the Pitch Change links would break, most likely blowback would have the rotor pitch up heavily, the tail boom is cut off and of course everybody dies. Except for the fact that the mast isn’t broken off, this NY 206 crash looks very much like the AH-1 failures, difference is I think that your not ripping out the main transmission of a Cobra, but there isn’t much holding in one on a 206, perhaps one of the inverted V braces that hold the tranny in broke? Or unlikely I think but the transmission seized?

A very big Thank you to all who responded to my request, this thread has been of immense help in the buying process. We got N41EJ home last weekend and started my transition training with Don Kaye . Sandeep

That’s why helicopter pilots got dez nuts.

True, but it is clear from the nature of the penny-pinching airline that they were willing to try a new, unproven grease in the vain hope it would stick around longer and thus extend jackscrew manufacturer-ratified inspection intervals even further! This disgusting scenario is reminiscent of LaMia Flight 2933 crash, where the pilot was also a co-owner of the airline, and the plane ran out of fuel and crashed, killing 71, due to his trying to squeeze every mile out of his fuel dollar by not filling sufficiently and overloading the plane. As I have said before, for each airline that makes a habit of skimping on safety, the country's government should take away their licence. If this leaves just ONE airline in business for the world, so be it! Unfortunately, there are a lot of corrupt governments out there.

I’ll start the speculation based on no facts. I think either Swashplste failure or Pitch Change links failure, either would sever main rotor control which would lead to mast bumping and that means everybody dies.

No. What is true is that our ancient factory gauges are unreliable and inaccurate.

Radar at the time

Very sad. Looks like Autopilot was on up to the first turn at least (looking at track/altitude). Maybe trying to deviate around a cell? Having a look at the wx data for yesterday, the area looked dreadful: icing with bases 070/040, convective activity and TS.

15K fpm = 170 mph = 148 knots, vertical speed. Add in 54 knots forward groundspeed, he was moving. Full throttle steep descent? I've practiced emergency descent, but never above 2000 fpm, and that was dramatic (45° bank, cruise throttle, falling out of the sky). If the pitot ices over, doesn't airspeed act as an altimeter? So it wouldn't show the increased airspeed as he pointed down due to ice on the wings and tail. In fact, the tail would ice up before the wing due to smaller leading edge radius, lose lift and allow the nose to drop. I've never experienced a tail stall, and no thank you, don't want to try one. If he wasn't IFR rated and got Spatial D as the plane iced up, no telling what the flight path and speed would become, but the end result would be this . . . .

I think the starter adapter and starter give indications before complete failure at least that was my experience. I had my plane for 6 months when i got the first starter adapter slip on starting. I was worried as i had mechanics tell me anything from replace it asap to wait until next annual. I chose the later and only had it slip 2 other times in the last 5 months to annual. 3 years later i started my plane flew it 30 mins to grandberry and when i went to start it again it would not start. This time it was the starter as i couldn’t hear the starter spin like i did with the worn starter adapter previously. A local mechanic took a rubber mallet and banged on the starter housing and that allowed me to start and fly home. As a precaution i took the upper cowl off and tapped the starter with a rubber mallet so that when i went to fly it next to my mechanic they could replace it which they are doing now as we speak. So even though both have stopped working reliably in the past they gave me enough warning to not be stuck AOG at an off station. Maybe i was lucky but i don’t lose sleep over when the new ones will start failing in the future.

