Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/20/2018 in all areas

  1. The only time we have a concern for running too cool is if you are not fully scavenging the lead. Avgas contains a lead scavenging agent" called ethylene dibromide. However the agent needs sufficient combustion temps (not necessarily CHT) to do its job. If combustion is too cool, it results in lead fouling of the plugs. Its true that the scavenging is most effective in the 350-400F range but so what, we hardly operate our engines to maximize lead scavenging. Most of us prefer to operate for maximum cylinder longevity which likes cooler CHTs. Although from a CHT perspective, lead deposits have shown to form with CHTs below 300F, typically we find this is only a concern with very low power ROP cruise where see both very low EGTs and CHT (CHTs of 250F and lower). But leaning to peak EGTs when operating at low power does much better and exposure to lead fouling is much less likely. Hopefully all this will be mute soon when we can run lead free avgas. This is just like the OWT that oversquare is bad for your engine! The bottom like on Mike is that all of his work is dedicated to educating the pilot community and has been for years. Its been a few years since he started Savvy to work with clients directly for fee, but his business model is all about saving clients money by educating owners on the difference between discretionary maintenance and required maintenance, saying "no" to scheduled maintenance that is neither required nor proven to be helpful - like cleaning injectors on annual schedule and giving the owner control back on their annual invoices by separating the inspection from maintenance and getting estimates for discrepancies before the work is started. He's also all about data driven maintenance rather then premature wrench turning and throwing parts at it. Of course he does not advocate all maintenance be done on condition and is a very vocal on the need to comply with timed Magneto IRAN inspection too. If that's cool aide, its the most sensible, logical and scientific reasoning I've been exposed too in the aviation world to date. All of us at Savvy are proud to be associated with him and all he has done for GA.
    7 points
  2. https://airfactsjournal.com/2018/04/know-when-to-fold-em-how-to-avoid-tunnel-vision-in-the-cockpit/
    3 points
  3. I've been able to land my Mooney in very short distances, 800 feet or less to stopping. The problem I have is with consistency. I have to be on the top of may game. Add a gusty cross wind and no way. And for those that have never made a tail wind landing. It's amazing how fast the runway goes by and how much you use. Your roll out is much longer too. If you do this by mistake, or if the wind shifts, you will know something is wrong and off. --A good time for a go around. It could be your gear is up too.
    3 points
  4. Even going experimental isn't that cheap. I'm building an RV-8. It will cost north of $100,000 when finished. Include the cost of my labor ~ 3,000 hours and the all in cost is above $600,000. Anyone who does anything in aviation really has to do it because they enjoy it, not to make money.
    3 points
  5. For one thing it's Busch. If "drinking his Kool-Aid" refers to using Savvy Aviation expertise and being grateful for @kortopatescontributions to this space then there are a great many Kool-Aid drinkers here, including me.
    3 points
  6. Not necessarily. More than likely, she was flying while talking to ATC and the FO was working the problem, communicating with the company and FA's, and getting ducks in a row for the landing. It torques me a little that the press never gives credit to BOTH pilots... ever. Yes, she did a great job, but she wasn't alone. This is a crew airplane. Side note: I have flown with her as her FO a few years ago. She was cool to fly with and very competent.
    3 points
  7. I've been with Starr insurance. When I bought my Mooney I had under 5 hours complex time. About 80tt. Zero in a Mooney. My annual premium was ~$1500. Now, I'm instrument rated. Nearly 300tt. Almost 200hrs complex/mooney time. Starr decided my rate should be ~$2100. That was a shock, to see it go up so much, not at all what I expected. I got another quote from Global Aerospace, and bound a policy with them. $915 for the year. And a much much more liberal open pilot policy, with all the other coverages being identical. I guess Starr doesn't want to write mooney policies this year.
    2 points
  8. Experimental aircraft are not free...it's true. But having owned both certified and experimental, not only is the purchase cost much lower for similar types, the overall cost of ownership is MUCH lower. However, I'll be the first to admit, experimental is not for everyone. $600,000? You need to charge yourself at a lower rate. Maybe $0.25/hour and then the cost will be below $500,00!
