Bob - S50

The problem is that the blades are only minimum drag a one specific AOA. Any other AOA and they are no longer streamlined. Now if you could mount them on a pivot so they always streamlined like an AOA vane maybe it would be better. And if you could use smaller blades. And while you're at it, since they are rotating to stay streamlined, why not use them for AOA? That was what the article said. Cat whisker antenna was the lowest drag.

There was a an article in the Mooney Flyer several months ago in which it was pointed out that the blades do not reduce drag. Save your money.

The installation manual specifies a trim switch that may be used and purchased from Garmin. You can get that switch directly from the manufacturer for about half price. We did that but it was too large for our yoke so we re-used the KFC switch. Luckily for me the installer said he could use the new switch on a future installation in a different type aircraft so it didn't cost me anything.

We used the switch from our KFC200.

I'll take it. Sending you an email. Bob

I have no proof of this, but I think the most efficient RPM/MP combination will depend on which engine you have, primarily because of differences in static timing. The rest of this is just the ramblings of an old man. Two things will affect how much potential energy (stored in the gas) gets converted to speed: Engine efficiency and prop efficiency. Skip already covered most of that. However, from what I've read, the optimum point to reach peak pressure inside the cylinder is about 15 or 16 degrees after top dead center (TDC). If I'm not mistaken, most A3B6 engines are timed at 20 degrees BTDC while the A3B6D engine is timed at 25 degrees BTDC. That's a big difference if you are trying to hit peak at the same 15 ATDC. It's my belief the the 25 degree timing was optimized to produce maximum power at full power so Mooney could hit the magic 201 mph on 200 HP. I'm guessing at 20 BTDC engines make just slightly less power at full power. If you reduce RPM, peak pressure will move closer to TDC. As you increase MP, peak pressure also moves closer to TDC because the flame front spreads more quickly. If you are operating at the optimum point, moving peak pressure closer to TDC reduces power and increases stress on all the moving parts and the bearings. If I have an engine that is timed at 25 BTDC, and I reduce RPM but keep the MP high, I think it moves peak pressure earlier than optimum. However, if I have an engine timed at 20 BTDC, which is likely operating later than optimum at full power, running lower RPM and higher MP will move peak pressure closer to optimum, or at least, not as close to TDC. So bottom line, if I have an IO360-A3B6 engine, I'd tend to choose 2400 RPM. But since my plane has an IO360-A3B6D engine, I operate my engine at 2600 RPM in cruise. I have also noticed that doing that reduces my CHT's and blow-by which means I end up with less oil on the belly of the plane (still lots, but not as much). Of course, once you are operating at full throttle, the only way to increase power at a given mixture is to increase RPM. So once you are full throttle, 2600 RPM will move you through the air faster than 2400 RPM. Rambling done.

I'm thinking 60 or 90 degrees would built too much offset by the time you get to a safe altitude. Plus, a 45 degree offset will require a 225 degree turn back, a 60 degree offset will require 240 degrees of turn, and 90 degrees will require 270 degrees of turn. As for when to start the offset, if I'm staying in the pattern, which I rarely do, then just fly the normal pattern. The AIM is not regulatory, just best practice. I would only consider the 45 degree offset if I'm at an uncontrolled field, departing the pattern, and paranoid about losing an engine at low altitude.

The direction of turn would be wind dependent. If there is no crosswind then either direction would work equally well, however, most of us would prefer to make the turn back in a left turn because we can see better. That would require an offset to the right after takeoff. If there is a significant crosswind, I would probably turn downwind. If the engine quits at low altitude the extra offset will give me more turning room. If I'm climbing at 100 knot ground speed, that's about 170'/sec. At a 45 degree angle, that's building an offset at a rate of about 120'/sec. If I'm climbing at 1000'/min, I'll reach 600' in 36 seconds and will have about 4300' of offset, or about 2/3 of a nautical mile which would be a fairly tight downwind. Even a 20 knot crosswind will only make about a 1200' difference, so I can either be offset by 5500' or 3100'. Call it one mile or 1/2 mile. You choice. As for the bank angle, here is a link to an article about the impossible turn from an analytical perspective. Impossible Turn

Another consideration, and I cannot take credit for this, I've just read it somewhere. If you are really worried about the engine quitting on every flight, AND you are flying out of an uncontrolled airport, THEN you might consider making a 45 degree turn once safely airborne. That way, when the engine actually does quit you won't need a 260/80 turn to get back to the airport. You might need as little as a single 135 225 degree turn. Plus, by turning 45 degrees to create turning room you will also reduce your distance along the extended centerline by about 30%.

I haven't done one for real, but at altitude I set up my typical climb in our J of 100 KIAS. At an altitude I picked for convenience I pulled the power to idle, lowered the nose to maintain 90 KIAS, rolled into a 45 degree bank, maintained that bank and 90 KIAS by adjusting back pressure, and did a 360. I lost 400'. I figure a 360 degree turn would lose about as much as a 260/80. I then added a 50% safety margin, so I figure I would give it a try from about 600' AGL or higher. There are a few articles out there about the impossible turn, and at least one of them points out that 45 degrees of bank is the optimum bank angle. Less bank will result in lower sink rate but will take longer to turn around and place you further from the runway after 180 degrees of turn. More bank will keep you in tighter but will result in a higher sink rate and a higher chance of an accelerated stall. If you think in terms of SIN and COS of angles, the sum of the two is maximum at 45 degrees of bank. At 30 or 60 degrees of bank the total is .5 + .866 = 1.366. At 45 degrees of bank it's .707 + .707 = 1.414. So you get the most bank for the buck at 45 degrees.

