Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/05/2021 in all areas

  1. Thank you for the clarification. I think I speak for others on MooneySpace thank you for being so active answering questions. FIKI or not your systems are awesome.
    3 points
  2. I like your point here. I know a new pilot eagerly shopping for a plane but he told me he can’t pull the trigger unless he feels like he got a great deal. Must have “saved money” on it, negotiated well, got excess value, etc. As a result he’s talking himself into taking on projects and explaining to me how just because an engine has only flown 100 hours 20 years after overhaul and sat in a barn for the last decade doesn’t *necessarily* mean it’s bad, and also he can get it for $X less! I told him I think you have the wrong goals: you should be looking for the right airplane, not the best “value.” Even if you pay top dollar doing that you’ll still feel like you saved money if it rewards you with years of reliable, mostly trouble-free service. But he still wants the best “deal.”
    3 points
  3. This picture was taken yesterday coming back VFR from Colorado. Just another day for the M20K......cruising at 15,500 ft with a TAS of 173 knots burning 11.7 gal/hr
    2 points
  4. The PMA 450A has been great. Nice crisp clear audio and intercom.
    2 points
  5. I concur with 95% of this. I think you’ll be ok. Personally I don’t trust the airmets for turbulence though. Often they are for 20,000’ blocks or more and the turbulence is in a smaller altitude block or non existent. If you have strong west winds aloft in Colorado, there can definitely be bad turbulence all the way into Kansas, but I’d look for pireps, listen to the airliners, and ask the controller if there are reports of turbulence or a smooth altitude 14-20k. Make sure pireps are turned on in foreflight for display on your map. You can quickly pick up where actual turbulence, icing and wind shear are occurring as a final check.
    2 points
  6. You know - I never took Midieval literature. But if I had...it would have prepared me to understand my youngest son better! He loves that stuff! he loves languages - no kidding he is working on 14 different languages. And he loves history. These are the things he studies. Besides getting a job, I am a big believer in education making us better informed people. A lot of it helps us interact with other professionals from within our jobs or otherwise business life - eg having some idea of what training lawyers get, doctors get, etc I think is helpful when I need to interact with those people, professionally or even just as a citizen. Some pretty wild things I thought were way in left field that I took for fun actually have some real relevance in my career. E.g. I took a philosophy class - philosophy of the mind from a fellow named John Searle (wiki him) and it seemed like pure - philosophy. You know now that machine learning and AI are a thing, and I am right in the heart of it, I find myself quoting from that class more often than you would know. Beyond the technical skills I learned as a math and cs and physics major (I switched around goodness help me), these kind of classes challenge the way we think. Beyond a trade school we need to be thinkers. And for real, I have gotten lucrative contracts specifically because of things I have said in the pitch phase that were in part shaped by a way of thinking thanks to that time in that Searle class - and I never would have guessed it at the time. I took economics and I am certain it makes me a better citizen and a more informed voter. And I think I make better informed decisions regarding my investments of my own money - so not so much it got me a job but still... I took one semester of Italian (and I took lots and lots of french), because at the time another student and I who were math majors convinced each other it was a great way to meet girls. Sure enough in that class there were like 20 girls and like 3 guys total, including me and that other guy. Well that was the good news. The bad news was neither one of us was bold and we didn't make anything of it -' but the Italian was fun. And heck I've been to Italy a bunch of times over the years, professionally to conferences, and once for several weeks to the University of Naples to lecture, and while i didn't need to know Italian since educated European people seem to all know English - which is the people I interact with in the university-biz, its still fun to know at least SOMETHING. So as Anthony says... Opinion of a PP only, and not a philosopher, or an economist or a linguist.
    2 points
  7. Its a phenomon well beyond mathematics. Renaissance man. There used to be a time when one person could know everything there was to know. Now we must become and more specialized if we want to know everything about at least something. And a good fraction perhaps of a larger body of knowledge, but give up after that. Don't ask me anything in Latin.
    2 points
  8. I don't know if it's true or not, but I remember one of my math profs telling us that probably the last mathematician to have a good grasp of all know mathematics at the time, was Gauss. He also told us (this was early '90s) that there had been more new mathematics discovered since 1950, than in all previous human history.
