Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/30/2020 in all areas

  1. Just curious to see if anyone has tried this. I had logged about 400 hours in my father's 1966 M20C (same as shown, even same colour), but never attempted to stop the prop inflight.
    4 points
  2. What happens between friends isn’t the governments business.
    3 points
  3. I would think that a dog is considered cargo as far as the FAA is concerned. Ask yourself if a commercial pilot in a part 91 airplane is permitted to offer themselves for hire as a cargo operation for hire.
    3 points
  4. Vacuum indicator should be part of your instrument scan. If (edit, not if, but when) the pump fails, cover your vacuum powered instruments before they start spinning down. If you fly instruments very often, it is just about impossible not to look at an uncovered and failing instrument and will set up a spacial disorientation event. Last pump failure I had was on an ILS approach in Little Rock. I saw the gauge twitch, go to zero and I said something ugly. Wife saw the gauge and without either of us saying more, she tore off the cover of an NOS approach book and handed it to me to cover the AI.
    3 points
  5. Rocket is alive and well. They converted the M20J and M20K into the Missile and Rocket. They still hold the STC for both and still support both. And Rocket gave the largest gross weight increase in the Missile and Rocket than any other STC. You are correct that many of the STC holders are defunct. -Seth
    3 points
  6. Since @VinceCB took 2711W away we’ve been searching high and low for a new airplane. Flirted with Rockets, considered C180s, got disappointed by the state of most PA-30s and came very close to joining the cult (Bonanza ownership), right under my nose appeared my new ride. ’83 model 231 with a 262 conversion and TKS. Low times, by high time sitting. Waking it from its slumber and so far so good. Small fuel seeps, could use a few new hoses. Fingers crossed about the health of the bottom end. Seems to fly straight. Not sure about performance yet. Expect lots of questions about engine management. Still stuck below 10,000 until I get ADS-B installed.
    2 points
  7. We discussed this in another thread and IIRC, the result was that the drag of a stopped prop is slightly higher than a windmilling prop set to high pitch. I believe there are some youtube videos about. There's actually quite a bit of blade area to create drag when the prop is stopped but not feathered, and a non-feathering prop will go to flat pitch when stopped. Of course feathered is best. I recall reading somewhere that to get measurements to confirm the B-17 drag polar, Boeing flew one up to 20,000 feet or so and shut down all four engines and feathered all four props and did glide tests. I guess they got them started again Test pilots have all the fun. Skip,
    2 points
  8. I personally won't rely on that route in winter. It may work out fine but a more reliable winter crossing is further south by El Paso. Check out EWM V94 TFD - this route has MEAs no higher than 9000' versus going through ABQ with MEAs around 11000' - it can make a big difference if there is any weather to be concerned with. If you end up with excellent weather during the trip, you can cross further north if you'd like.
    2 points
  9. Don't file IFR unless you don't have a choice and if you do have to file IFR, don't go. Fly as high as possible. I got the crap beat out of me in March/April one year coming home to Tucson from ABQ at 16,500 ft. Go a bit south into PHX to avoid the airspaces and allow yourself time to get down. Unless you MUST go into SDL, go into CHD, FFZ or DVT. They are orders of magnitude cheaper and easier.
    2 points
  10. I believe the 1966 has the rudder/aileron interconnect, and may also have the bungee. Aside from the basic flight controls rigging possibly being incorrect, I have seen instances where the interconnect spring clamps had to be moved, per the Mooney manual procedure, in order to get the plane flying right. But basic rigging has to be checked first. The aircraft could presently be rigged to compensate for something being out of adjustment. That said, I don’t know that the bungee or interconnect system actually provides a perfect and/or equal amount of rudder in both left and right turns to compensate for adverse yaw even when it is rigged properly...
    2 points
  11. Your right, it is a global permissions issue and we're moving to plan B. For all of you that are subscribers as well as past subscribers that I've worked with, I have all the information we need to fix the cohort and we'll do that for you over the next few weeks. We'll circle back on the ignition issue since I don't have that detailed information; especially when it between left and right. I'll change the first post to reflect we'll be doing the updates for all our Mooney subscribers.