    2 points
  9. Hmmm. Sadly, I both agree with you (“deal with the situation at hand- stop whining and just deal with it”) and disagree with you (because I do believe the future *could* be better, and have an idea of what better is). The issue with the “unachievable” 200k J is certainly economies of scale. If the company can only move 12 units a year, and the basic costs remain fixed, then those 12 units MUST cost more than if the company moved 250 units for said company to remain solvent. Sadly, the engine manufacturers, the avionics manufacturers also suffer from the same issue. Does a 6 cylinder, mechanically controlled air cooled engine *really* need to cost 60K? The electronically controlled dual cam 414 HP V8 in my BMW costs about 15K new. I know, it’s not an “airplane engine”.... but the fact is that BMW built about 500,000 of those engines over 6 years- so they cost less to produce. The fixed costs are amortized across the units produced. I have no doubt that the M20 Ultra is absolutely gorgeous on the inside. The leather, the workmanship, the paint and the electronics, while amazing by GA standards, are probably no more complicated... really... than what’s in a 75K Mercedes. Debatably, the Mercedes interior may be considered “nicer.” Another example: a Stratux kit, built from a raspberry pi (hundreds of thousands of raspberries built), with a full blown AHRS, costs about 100bucks. A “certified ADSb in” costs $2000.... economies of scale. we can and will, in GA, continue to go down this road of climbing costs. New planes will continue to cost more as interest wanes, and liability wanes. The price for entry may have never have been “cheap.” But it was within reach at one point. It’s becoming (if it isn’t already) unachievable for even the upper middle class. As a kid that was able to learn to fly in a C172 at 15, because I worked a job at a golf course to afford some lessons... which fueled my desire to become a fighter pilot... to make “something of myself”... and to see what that opportunity has given me, and many like me... it’s heartbreaking to me to think that the next generations of Americans will potentially miss out on such an opportunity to learn, and love, and maybe even make a career of aviation. but- you’re right- the present scenario is that GA is becoming more expensive, relative to the economy, and if one cannot afford it- sadly, they won’t be able to fly. Mooney makes great planes. If GA was more popular, they could make the exact same great planes for half the cost. as a flight instructor, I would expect that you’d agree with this: more pilots in GA = a better, stronger GA community... and tens of thousands more = more demand = more production = lower costs in time for all.
    2 points
  10. It's been entertaining each time I had a kid start working and they get their first paycheck only to find out that a good chunk of the money is missing... It has the effect of starting some conversations about the government.
    2 points
  11. Good eye Oz. They called base so quickly that I was high. I overshot a slight amount but what you’re seeing is actually a slip. Nailed it.[emoji57] Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    2 points
  12. I think I do a pretty good job landing the Bravo and my comfort with shorter runways has increased in the almost 5 years since I’ve had her. Still, I think for me 3000 ft on a relatively calm wind day and up from there as the winds, gusts, crosswinds, etc increase is my everyday comfort level. I have put her down on as little as 2600 ft but that is my absolute minimum and only when conditions are ideal.
    2 points
  13. Hi John, Yep you lasted longer than I and about the same as Rocketman. I put on the mask at 60% just short of the 3 minute call out. This is the PROTE unit I have been trying to get CAMI to bring to the Mooney Summit for the last 4 years. Supposedly, we are being considered again for 2019. It had to do with budget, (not equipment, trained employees to man it) that we were cut from this year's tour. Don Demuth of CAMI gets semi weekly emails from me on this. The PROTE unit will also be at OSH. If you fly over 8K and are going to OSH, hunt down the FAA's area and do this 1/2 hr course. It is well well worth it.
    2 points
  14. Very unfortunate event for Bill, but glad nobody got hurt. Hopefully the wing is repairable or they can replace it. I was shocked by some of worst characterizations I've read in the news about an aviation incident - i added italics to the portions I am referring too. ----------------------- from http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2018/04/mooney-m20r-ovation-n6868-incident_16.html "A small aircraft landed on a North Side street Monday afternoon after the pilot apparently missed a nearby runway." "San Antonio Fire Capt. Kevin Koch said a couple in their 70s were trying to land the plane at Twin Oaks Airport around 3 p.m. when a wind gust lifted the plane past the runway. It ended up in the 600 block of Heimer Road." -------------------------- For sure this is a short runway and gusty winds with tail wind probably made all the difference. But its certainly not too short and although I've never been there the airport data shows the runway gradient on RWY 30 to 1.9% so this makes for a very steep runway landing uphill. Using the rule of thumb that every 1% in gradient is equivalent to landing on 10% more runway, the runway at 2225 * 119% = equivalent length of 2647' - which is much more reasonable yet still very narrow. Of course I am not accounting for obstructions landing on RWY 30 but on google earth it doesn't look horrible. But using the worst case KSAT winds of 18018/G26 indicates landing RWY 30 Tail wind component of 6.5 gust 8.8 and xwind of 18 gust to 24. And the GA rule of thumb for tailwinds is 10% landing distance increase for every additional 2 kts. So although the uphill gradient was a help by perhaps 19%, the tail wind was 30-40+% reducing the effective runway. But the peak winds in the Metar tell a much worse story. If the Mooney got a taste of those peak winds while on the runway, the 150/26 yields 22.5 kt tailwind with 13 kt x-wind component - which is more like a 110% reduction in effective runway length or stopping distance. Wow - Yikes is right!! Also of note, Jolie has been hosting a very popular Mooney fly-in on our west coast a couple times a year at Oceano L52 which is just a 100' feet longer at 2325x50. No real obstructions, but very flat (0.5% gradient) but I doubt it will ever see the density altitude of a airport in Texas. But we've had all kinds of Mooney's including longbodies come into Oceano. Of course Its always important to being right on target speed for a short field landing; else the infamous Mooney float will eat up much of the runway. But rather than gusty winds, our biggest cause for diversions has been the marine layer.