    2 points
  9. Its my opinion that there is very little mathematics in that video. Meaning he does not really derive, interpret or describe the mathematics - he just points at it as a static object and then jumps to more general engineering terms of the outcomes. A mathematics presentation would at least include working examples such as presenting term by term each expression in the integral and then performing the integration over some simpler domains. That mathematics in there is more of a prop than a tool. I am not second guessing him. If this is a presentation for a class, then he must not be expecting the class to be able to work problems that use the integration as a tool, but instead describe in general terms what it is for. (That said - I only "speed read" the video meaning I jumped ahead ten min at a time and watched 30 seconds worth in each 10 min segment to see the nature of what he is doing rather than the details - as I often do when I want to decide if I actually want to spend the time to watch something).
    2 points
  10. Do it! I did it for 4 years and it was absolutely tons of fun. Seriously
    2 points
  11. I'd be comfortable going based on what you see today. Without looking at winds, I'd like be at an altitude that puts me in clear air, somewhere between 12,000 and FL200. 16,000 would probably be my sweet spot if you're above a layer or between layers at that altitude. You can often see the main cells of the thunderstorms. And the higher you are, the easier they are to see. Then you can deviate slightly north or south to go around the build ups. I'd check the turbulence forecast as well. And if it's forecasted to be bad as you get into Colorado, just go lower. It can still be bumpy, but the worst stuff in Colorado is typically 10,000 and above. Just check for Airmets on the turbulence. If the winds aren't too bad on the ground, then go for the cheapest gas. If the winds are 20+ knots and gusting, then just plan to stop at a big airport like Lincoln KLNK. It looks like a good trip for a Bravo.
    2 points
  12. Some guy showed up in a pristine Beech 18 this weekend. It was beautiful! Gorgeous chromed big radial Pratt and Whitneys. The fuel depot is right across from my hangar. He took a big ol slurp out of the fuel station. I thought he was sporting a bit of a Howard hughs look.
    2 points
  13. The Garmin EIS on the large panels looks really good, but a GI275 engine monitor is not only expensive, but the presentation is terrible.
    2 points
  14. 3 more T&Gs today, before the full-stop. 3 of the 4 landings were power off. In a nice crosswind. Two I picked a spot and tried to hit it, got pretty close. Last time flying, 2 T&Gs, 3 ldgs, a more solid x-wind, had some fun rolling one main on, then the other, then 'go' without the nosewheel ever touching.... enough wind that half-flaps were used on every one. What fun!
    2 points
  15. I cannot help with spins, but I can shed some light on the trim bungees. For every flight condition, the airplane (excluding the tail) develops a pitch down moment. This moment varies with flight condition which is why the trim is adjustable. To balance the moment, the tail creates a down force and the amount of force is adjusted by the trim. The stabilizer only has about 6 deg of incidence adjustment via the trim system, and the gearing is such that it takes many revolutions of the trim wheel to move it from full up to full down. To be effective, it needs some help. When stationary on the ground and holding the yoke in a fixed position, you will notice that rotating the trim wheel nose down increases the nose down force on the yoke and rotating the trim wheel nose up increases the nose up force on the yoke. Therefore, the bungees act to add an extra increment of force into the control system so that trimming does not require the stabilizer incidence to change enough to null out all the force on the elevator aerodynamically. The bungees also act as centering springs which increase the airplane's airspeed stability. A lot has been made of whether the elevator trims in trail with the stabilizer and if not, is this causing extra drag. Generally, short bodies trail, mid-bodies (except the K) trim elevator trailing edge down and the K and all subsequent models (which have bob weights and variable down springs rather than bungees) trim with the elevator slightly trailing edge up. All this "misalignment" does is increase the camber of the stabilizer. The drag increase should be negligible because the air is flowing smoothly over the tail. Most "trim drag" is induced drag: some from the tail and some from the wing which must generate extra lift to carry the tail down force. One "proof" that the drag is not significant is that when Roy Lopresti created the J, he was looking for low hanging fruit in the drag reduction area. Almost certainly if the tail were creating enough drag to be worth fixing, he would have done so. Skip
    2 points
  16. Well we need more dylithium crystals to power our airplanes!!!! Mine are burnt out.
    2 points
  17. Crossed the Sierra Nevadas today from East to West. Climbed to 14.5 first and kept a lookout for downdrafts as the wind was out of the West. But it was smooth and beautiful.