    2 points
  12. Oh man... that was so sad. Patrick was so enthusiastic and passionate about his Mooney... and I feel like many of us drew positive excitement from his positive attitude. It was a real tragedy (and wake up call/learning opportunity) for the entire community for sure.
    2 points
  13. Price and Strait, Tulsa, Ok was reccomended by Britain and did a great job on my PC turn coordinator unit about a year ago.
    2 points
  14. Back in the day, you could get an instrument shop to clean the glass and repaint the dial for about $100. Now they won't do anything without a complete overhaul. Our government is here to help you!
    2 points
  15. Thanks, @PT20J, Skip, this is a snake pit but I will always be open and honest with everyone. The regulations for STCs and ATCs (Supplemental and Amended Type Certificates) are identical for both the follow-on applicant and the OEM, respectively. Similarly, there are no differences in the regulations for primary and secondary composite structures. With that said, though, OEMs know more about their airplanes, have analysis models and know which parts are more critically loaded than others. The roll cage tube change was implemented for solid reasons. Similarly (and we are fighting this in ASTM right now), currently the FAA has no control over which STCs can or cannot go on the same airplane. Here's a good non-Mooney (Cessna) example. On the C185 there is a wing tip extension STC (4', I believe). There is also a substantial gross weight increase STC. Both are approved STCs. No one has looked at combining the gross weight increase STC with the wing tip extension STC. The wing tip STC probably proved that the wing would not fold at the strut. The gross weight increase probably proved that the wing, strut and fuselage bulkhead could take the load, BUT no one has looked at both at the same time. A good OEM will step up to the new regulations for every modification that they certify. By regulation, they have to; it's called the changed product rule. At one time there was talk that every modification (STC) would have to go through the OEM. Obviously STCers didn't like that idea. It was then changed to it had to go through the same ACO (Aircraft Certification Office). This would alert the OEM (and they could point out potential issues), and one ACO would know all the modifications (and potential conflicts). This died, too, for the same reasons. Sadly, it is a grey area in a black and white world ... engineering. Bottom line: Yes. STCers have an easier job certifying changes because they don't have the resources to look at everything. And OEMs should not be forced to give out their data and analysis tools.
    2 points
  16. check the push rod tube right above ! Could be a Leakey seal ! I had one last week !
    2 points
  17. Here are the cost figures i received yesterday from my regional shop, assuming you already have 1 G5 AI installed. ADD GFC500 2 Axis with no trim GFC500 Parts: $8250 (Garmin’s base price for Mooney's is higher than advertised $6999) Labor: $4000 ADD Trim Trim Kit $2400 Labor: $1000 ADD Interface to IFR GPS/Nav box GAD29B and the GMU11 $1000 Labor: $1500 ADD 2nd G5, HSI G5 $3175 Labor: $1500
    2 points
  18. I think you are more right because it is an auto pilot. I do have a serial number specific manual from Brittain for my Accutrac. Got it after Brittain fixed it about 5 years ago. I think AP are different in the regs. The person who created this mess at the FAA has probably retired.
    1 point
  19. My wife, kiddo, and I flew down to Cartersville(KVPC I think) Georgia outside of Atlanta and were forced to tie down outside. It rained real well on Christmas Eve and then got below freezing. I didn't think anything of it until we got in the plane today and fired up. Immediately you could tell something was off. It was very confusing since shutting down a few days before everything was perfectly smooth. I thought maybe the FBO towed it around and damaged the prop, but we were in the same parking spot as before. I shut down a few times and restarted thinking maybe it was only running on three cylinders. The whole time I'm trying to remain cool in front of my wife and kid but clearly knowing something's not right. The first clue that I had was the prop slinging water on the ground as it was idling. I got out of the cabin a couple times with the engine off to try and see, maybe it was an engine mount failure. But it finally registered with me to check the inside of the spinner. Sure enough, there it was. A large amount of ice. I never pay attention to the orientation that the prop stops since with the three blades, it is somewhat random. But going forward I'll definitely be watching this should we find ourselves tying down outside again.
    1 point
  20. Given 100 MIAS best glide speed, I figure you’d need a 7-8 kt thermal to maintain altitude. might be fun to get into a good mountain wave...