    2 points
  15. This is what I love about this place, there are so many hear that are the real deal not just in the piloting but just about all aspects of aviation.
    2 points
  16. Flown with heavy retardant loads,turbulent low level conditions,aging airframes,sudden load shedding induces torsional cyclic loads...
    2 points
  17. I believe my 1967 was around $30,000 new (or around $250,000 in today's equivalent). New Acclaim Ultras are $801,000 supposedly (or just over $100,000 in 1967), but I thought I read that they were selling for $900,000 in another thread. It got me thinking; how much was a new J or K in 1980? What about 1990? 2000? It seems like the prices have vastly outpaced inflation resulting in a region of reverse-command where economies of scale are lost due to rising prices, which reduce sales, and further reduce economies, raising prices, et cetera. Inflation calculator: https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
    1 point
  18. We flew our 252 from Germany to the southern most tip of South America and back again between September 17 and March 18. This was our route: Many may have heard about our trip via fb, but anyway, maybe there are members here who haven't and are interested in a report. I've written continuously on a European GA forum, here is the link: https://www.euroga.org/forums/trips-airports/9174-to-the-end-of-the-world-and-back-the-whole-story#post_176978 (I hope it's OK to post a link to another forum here)
    1 point
  19. Heck Paul, just a couple of weeks ago it was minimums in KERV the 2 days i flew in from West Houston. Clear above 7K, soup to 300' AGL. Great IFR training wx as it was benign, no TS.
    1 point
  20. Took a 3rd try with a different IA but finally fixed it.
    1 point
  21. /* Warning: This post contains techno-geek material. Slant range is one contributor to DME accuracy. But slant range error is generally small compared to intrinsic system performance limits. The DME system achieves a 95% accuracy expectation of around 180 meters, about the same as the +0.1 nmi resolution on standard DME displays. The 95% horizontal accuracy of WAAS enabled GPS is under 10 meters, so DME is about 20 times less accurate. In addition GPS accuracy is independent of the number of users, while the ground-based DME transponder is reply-rate limited. This means in dense traffic areas, or far from the ground station, individual users may receive fewer updates. During such intervals the airborne DME interrogator’s display “coasts” for a few seconds with no updates before blanking out until further replies come in. The reply-rate limiting is done in part by reducing the ground-based transponder’s receiver sensitivity. This has the effect of favoring near-by users more than distant airplanes. It also favors higher power such as airliners over our lower power GA units. Typical DME interrogators in airliners transmit 300 watt pulses compared to 50 watts from a KN-64, giving them nearly 8 dB advantage. Note that what we refer to as DME is also known as DME-N where the N designated “non-precision” or “narrowband.” There is also a standard for DME-P meaning “precision” associated with the Microwave Landing System or MLS. All common DME in our planes are DME-N only. A reference: Tran, Michael, "DME/DME Accuracy," Proceedings of the 2008 National Technical Meeting of The Institute of Navigation, San Diego, CA, January 2008, pp. 443-451. End of Geek warning. */
    1 point
  22. I am looking at the same upgrade. I think you need a new indicator compatible to IFD440. I am looking into G5/HSI to pair it to Avidyne... And you could keep old King, of course.
    1 point
  23. Thank you for the thoughts based on experience...yes, the "boss" is pretty good (even with progressive deterioration of muscular dystrophy) she is pretty willing to try and we use her wheelchair everywhere so it has a lot of mileage on various caribbean islands. Obviously, I try to take as much stress off her as possible which is why I was concerned about returning through Cent Am. She is also nervous about a long overwater since if something happened, she figures she would be toast. I planned to "hopscotch" down with land within sight as much as possible and stopping at the places she really enjoyed when on cruise ships. Sounds like a return trip with different islands would be best...I do have it laid out on FF...really helps to put the whole thing together....thank again!!