    2 points
  18. We need to put together a Zoom Video conference.... to view that video... I’d invite Rich, Cliffy, and my favorite mathematician, Erik @aviatoreb.... I’m going to see how deep I can go into the video, solo... but if they derive a triple integral... I’m going to have to go all Cirrus Red Handle.... Best regards, -a-
    2 points
  19. On the other hand, you could need an overhaul in your first year even with a low or mid time engine.
    2 points
  20. Some beautiful scenery plus there were 5 Mooneys on the ramp
    2 points
  21. Not being in annual is not a deal breaker. There are a lot of reasons for that - loss of interest in the airplane due to other issues in a person 's life is the main one. A good pre-buy will identify the airworthy items and go from there. The owner that previously owned my airplane had passed away after a long illness. I participated in a pre-buy with a shop on the field where it was based. After I was satisfied and we struck an agreement, the shop arranged a ferry permit so I could get it back to Texas to get it an annual from someone I had faith and confidence in (wouldn't hold the airplane hostage). It all worked out. All systems on the airplane don't automatically go bad the day the airplane's annual expires. I knew after spending a few hours going through the logs and seeing it with the belly pans and inspection covers off I was confident I wouldn't have a huge annual. I knew it would be costly since I would be catching up on a few things (shock discs, oxygen tank etc.) but I budgeted for it and turned out to be $1000 less than I had planned. Once I asked the right questions and felt comfortable with it I looked at it being out of annual as an opportunity not a problem - it eliminated virtually all of the other would-be buyers. I wouldn't have done this had I not done all of my homework, seen the airplane with my own eyes and participated in the pre-buy.
    2 points
  22. FastTex.... Is it pn 4085-2C you’re looking for? The Doc must be clairvoyant!
    2 points
  23. A bit of light reading if you're bored over the weekend. TL;DR: Stall switch failed on me, and the $2500 price tag for a new replacement is downright stupid. A few months ago I noticed that the stall switch (lift detector) on the 201 I'm currently flying didn't work too well - in that the stallhorn might or might not activate even as the airplane entered imminent stall condition during the last moments of flare during landing. Interestingly, around that time I also noticed that during descent (in excess of 500fpm) in clouds/rain I would hear a distinct, but faint, high-pitched tone from the ceiling area. A few days ago I returned home after a rather challenging X/C trip that mostly took place in the soup, even with a "fun" encounter with light icing too. Upon arrival late at night, I hangared the plane and plotted -D-> to MYBED. The next morning I returned to the hangar to take care of a few things, and at this time I turned the master on to check the voltage since I had it trickle charging overnight. As soon as I flipped the master on, the stall warning came on in full force and wouldn't quit. Playing with the lift detector vane didn't help (although I could hear a very faint pitch change in the stall warning tone) but pulling the STALL WARN circuit breaker stopped the madness. I searched this forum and found out that I was not the only one to encounter this issue: https://mooneyspace.com/topic/17546-stall-warning-stuck-on/ https://mooneyspace.com/topic/15399-stuck-stall-warning/ I opted to leave the airplane alone at that time and to see if any supposed moisture buildup in the stall switch would clear up in a few days. It didn't. After letting it sit for 4 days the horn was still blaring as soon as I turned the master on, so I removed the switch from the airplane (not the worst, but not easy either) and confirmed with a multimeter that even when not activated, there was only 1.2kOhms between N.O and Common. The Mallory Sonalert SC628 (the generic P/N of the 201 stallhorn) has a current draw of approx. 7mA at 13VDC using data interpolated from the datasheet. This roughly translates to a roughly 1.8kOhm impedance assuming no other resistance in the circuit. When a 1.2kOhm "resistor" (i.e. faulty switch) is added in series with this device, the voltage differential across the Sonalert drops to 4.6V, but the thing about these smaller Sonalerts is that despite their listed operational voltage of 6~28V, they actually activate around 1V and are quite loud even at 3V. I have disassembled the switch as much as I can. The Safe Flight lift detector system is attached to the leading edge curved piece via 2 MS20470AD4-3 (or -4?) rivets which can be drilled out with a 1/8" dia. drill and punch. The lift detector assembly itself is basically a custom-order variant of the Honeywell BA or BE series SPDT microswitch