You need these o-rings. For $17 it is the cheapest bang for the buck and favor you can do for your airplane. I also recommend the Marsh washers too. You have a Shaw 431 fuel cap. https://www.gallagheraviationllc.com/Gallagher-Aviation-Shaw-431531-Fluorosilicone-Fuel-Cap-Kit_p_161.html <-- Shaw 431 fuel cap o-ring kits https://www.gallagheraviationllc.com/Marsh-Brothers-AeroTough-GF-Fuel-Cap-Washer-Kits_p_252.html <-- Link to Marsh washers

Definitely you should check the o rings. There are two, one big one you can see and one tiny one you can’t (it’s inside, on the shaft). There might be one other issue… the caps have a nut with a cotter pin on the end of the shaft holding the whole thing together… the nut needs tightened just right or the cap will be too loose or too tight when you put it on the tank and close the lever. I just took mine apart and put new O rings on. The caps had the blue flourosilicone large O rings, but surprisingly, my IA found one of them was a little loose and might not seal properly. Then when I disassembled the caps to clean them and install new o rings, I found that the inner ones were the old style. No idea when they were last changed.

One of two things. O-Rings could be worn or have a nick in it. Change them frequently or go for the more expensive ones (and you still need to check them for nicks, etc.). The other thing is to make sure the cap is REALLY seated correctly. Assuming you have a syphon cap inside the filler hole, and if you fill up where there is fuel above the syphon cap, it will get sucked out if the main wing cap is not on straight and sealed. Learned that shortly after I got my plane when I *thought* the cap was flush, but it was just slightly off and didn't seal completely. Also learned then that if the locking flap is even slightly harder to push down than normal, the cap is probably not flush.

If anyone knew Jonathan Shelley or knows if he has a surviving spouse and their contact info, kindly DM me. EDIT, it appears the pilot was Jeffery Blane Maneth.

Unless you have the Cies aftermarket fuel senders, the factory gauges are only telling you the tank is below half. A calibrated stick is usually more accurate.

what's the delta in fuel you see? meaning how many gallons are you putting vs how many gallons can the tank take? I never had a problem with air, I did have problems with the fuel caps. If fuel is coming out, also water could get in Do you have aux tanks? Do you see the delta in fuel in the Aux?

One of the big differences is what I bolded. For all practical purposes there isn’t any navigable Golf airspace in the US lower 48. You are correct. Except for some small pockets in the mountain west, Class E begins at 1200 AGL, but even that is declining because airports which have instrument approaches start at 700. AGL or at the surface. Head over to SkyVector and pull up a US VOR chart and you can see that. All those magenta vignettes around airport represent Class E beginning at 700 AGL. The rest of the area, 1200 AGL. Higher Class G is relegated to places like this

That's incredible he was able to do that from photos! I took a panel to a local well known paint shop and they matched the colors perfectly. The color codes in the logbook are of no use as it doesn't take into account the effects of UV and nature over the ~40 years. I believe they need a 1x1 inch area to be able to sample.

Lot of "Jesus Nuts" on a rotorcraft. You know the ones where you pray to Jesus that nut does not let go.

I have the io-540’s in my Aerostar, yes I know they are not the same variant, but it’s more similar than not to the bravo engine. All of my time prior to the Aerostar was in mooney’s behind the tsio-550 and it-550. The continental engines are designed and built for LOP ops, and they perform very well. In my experience, they do not enjoy ROP as much, and the speed loss from LOP is only about 7-8 knots to save 4-6gph. Easy decision for that engine to fly LOP. The Aerostar however is much different, while mine will fly LOP smoothly enough to tempt you, the speed loss is huge. It’s about 30knts. So when you do the math, and use miles flown divided by the tbo time, vs gas usage difference, it is actually cheaper to fly ROP. The Lycoming also just seems much happier ROP. I looked hard at a few bravos, and have flown quite a few, but none of the ones I have flown felt smooth enough to get comfortable flying LOP. To each their own, but I’m convinced the io-540 longevity is going to be better ROP.

Try an oil ring solvent flush first. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It means I do understand LOP and chose not run my engine in that manner. The Continental Engines do run pretty smoothly LOP and I have a number of my students who do chose to run their engines LOP. When I'm flying with them I often ask them if it makes more sense to save on the fuel and end up paying a lot more for my time. They usually move to ROP. Since I don't like the "feel" of LOP, especially in the Bravo, maybe I ought to increase my rates for LOP students vs ROP students.