    1 point
  24. Oceano is fun, we're hoping to get there May 12th. Be on your target speed and it was plenty long for my plane. With brakes we could have made the first turn off but chose to roll out instead. (Jump ahead to 2:50) I agree. A couple of my better landings were my first and only times at Harris Ranch with it's 30' wide runway and Oceano with it's short runway and clouds off the coast eliminating a go-around unless I was going to take my non-IFR equipped plane and myself (a non-IFR pilot) into the marine layer. Those things had me very focused on airspeed, vertical speed, and alignment resulting in good landings. Some of my worst ones are at fields that I am very familiar with.
    1 point
  25. Try a few starts, or start again, do a 'reset limits' and see if that helps. Aerodon
    1 point
  26. Lowell Mather (the mechanic) was played by Thomas Haden Church, or Tom Quesada as he went by in High School. He makes down to Harlingen every once in a while
    1 point
  27. You're right. It's not smooth. The layout of the quote made me skip over the 100k per passenger limit. On the starr side it's all on one line, on the global its on a separate line. I did catch one other difference. Global doesn't cover flights to the Caribbean while starr does.
    1 point
  28. You have mentioned this in a few of your post so pour us a glass of your Kool-aid! I’m always up for hearing another educated point of view. Let the forum discuss it!
    1 point
  29. KSUN NDB/DME-A might be a good replacement.
    1 point
  30. From what I understand it is tough to get smooth liability limits for reasonable rates without an instrument rating. If I am not mistaken some carriers will not even underwrite it without the IR.
    1 point
  31. To state it backwards, that 800k Acclaim would have cost about 260k or so back in 1980. Based on the price of high performance singles of the day it would seem that aircraft have outstripped inflation to some extent but when you factor in the significant technological advancements particularly with avionics who knows.
    1 point
  32. thanks for responses, the engine is at 4044 last oh 1864, 2180 SMOH, in September 1992. Oil tests are good still, flying it weekly. I know its up there, but Im training in this plane amd it runs good. Have been advised to let it go, till using more than a qt/ for 4 hrs flying.
    1 point
  33. That screw has a jamb nut. It shouldn't require lock wire. It won't hurt anything if you lock wire it. The other screw shown that holds the arm on should be lock wired.
    1 point
  34. Another thing I heard today that I thought was interesting. The failure was considered to be contained meaning the blade that failed stayed within the combustion area. What did vacate and caused the damage to the window were the components of the engine cowling, presumably due to the unbalance and subsequent vibration. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
    1 point
  35. Interestingly I usually take pictures before I do oil changes. Caught my governor in this picture. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
    1 point
  36. Just an update for you: 1. It's now moot since the approach is now available in the database. 2. I had a chance to fly by VUO yesterday so I tuned up IVDG at Portland. I entered IVDG as a direct to (yes, it will let me do that) and looked at the range. They were withing 0.2 miles of each other but considering I was at 6500' and about 20 miles away, I'm guessing slant range would account for the difference. So yes, you could theoretically make IVDG a waypoint and use distance to that point to substitute for DME.
    1 point
  37. Interesting article about a Mooney nonstop trans-Atlantic flight... and a Mooney ad near the front cover: https://books.google.ca/books?id=yk-e7GrGplcC&lpg=PA2&pg=PA62&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false Nov 1961
    1 point
  38. Why do you feel that way on only one day of the year? You should feel that way at every pay check or quarterly payment. It is easy to ignore it when someone else is writing the check to the government every week instead of you, but it is your money none the less.
    1 point
  39. And this level of professionalism is what we, as good stewards of GA and as Mooney pilots, should strive for in our own flying. This begins with our approach to ownership, preflight, proper use of lights, checklists, etc. Please do not settle for sloppiness or less than perfection in your duties as PIC, consider training often and constantly improve your proficiency. We are the weakest link in an accident scenario yet we are the ones we spend the least amount on.