housed inside a custom formed sheet aluminum cover then secured via two long MS20470A4-?? soft rivets, although the rivets are bucked so that the bucktail looks identical to the head. One could try drilling these out too, but they are prone to rotating with the drill bit, so I found the best method of removal was to carefully use a file to shave off one of the heads, then to use a 1/8" dia. punch to press/pull the remains out. The vane lever (constructed of stamped stainless steel) is secured at its fulcrum using a pin, which also can be pressed/pulled out of its place using a very small diameter punch or some other improvised device (I used an awl to expose enough pin on the other side, then carefully pulled the rest out with a needle-nose plier. It appears that the switch itself is not one of Honeywell's hermetically sealed types, which in my opinion is a huge no-no given the fact this switch is literally exposed to oncoming air/rain/debris. Thus, the plastic plunger slips right out of its place, so care should be taken not to lose this part in addition to the aforementioned lever pin. The Honeywell (or rather, its subdivision "Micro Switch" in Freeport IL) switch can be opened up to reveal its conductive innards by separating the upper "roof" from the main body, albeit with much difficulty. Safe Flight uses some sort of yellow electrical tape in an apparent attempt to seal this joint but I have found the tape's material to age very poorly, peeling unevenly and leaving an unsightly pattern of sticky residue upon eventual removal. Alcohol and/or brakleen easily removes this though. The "roof" is secured to the switch body via a combination of press fit and 3 tiny pins, 2 located on the LH and RH sides, and one at the rear. I learned this after-the-fact when the roof separated from the body and 3 pieces of plastic debris fell out with it. In my case, the breakage was clean and CA glue (aka superglue) did the trick. The switch innards are very simple; in the image above, the switch's Common conductor (on the far right) is connected to a springy copper arm that extends from the right to the far left. The arched shoulders on this arm bias the arm upwards as such to normally make contact with the upper electrode (the gold colored rectangular tab on the left) which is connected to the N.C. port, but this port is not threaded/used in this switch. When the vane at the wing L.E. lifts during high AoA, the opposite end of the vane lever pushes down on the plastic plunger, and the bottom end of the plunger pushes this copper arm down, causing it to detach from the N.C. electrode and to make contact with a similarly-shaped N.O. electrode below. A distinct clicking sound can be hear d during this operation. I rinsed down the switch body with liberal amounts of contact cleaner and then tested the contacts again with a multimeter; the check was OK. Chances are some conductive debris got lodged between the Common and N.O. electrodes. Reassembly of the switch consists of reattaching the "roof", securing it with the 3 tiny pins, inserting the plastic plunger (flat end goes into the switch), then reattaching the vane lever with the securing pin. I have taken the liberty of securing the switch to the Safe Flight housing using 2 sets of #6-32 screws, AN960-6L thin washers and MS21044N06 nylock nuts, and likewise for securing the assembly to the leading edge curved piece as well. Especially disappointing (and frankly, anger inducing) is that this switch was removed, factory repaired, and reinstalled according to a logbook entry dated 15 January 2016, which means this switch only lasted just over 5 years and about 150 hours T.I.S. before failing again. (The previous owner apparently didn't fly much) According to a Cessna 170 forum thread, a factory overhaul for an unheated lift detector (which basically involves Safe Flight switching out the Honeywell switch and putting it back into the housing) cost $400 in 2007 and according to another MS thread, $1200 in 2017. That is f***ing outrageous. Mind you, the price above is for overhauls/repairs. Aircraft Spruce lists a new Safe Flight Model 164 switch at $2575. A Honeywell BE-2R-A4 switch costs $12 on Sager Electronics. Even if, say, a custom-order variant of the BE series switch was batch-produced with an MOQ of 10,000 for $1,000,000 ($100 ea.), FAA PMA certification efforts cost $400,000, the aluminum housing cost $50 per unit, and the labor to assemble one was a generous 2 hours at $100 per shop-hour, this amounts to a valuation of $390 per switch, which translates to a 660% markup. During my days as an avionics tech, I've seen some unremarkable products sold at absurd prices (such as the Astro-tech LC-2 clock, a $10 Walmart kitchen timer sold at $400) but the Safe Flight lift detector takes the prize for the dumbest piece of s*** sold at the most d e n s e markup considering