    1 point
  21. I recall reading somewhere here some MS'ers trying to get the prop to stop, and without any modification, they had problems keeping it stopped above stalling speeds, so it seems unlikely you could keep it stopped for long at best glide speed. That being said, the windmilling glide ratio in my POH is 12:1, which is not much worse, and you'd probably gain a bit if you pulled the prop all the way back. FWIW, it doesn't look like the prop is stopped in that photo, I think they're just claiming that glide ratio with stopped prop in test flights.
    1 point
  22. Since your history with the aircraft is relatively short, I think PilotCoyote gives excellent advice. Did you get enough flight time before the engine work began (almost a year ago?) to get a feel for how it flys? We’re assuming that the engine mount and alignment is all good when the engine was rehung. Congrats on getting her back in the air. You’ll get it all figured out, I’m sure. Your sortie on 29 Dec looks like pure fun to me.
    1 point
  23. A simple way to ensure correct routing (assuming it is correct as currently installed) is to fasten a 50# monofilament fishing line, or an electricians pull line to the old unit prior to removal. Then use this line to pull the new one back in.
    1 point
  24. I send an inquiry to Flightaware support on another subject. The reply contained this information: The uAvionix Skybeacon is a 978/UAT ADS-B device. We have very low coverage of the 978/UAT units because they are only legal in the US, below 18,000MSL.I hope that provides some insight to why the tracking may not be very good.
    1 point
  25. In recognition that sometimes you just need a patch job, I once tried to start a list of folks people had used and would recommend for a patch job. It didn’t get much traction with folks instead insisting patching is not worth it. I think the point was missed that although I generally agree that once a tank starts leaking patching probably doesn’t pay off in the long run, circumstances can be very different and in some cases patching can make sense. My plane currently has a small seep at the top of the inboard forward spar cap. If I fill up I lose 2-3 gallons over several days and then it stops. I thought about trying to patch this up myself and have read Maxwells procedure on how to do it, but frankly if I knew of someone in Florida or Georgia that was good at this I just as soon let them do it. I wonder if there is an interest in getting such a list going again. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    1 point
  26. I second Yves’ suggestion for McFarlane part number, though double checking length and control rod size is always a good idea. The Owner Produced Part rationale goes like this: you asked McFarlane to make a control with locking push button with a diameter of X and a length of Z. Your mechanic, if he/she is satisfied with its quality, can then install this in your airplane without STC, PMA, TSO, etc. using only a logbook entry.
    1 point
  27. Note pad came in handy when my pump died.
    1 point
  28. Thanks, I do like it. It is no Rocket but goes pretty well. It also has almost the whole catalog of Mod Works options it seems! Mathieu was a great steward of her and he took good care of her. It has been great so far. I consider an upgrade ( like we all do...) but have to really stretch to find something that can do all it can with any kind of improved utility or performance. I end up in Aerostar or Meridian territory and well outside my paygrade.
    1 point
  29. +1 No 337 is needed. Have your A&P install it as an Owner Produced Part (which it does legally qualify as) and it’s a simple logbook entry.
    1 point
  30. My E and 172 both have safety wire wrapped in a figure “8”? around the control cable clamps..... I figured it was standard practice seeing how they were maintained by 2 different people originally
    1 point
  31. This was my first Mooney back when the N-number was N5665T. I saw it on the ramp in McAllen TX at McCreery Aviation in 1992 and aircraft weren't selling fast back then. Finally in May 1993 David made me a deal I couldn't refuse trading in my C-172RG and I got an hour check-out and flew it back to San Antonio. I flew it for three years and traded it on a new Bravo in 1996. I got my IFR ticket in this airplane with a lot of fond memories. Congratulations!!
    1 point
  32. This is a great point. Back in August I had my vacuum pump fail. I noticed the vacuum gage had gone to zero. I had just installed a RCA 2601-3 backup AI in place of the turn coordinator so watched both just to see how the vacuum one would progress. It was a very slow lean for quite a few minutes, I wish I would have timed it from the point that I saw the vacuum gage go to zero and when it finally fell off and started tumbling. I'm going to say it was somewhere around five minutes. The drift was so slow that without having the other AI and if I was IMC and I didn't notice the vacuum gage I would have been in serious trouble. The vacuum DG also took a long time before it started spinning, and while it began to precess faster and faster it was initially very slow.