    1 point
  40. Both pilots worked together and did a fantastic job in bringing this emergency to a successful conclusion. But don't think that they are the exception. Every time you get on an N registered carrier, certainly a major, you've got seasoned experts up front. They practice engine failures and depressurization scenarios routinely in the simulator. Many have a military background. While these two pilots should be commended for their professionalism I would submit that almost 100 percent of the crews out there would also perform at this level. You're in good hands Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk
    1 point
  41. Just a couple of items to add- Mooney has a laminar flow wing back to about the 40% chord line IIRC. Piper Comanche and Twin Comanche also have a laminar flow about the same IIRC. Laminar flow is where the boundary layer of air stays attached to the wing surface for an extended period of time as it flows aft toward the trailing edge. Generally these wing airfoils have a more streamlined thinner shape than say the airfoil on a Cessna wing. Full laminar flow would stay attached all the way to the trailing edge. Very difficult to achieve. As far as Mooney wing strength goes, the same engineer that designed the Bonanza wing designed the Mooney wing. If you recall, several Bonanzas were lost to wing failure early on and many "fixes" were incorporated into later Bonanza wings to strengthen them. When Al Mooney hired that engineer to design the metal wing on the Mooney the engineer would only accept the job if Al let him design it the way he wanted as he said he didn't want to have another design coming apart because Walter Beech kept having him "lighten" the structure to save weight. That is why we have such a strong wing in a Mooney.
    1 point
  42. I think after years of owner ship of not only Mooneys ,but c,b,a,p mfd products,my advice is if50k is the budget and you need a reliable ,weekly 300 nm range bird ,his (gasp) CFI s advice was probably correct.At 130 kts vs maybe 145 for the c model with no gear linkages to maintain,55 more horsepower,better useful load ,better ground handling ,rough strip capability...blasphemy I know!!
    1 point
  43. I always try to under pay my taxes. It is the only way to get an interest free loan from the government. When you get a refund, you gave the government an interest free loan!
    1 point
  44. It has been shown to usually be the loose nut behind the yoke . . . . Strength of design is one of the (several) things I really like about my Mooney.
    1 point
  45. What I learn from that, is that's most likely exactly what caused it. We are all susceptible to "I've done this hundreds of times unscathed, I can do it again". But maybe not with a tailwind, or an unexpected wind gust or a distraction on the ground or in the cockpit or on a day that you just aren't 100%. 99 out of 100 is great in most endeavors, except flying. I feel more comfortable with a higher margin of safety. There are a lot of things we can't control, but what field we base at we can control. I also choose to base at an airpark, but the runway is 3800 feet long and 80 feet wide. Do I need it to be that long? Not most of the time, but if a few of my pilot imperfections surface that day along with something unexpected, I have a better chance of getting it stopped safely.
    1 point
  46. Ned -- forgot to mention one thing. The monetary thing hurts but once it is done and you get to use the new stuff, you'll be happy that you did it. I have been flying behind the new panel for 6 years and my only regret is that I didn't do it sooner. You only get one ticket for this ride we call "life".
    1 point
  47. Mike, the manager at Sheltair, has offered us a small discount on fuel in the past. Perhaps based on the number of Mooneys present last year, he can offer a larger discount? Mike has been most gracious in years past.
    1 point
  48. My number one is a 430AW and I have a number two comm and a number two nav (KNS 80). The 430 has been there for several years because on a day when I had the comm 2 out of the plane and in the shop being repaired, the previous GPS (an Apollo) made a crispy smell and both nav and radio went black. It happened to be a day when there was an airshow at my home field. I had the sense to get on the cell (a new idea back in that day), and got to come in with a cell phone clearance and light gun signals, with all the warbirds on the ground watching. Lots of fun. Backup is important no matter how little you use it. I use my Comm 2 quite a bit, it is an old King, and there is a known problem with the radio in the 430AW. Great transmitter, but not such a good board, and it will lose reception if there is a lot of weather around (not a good time for that) and I am up in the higher altitudes. The old King is lots better when that happens. So put me down for two comms. My usage of the KNS 80 is mostly for ancillary tasks like getting weather at airports that only broadcast it on a Nav channel, or putting in VORs along my route just in case the 430 gets indigestion. It does have a DME though, which I find very useful. I would not fly IMC without a second Nav even though failure of the 430 is a nonexistent problem to date. I have a Stratus2 and iPad, but would not be interested in using that for any true nav purpose, esp. not relying on it in IMC. You really need a fixed mount for the sensor for that purpose.
    1 point
  49. Yeah - me too. I was thinking that a shorter pilot might make a safety enhancement to their airplane (whatever model) and getting a small wooden box and put it on the floor behind their seat - so it would be impossible for the seat to slide back too far. I am very tall and long legged and I did test that I could fly my plane sufficiently with the seat all the way back past the holes and jammed on the back seat.
    1 point
  50. Horrible. Does anyone know whether this person was a member on this forum? Looks like a situation where Mike E. could engage to provide any outreach support possible to any family members and/or friends. Steve
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.