it's tech straight out of the Industrial Revolution of the 18th century. I've seen TSO'd comm radios sold for less than this switch. I understand that businesses need to generate profit to stay afloat; I may have given the lift detector a pass if it incorporated some ingenuity or special attribute that reflected some sort of significance in its R&D. My day job involves selling industrial electromechanical devices with a comfortable (but fair) markup because they're some of the best performers on the market and I know the engineers put in so much effort designing and refining them in years past and present. But the lift detector is nothing more than a custom-order microswitch from the 1940s with no meaningful R&D since, probably, the 1950s or 60s. To sit on decades-old tech and offer them for a markup so high that it might as well get RVSM is beyond my comprehension. Well, maybe it's not that much beyond comprehension. I know Safe Flight has some pretty technically advanced products such as their powerline detectors and helicopter pedal shakers, and I can only assume that their lift detectors contribute only a tiny portion of their revenue portfolio at this point, so all things considered, they couldn't care less about these relics of the past. Normally, the nature of the market would dictate that someone else would pick up the slack to offer reasonably-priced competition, but given the current rate at which new airplanes are produced and the relatively high entry barrier of PMA certification, such a venture is unprofitable and unattractive. If anything reflects painfully well the shattered remnants, the empty shadows of a once-hopeful general aviation industry, it is the flat-out unimpressive Safe Flight lift detector and its ludicrous pricing. At the end of the day, this is just one of my biggest pet peeves that I know is beyond my personal control, but one that I still can't help but be frustrated about. If you've made it this far, kudos to you for actually sitting through this entire monologue. Thanks for coming to my Ted talk.
    1 point
  24. Well I just signed the intent to buy. I'll be minority shareholder with my credit union on the 1985 Rocket that was listed on All American Aircraft. The pre-buy went well. Thanks to Chris @MIm20c and Paul @PJClark for their helpful input! This plane has had one owner since the mid-90s. It's been well taken care of although the panel, interior and paint are dated. The engine and airframe are solid with no major issues. First order of business when she's mine is to name her then install an engine monitor. The owner flew it for many hours using the Rocket Engineering suggested power settings. I'm super excited to start my Mooney ownership journey for the 2nd time.
    1 point
  25. Yep, Engineering School prepared me for many different career paths, not knowing which one I would end up on. And mine has certainly not been anything that I thought about as a possibility when I was a student! Some of my "general education" electives were actually fun, but certainly Medieval English Literature did not prepare me for an alternate career when I was laid off at age 50. The old degree opened doors, as without it I was not qualified, but it was myexperience and job history that got me working again in 8 weeks, from Thanksgiving to end of January a few years back. Some jobs require "any degree," some will accept one of several technical degrees, but most also require a certain level of experience. The degree that I earned gave me what I needed to successfully launch in one of many different areas, and I certainly launched well in an unexpected direction but without technical difficulties. But almost nothing applies to aircraft design or detailed aerodynamic analysis of specific aircraft parts or features. So I will bow out now and learn from those who took classes with me and went that direction instead, as qualified to start that as I was in my career.
    1 point
  26. Do it! Hang gliding is the purest form of flying. And while I've heard some hang gliding instructors say it's more effort to teach a fixed wing pilot because the controls are all backwards, that wasn't my experience at all. It was extremely intuitive and I thought very easy to learn to fly hang gliders. One thing newbies have problems with is wanting to get slow for landing as the ground approaches, and we all know what can happen when you get too slow. My natural instinct was to come into ground effect with plenty of speed, and then let it bleed off until ready to gently touch down. Just like we do in airplanes. Also, as pilots, we know that the pull in/push out is really not for up/down, but rather fast/slow. Go do it!
    1 point
  27. Holy cow, I never thought of that. I've toyed with the idea of taking hang gliding lessons someday, but now I'm worried I'll just nose over into the ground on the first try!