    1 point
  33. Nah, it's a career as an electrical engineer; I don't trust half the stuff out there...I've seen a lot of scary designs in my time! I actually think a vacuum driven gyro is about the simplest and most reliable instrument in the panel. It's the damn vacuum pump that's the weak link.
    1 point
  34. Nice work, I wish you many years of enjoyable flying without that kind of trouble ever again!
    1 point
  35. An AV-30, G5, or GI275 (in order of $$) might be worth at least considering while you’ve got the primary out. I know you don’t want it, but I honestly think an eADI is safer (much more mtbf, and better failure mode/annunciation). You can just do one as a drop in for your ADI and wait on anything else for later. And, it would let you get rid of the vacuum system at your convenience. I know you don’t want it, so I’ll stop now.
    1 point
  36. I have used both Paul and Edison (different airplanes). Both did a great job, good customer service and done on-time. Paul was more difficult to schedule due to work load buts that’s not a big issue. I chose Edison for the second Mooney because he was closer to me and others had given him excellent recommendations. Lee
    1 point
  37. DEE04862-D9DE-4FEB-B20F-369710608EB5.MP4
    1 point
  38. Nice to know that you are back in the air! Nice video.
    1 point
  39. Yes and the G onset rate was said to be the fastest in the USAF. It would really turn when you pulled... for about 90 degrees, then the tremendous increase in drag would overcome the tiny little “dog whistle” engines and the airplane would turn into a PA-160. No G suits, so you had to be ready on the G strain or you’d be asleep in those 90 degrees. Parachute was actually on your back too. Wore it out to the jet. It did have an ejection system but it was pure 1950s. It worked but at low altitude you were likely toast. It had a special lanyard to connect when you were at pattern altitude and below that would skip the safety of a 2” delay for separation of the two seats and immediately pull the chute upon exiting the airplane. The engines were so loud that you had to wear both in ear and over the ear hearing protection on the flight line. Apparently they converted JP-4 into noise, but not thrust. Spinning the Tweet was great too. She was an honest airplane, and if you stalled with yaw, hold on tight! There was no “neutralize the controls” recovery that the new trainer uses, the Tweet required adherence to 4 very specific steps or she would just keep on spinning while you watched the altimeter unwind and wondered how well the 1950s ejection seat would work. Power, idle. Ailerons neutral. Rudder full opposite direction of the spin. Stick abruptly full forward. And by “abruptly”, they meant slam it into the instrument panel as hard as you can. After the spin definitely stopped (and certainly not before), you might want to let off some of the forward stick or you’ll soon be IMC in the cockpit at -2 Gs and see 50 years worth of dirt and lost ear plugs.
    1 point
  40. How about in the middle of 3050. Random? Nope, that is the gross weight of a older Cirrus SR20 when it was powered by the 200HP Continental.
    1 point
  41. Would you like to have your GPS receive its position from your tires? Or your radio squeal at you? The reason is interference. I am sure if someone were to devise a system that generates no interference and is willing to go through the STC process to prove it up, that you could do it.
    1 point
  42. Didn't Houston Tank Specialists donate the use of vans to transport attendees at the Summit?
    1 point
  43. If the weather is permitting we are flying to Idaho Falls at New Years. If the weather up north does not allow for that flight we would be happy to meet up in Paso Robles.
    1 point
  44. I'll have to check with my co-pilot but I would enjoy meeting at Paso.
    1 point
  45. Might make this happen depending on getting current the week leading up to it and amount of preparation for trip the following morning....
    1 point
  46. Thanks for the comments Kevin, one of these days I’ll find a Mite and/or get to fly one. It’s on my list..
    1 point
  47. I was in the same place when I was starting out with this LOP stuff... Just climb to an altitude where you're at 20" MAP at full throttle with boost on, (not hard to do when you're at 5700 ft before you leave the ground). Now with an RPM of 2500, you're only making 65% power. Now you're safe and you can play with the mixture all you like. Go as slow as you like through peak, noting the numbers, both EGT and CHT, feel the power reduction as you get to about 10° on the lean side. You can go back and forth across peak to get super comfortable with all of it. Since you're at low power, you can't hurt anything. Maybe we can go fly this weekend? I'm free Sat afternoon and all day Sun.
    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.