Got rid of our KFC200.

Not always the case. We gained some useful load by weighing ours. You might also want to check to see if they weighed it with empty (except unusable) tanks or if they made a calculation to account for FOB. If the latter, I'd weigh it again without the fuel.

Climbing at 25/25 is climbing at a cruise power setting of 75% until you get to about 5000' at which point it starts being reduced even further since you can no longer maintain 25" of MP.

Like almost everything else, I think it's a gray area. It depends... How low? 100'? 50'? 5'? At some point it becomes a safety issue bordering on reckless. Where that point is I don't know. Why? To clear game off the runway? Good plan. To impress friends and relatives? Not so much, but done in a reasonable manner, probably not a big deal. Unless you pull up too hard at the end of the runway and either over-stress the plane or get an accelerated stall. Or you turn while at a too low altitude and scrape a wingtip. In the Air Force we used to say something along the line of, "If you wouldn't do it with the Wing Commander watching, then don't do it." We could substitute FSDO instead.

I bought a folding 2 step aluminum ladder. The top step is about the same height as the trailing edge of my flaps. My wife loves it, I use it during preflight and to wipe bugs off the leading edge of the vertical stab, and my passengers like it.

Here is the bottom line: An LPV can be flown just like an ILS even though it is technically a non-precision approach. Follow the glidepath (GP) to a decision altitude (DA) and either land, or if you don't see the runway, go around. The GP gives you obstacle clearance all the way to minimums. An LP+V or LNAV+V is a true non-precision approach. You must comply with all stepdown restrictions and you can only go to the minimum descent altitude (MDA). The +V gives you an unofficial GP. While it USUALLY keeps you above stepdown restrictions, it isn't a guarantee. It also does not guarantee obstacle clearance. Only complying with stepdown restrictions will do that. It just provides you with an easy way to arrive at a VDP in a stabilized descent. If you get to the MDA you must level off just like you would if you didn't have the +V.

I don't know how hard it would be to get approval, but would it be possible to hook up a keyed switch and the Electroair ignition panel in series? That is, you have to turn the key on the first switch for electrical power to reach the Electroair panel. That would provide the key desired for security and also provide a key to place on the glareshield for safety. Would that be a minor or major repair?

Depends. In our particular airplane, probably not. Ours had the KI525 and KI256 so the panel holes were not the standard size. The G5's covered the holes nicely. If we had a panel with standard sized instrument holes, yes I probably would have gone with the GI275, especially if I didn't already have an engine monitor. In that case I would have done so for the following reasons: Cleaner looking installation. Easier to flush mount. While I could legally remove the rest of the 6 pack, I would probably leave the airspeed, TC, and altimeter, but replace the VSI with an EI or Insight 3" engine monitor. If the TC died I'd still be legal for IFR and would then replace it with an AV30C.

Yes it does. We have a majority wanting to sell the plane so we could do that. However, the one remaining wants to keep the plane and find new partners. We are willing to do that if we can come to an agreement about what a fair price would be. We were thinking with dual G5s, following a GTN650, driving a full up GFC500, with ADS-B OUT/IN, that we might be able to sell it for $125k to $135k. I was just looking for an idea of what others thought without influencing their thoughts (which I have now done).

You can see the paint job in my avatar.

No. We got it 6.5 years ago with 800 hours on it. It flies an average of about 200 hours/year.

It was blowing a quart out the breather every 3 hours so we did a top.

Probably shouldn't do this but, one of our partners wants to buy us out of the plane. I know what we have invested in it, but I'm wondering what you would pay. '78J 1002 lb. UL with 6 quarts of oil in it. Determined by weighing the plane. 2279 TT, 1864 SNEW (original engine threw a rod), 558 STOH, A3B6D engine GFC500 - 4 servo to include trim and yaw damper Dual G5's GTN650 GTX345 ADS-B OUT/IN JPI EDM730 graphic engine monitor Aerospace Logic FL202 digital fuel gauge connected to 4 Cies floats Apollo SL15CD audio panel (slide in replaceable with the PMA7000BT - but one pin will need to be connected to ground to use with your phone) #2Comm Trig TY96A #2 Nav KNS80 - VOR/LOC/GS/DME plus a spare KNS80 and a third KNS80 with a bad display for parts New Turn Coordinator 82 hours ago SB282 No back clutch spring complied with 37 hours ago. LED landing light and wingtip lights Vertical card compass 406 ELT SkyTec starter Exterior a 7, interior a 4 (needs new upholstery) No major damage - a little hangar rash

I see nothing wrong with telling me about everything they find no matter how minor. At the very least it gives me an idea of how much it might cost me to fix those items. It's up to me to decide if the total cost is high enough that I need to back out of the deal or go forward. To be honest, one of my partners is starting to fly more and wants a bit more safety for his family. He wants to get a Cirrus, not just because it gives him a parachute if the engine quits and there is no good place to land, but it also gives his wife a parachute to use if he becomes incapacitated during flight. I've told him I'm willing to make that same move. Since neither of us know much about Cirrus, what to look for in the logbooks, or who to use for a pre-purchase inspection (other than a Cirrus Service Center); this might be something useful for me.

Actually, it's spelled Cies.