    1 point
  28. The stabilizer incidence was changed to give more nose up trim range coincident with the elevator travel change. Changing the incidence would affect the trim bungees since they are connected. Mooney made changes to various control deflections and trim bungees over the years. For instance, M20Js below SN 24-1038 have a max up aileron deflection of 17 deg. whereas later aircraft have a maximum of 14.5 deg. There’s probobably no one left at Mooney who knows why these various changes were made, and as you discovered, even if they do know, they may not tell you. Skip
    1 point
  29. Integrals of algebraic expressions are easy. Even at 10 dimensions. Adding trigonometry or Fourier/Laplace transforms spices things up... My favorite though are Green's diades. That said, the amount of math in the video is excessive for any pilot (maybe not for test pilots or design engineer pilots...) However, in Europe, private students learn the lift equation. FAA doesn't require it. The equation in the faa 8083 book states the CL coefficient of lift "before" the 1/2 that comes from the integration (v squared)... And says something like "experiments have shown that"... I read that and took a long break. Nope, it was derived on chalk board... Wind tunnels helped the CL portion... Now I'm studying the AP books... For acceleration it states "fps/s" fps being foot per second. Seeing the 2nd derivative here is like finding waldo... Man, I'm so signing up my kids for the international baccalaureate program... Ok, enough rant.
    1 point
  30. I pull back and it goes up, I push in and it goes down, if I go too slow it falls down. What else do I need to know about aerodynamics?
    1 point
  31. Thanks for the great screenshots. I sent them to my A&P but it looks exactly what I need.
    1 point
  32. Many years ago at Mare Island Naval Shipyard, a submarine was coming in for maintenance after a patrol (at the time, the company I worked for had a contract to install some equipment while it was at the shipyard). The captain's wife had permission to drive down to the slip to greet it. The XO was learning to dock and came in too fast crashed into the captain's wife's car. I always wondered what she told her insurance company, Skip
    1 point
  33. @LANCECASPER It sounds like you found a nice plane due to your diligence as a buyer. However, in my opinion, the current conditions of the market make it tougher on the "prospecting" buyer. Furthermore, It seems like most of the airplanes I've visited were better in the pictures and on the spec sheets than in real life. With these two factors in mind, it didn't seem prudent to continue pursuing this plane. I probably should have just left it at "this airplane isn't the one for me but it might be good for someone else".
    1 point
  34. Looks to me like it's 26K to upgrade a Bo from inadvertent to FIKI, and 72K to install from nothing on a Mooney (but is it FIKI or not? What is "basic ice protection"?).
    1 point
  35. So lest anyone think that I - a PhD of mathematics and a math prof even, knows everything there is to know about mathematics - let me be the first to confess bounded and mortal human limits. I know a bunch of stuff....but hardly everything. I know a good bit of fluids specifically - but not everything. From a distant memory - Biot-Savart comes up in electromagnetism. So instead of vorticity I am expecting to see a current element I dl cross r. I dunno....
    1 point
  36. Had a grad student Teaching Assistant do that in freshman Physics. It was sad, we were just learning single integrals, and he couldn't do anything using math less than a year or two ahead of us . . . . Wish I'd'a had a Red Handle for that class!
    1 point
  37. @cliffySome things will never be answered as much time (and many people) have passed. Here's a few points to ponder, but I have no definitive answers. 1. The only reason that I know to increase the down elevator throw of an airplane is spin recovery. 2. Flight characteristics will not change if the flight control system gearing did not change. It looks like travel was increased by changing the length of the push-pull rods (which may explain the trim change(s) 3. Deflection changes in '69 are noted in the S&MMs for the series (attached). 4. I also noted a Service Instruction "Mooney S. I. M20-44" (also attached) which appears to be for both mis-installed push-pull tubes in the tail section ... and to make clearance for larger travels. 5. Here's an educated guess as to "why?" There was probably a spin accident that occurred, but the exact CG and loading were not known. The FAA probably asked Mooney to run some spin testing at aft CG. I am not sure if Mooney did spin testing for the original M20E since the airplane, weights and CG envelopes were the same as the M20C. Something was probably found (slow recovery ... 1-turn spin has to recover in 1 additional turn), and Mooney and the FAA agreed to the elevator travel change. The FAA probably didn't have enough evidence to bring out an AD, and Mooney probably didn't want to put something out that said their airplanes could have an issue. Blue on Top, Ron S&MM Elevator.pdf SIM20-44A.pdf