I have taken the Advanced Pilot Course. Having tried LOP, I'm not going to run my airplane LOP. I'm on my 3rd engine and will gladly take the fuel penalty vs the discomfort of the engine "sounding" like it's missing and the speed reduction of running LOP. (I do have the GAMIs with a GAMI spread of about .4)

A few things, the transmission on a 206 is held in by two inverted V braces, one on each side, then there is an elastormeric “box” right behind the transmission that dampens movement, connected to this link is a round pin that sits in a square hole, excessive movement cause the pin to hit the hole and is called “spike knock”, we dreaded spike knock, usually got it in a touchdown auto by not leveling the aircraft on touchdown, at Ft Rucker if you got spike knock you got to wear a RailRoad spike hung around you neck for all to see. It wasn’t common I never saw anyone wearing the spike. The engine isn’t connected to the transmission except by a driveshaft and it’s pretty much like a auto driveshaft, no structure to really hold the two together The instant the engine quits, you immediately lower the collective to maintain rotor RPM, then at the bottom of the Auto you first decel which adds energy into the rotors, then finally use collective to cushion the landing. Having said all that the Bell products generally have more mass in the rotor system than others meaning they are much more forgiving in an autorotation, it’s possible the pilot could have been completely stupid and not put the collective down, but unlikely if they were decently trained being a Commercial pilot surely they were. Two bladed rotor systems are semi-rigid underslung, meaning simply that neg G or low rotor can destabilize the rotor and it tester back and forth and “mast bump”, mast bumping may or may not tear the mast off, I believe newer Civilian Bell’s have big springs in the Hub to help prevent mast bumping, mostly during shut downs etc from wing gusts, and I think that could have help prevent the mast from being broken off, but if a swashplate fails, it sealed and the PC links break and the rotor will come off, maybe breaking the mast or maybe just tearing the transmission out. Yes the blades most certainly took the tail boom off, if they were at full RPM they had plenty of energy to do that likely without breaking. UH-1 Transmission is completely different, to begin with it’s about 8 feet tall, held into the Huey with four “candle sticks” and a Lift Link at the bottom, you can’t get “spike Knock” in a Huey and as such you don’t have to level the aircraft before a touchdown Auto, the 206 tranny sits on top of the cabin top where the Huey one goes almost to the bottom of the aircraft. I was a 67V, an OH-58 Crew Chief for five years and flew them in flight school, an OH-58 is essentially a 206

My expertise is more in the way of writing checks than anything else, but here’s my advice: having seen some awful DIY touchups, find a shop to do it for you.

No, these are both entirely on condition although TCM does have recommendations for scheduled alternator maintenance. But every time I have my #1 alternator off I get it bench tested and maybe the brushes replaced depending on hours just because its a real pita to R&R it on the plane.

Ypic, +1 on finding all the Zerks... some like to hide... some like to escape... Some are only held in place by compression... On the landing gear... there isn’t an easy way to goof things up.... Greasing the prop... takes some additional detail... easy to mess up... even for some mechanics... Get a copy of the maintenance manual for your plane... There is a thread around here for all the various lubes that have been updated over the decades.... Just don’t guess... always ask... Best regards, -a-

When you look at the Mooney Maintenance Manuals you will find obsolete Mil Specs called out. MIL-G-81322 is now MIL-PRF-81322G and is Aeroshell 22 (amber color) or Mobilegrease 28 (red color). MIL-G-3545 is now obsolete but is Aeroshell 5 MIL-G-23827 is superseded by MIL-PRF- 23827C Type I (Metallic soap thickener, Aeroshell 33, Mobilegrease 33) and Type II (Clay thickener, Aeroshell 7). Don't mix Type I and Type II, the thickeners are incompatible. Use AS 7. Skip

M20 went down this afternoon. Two aboard. Search crews are looking for the site

https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/496358 M20F N7026V