    1 point
  38. Nice work Dude! What makes this TC special is... It is a Brittain TC that works with the Brittain wing leveler... Original (1965) Brittain Wing leveler systems had a separate gyro in the tail to do the work... and an old army surplus TnB was on the panel... So the TC100 is a touch better for two reasons... Keep in mind it’s still only a TC... TCs make crummy back up instruments for flying in IMC... they misbehave as they wear... and the pilot doesn’t know it until it gets bumpy... PP thoughts only not a CFI... Best regards, -a-
    1 point
  39. Looks like it is an add on... Next steps... Determine why they added that on? Then decide if that reason still exists... Got a pic of what is under there? From the top and from the front... Best regards, -a-
    1 point
  40. Two words... Stabilant twentytwo
    1 point
  41. Wow! It's the only word I can say after reading this whole thread. Everyone is close, but ... that only works for horseshoes and hand grenades (like we used to say in grade school). All y'all nailed the strutted, high wing Cessnas and the Lark, so let's get to the Mooney tail. Note: The Mooney tail aerodynamics visualized my be my last "The Mooney Flyer" article for a while ... hopefully in the May issue. Let's go ... Rule #1 - EVERYTHING in design is a tradeoff. Forget the leading and trailing edge sweep angles as they really don't matter. What really matters (aerodynamically) is the 25% chord line. Since Mooney surfaces are all straight tapered, measure 25% aft from the leading edge at the root and at the tip and connect those points. This is the sweep that the airflow cares about. ALL 3 Mooney surfaces (wing, horizontal and vertical) are forward swept. Now we'll look at the stabilizing surfaces. The horizontal doesn't change sweep with a change in aircraft AOA, but it does change local AOA. As the wing (aircraft) AOA increases, so does the local horizontal AOA due to an increase in the wing downwash. This AOA on the tail is further increased with flaps. A couple notes here: 1) downwash increases as wing lift increases and 2) remember that the horizontal is an upside down airfoil that creates a down force. Now to the main topic. The Mooney vertical surface is more effective as aircraft AOA increases because the 25% chord line is getting closer to perpendicular to the airflow (noting that downwash lessens this effect). This allows the tail to be relatively smaller. Tails are designed for the low airspeed conditions ... there's lots of yawing moment available at higher speeds. And now the kicker ... The rudder hinge line is actually more forward swept than the 25% chord line. Why does this matter? Mother Nature (airflow) wants to take the easiest path possible. If the vertical surface is aft swept (most modern airplanes), when the rudder is deflected, the air has a tendency to travel up the hinge line (easier) than going around the deflected surface (harder). With a Mooney, the air can't do this as easily. In other words (let's look at the left side of the vertical surface with a left rudder deflection - aero people call this the pressure side). Air doesn't want to go up the hinge line because it also has to go forward at the same time. Nor does it want to go down the hinge line as this is INTO a higher pressure area. As a result, it has a tendency to travel straight backwards around the deflected rudder. This is also why gap seals are more important in Mooney aircraft. ,,, and now you know the rest of the story. Blue on Top, Ron PS. Questions are welcome ... I'll learn, too.
    1 point
  42. So a little update, shop pulled the computer, tested the voltage on the trim servo which was good, put the computer back in and it's running like a champ. I've flown the last 2 days, tested great, and no issues thus far. 1 hour yesterday, two 2-hour cross countries today and no issues. Will update if there is any change, but thus far working well.
    1 point
  43. Yep, no question about it. In the current market, this upgrade will pay back more than the cost to do it.
    1 point
  44. I thought about posting this in my previous thread about the Aera 760, but thought in view of today's circumstances it was better to start a new thread. Today was interesting to say the least. As a result of having been completely vaccinated, for the first time in over a year I took on a ferry job that involved flying Commercially to get the airplane. If I hadn't been vaccinated, it would have been a very uncomfortable trip. The Southwest flight was totally packed and when arriving in San Diego the terminal had more people packed in waiting for flights than I have ever seen, even before Covid. (See Photo below. It was actually worse than it looks in the photo) I thought it was going to be an easy flight with no substantial weather. I did a text briefing from Garmin Pilot and scanned METARs and Terminal Forecasts. I should have spent more time and actually gone on a computer to see what was potentially out there a few hours later. When I looked down on the trip from San Jose there really wasn't anything going on. So I filed out of San Diego to Stockton on my usual flight plan; Oceanside to Seal Beach, then up V459 to Lake Hughes, then Visalia to get around the Lemore NAS MOAs, then direct Stockton. Everything was looking good up through LA. At that point I looked ahead, and in the middle of California there was a significant band of weather that had developed just behind a cold front. Tops were 20,000 feet so there couldn't be much convection, but there were a significant number to storm cells that were showing on the G1000, the 760, and the iPad. The band was moving pretty fast, since at 16,000 feet it was a direct crosswind at 40 knots. Just out of the Tehachapis I primed the TKS to make sure it was working. If I had been flying my airplane it would have been land and possibly stay overnight due to reported icing. As I moved closer to the weather I asked for and actually got a block altitude clearance in California. As I asked for higher from my initial cruising altitude of 14,000, the Controller quizzed me as to whether I really meant go lower, since some other aircraft had asked for lower. No, I wanted higher to possibly top it. The band did not extend to Stockton. so I knew I wouldn't be descending into a mess. First I asked for 16,000, then a block 16,000-17,00, then FL180, then FL 190. The temperature went to a -19°C. In the initial climb the windshield started to pick up ice. I turned on the TKS at that point. and it dissipated. At 19,000 feet I was still in cloud but I could see the sun, the conditions were smooth, there was no ice, and no convection. The stormscope showed nothing and the storm cells were moving east past me. ATC gave me a descent, which I declined due to still being around some indicated storm cells. They followed that with a pilot discretion descent. So what does all this have to do with the titled topic? I was monitoring all of this on the iPad and had set up the approach with the RNAV 29 approach plate overplayed on the map in preparation to running the approach. I got a little turbulence on the descent and I look over at the iPad and it had shut down. It had plenty of juice, but wouldn't turn back on, and I was busy being vectored for the descent since I had to stay high for so long. There was no time to trouble shoot it. I quickly set up the 760 for the approach and overlayed the plate on it. I had previously loaded the approach on the G1000, so I was set up for the navigation. When I got home, of course, the iPad turned on. I will never trust the iPad. Thank goodness for the 760, the normalizer once again. I know the plates are on the G1000, but I hadn't flown the G1000 in quite awhile, so hadn't set it up before hand. In my airplane, in which I know the avionics backwards and forwards, I have plates on both the G500 TXi and the GTN 750Xi in addition to the Aera 760 and iPad, so a failure of the iPad with that many backups is a none event. Not so today. The 760 backup came in very handy. Of course if that had failed, then I would have asked for additional vectors, as I set up the plate on the G1000. The moral of this story is you better have a backup to the iPad (preferably two) if you are using it for your primary approach plate and weather, and what better to use than the Aera 760?
    1 point
  45. How many people turned their iPad to see this pic right side up? What year was the Bravo built? Wondering if the Ovations used the same old fiberglass in 94... -a- Holy cow! Mooneys are spacious! Long Bodies are huge! That hat rack is a mile away!
    1 point
  46. I'd be interested to see what the NTSB final report says. Like most accidents, there is a chain of events that led to this. From what is available, here are the things for us to think about without knowing all the details of this specific accident: 1. Avoid wx that exceeds your capability or the plane's. 2. Don't fly into IMC without an IFR rating. This may seem obvious, but "get-thereits" can drive decisions that put pilots into wx they are not able to handle. 3. Continue practicing and understanding your plane's avionics so that you can use them to shed pilot loading when situations arise. I think of John F. Kennedy Jr's spatial D crash when there was a working autopilot which he never engaged. https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2010/july/pilot/10-mistakes-jfk-jr-made 4. For those of us who are IFR-rated, practice hand-flown approaches down to mins under with a view-limiting device. Also practice it with your coupled autopilot to ensure you know which gates to look for (when the RNAV switches from enroute to terminal, etc.). 5. Circling at mins is a perishable skill. Especially, when executing missed during the circle. Either practice circling enough so that you are comfortable with doing so at mins, or file to a destination that doesn't require it if you are uncomfortable. Circling right under an overcast ceiling with great vis isn't bad, but doing so right at the vis approach limit is much more difficult. 5. If you fly in IMC there are two types of pilots: those who have diverted to a wx alternate and those who will. When mission planning, walk through what you'll need to do to get to your original destination (does that airport have Uber service, or will family come to get you). When I was weekly commuting to see my family, I had my wife get the notifications on FlightAware and she'd track me to see if I was going to my original destination or going to the nearby regional airport with an ILS. We always had a backup plan and a GO/NO-GO decision. This helps fight the "get-thereits". 6. Lastly, have a solid GO/NO-GO decision that you've thought through BEFORE your big family ski trip, or your trip to X destination.
    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.