Bob - S50

Of course, I'd be VERY careful about setting any timing other than that specified by the manufacturer. I don't think any A&P would do anything different. Or are you saying something else? Bob

Here are a couple links to pages that have numerous articles or webinars on lot of subjects: http://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/182146-1.html?redirected=1 Just articles. https://www.savvymx.com/index.php/webinar A page of webinars plus, at the top of the page you'll find a tab labeled resources. On that tab you'll find a link to Mike's articles. You'll find info on both pages about Lean Of Peak (LOP) and the red box and even the red fin. Basically, the red box is a combination of power and mixture settings that are likely to result in a CHT over 400 degrees and puts the most stress on your engine. The idea is that if you keep out of the red box, your engine will last longer. Bob

The plane sits nose high on the ground. Pick some pitch attitude, say maybe 3 to 5 degrees nose high and set it before you take off. Then don't mess with it the rest of the flight. See how you like it. If you don't like it, use something different the next time. Once airborne, it doesn't really matter what pitch the attitude indicator shows for level flight. You aren't really at 0 degrees pitch for level flight anyway. The only time knowing what pitch indication to use for level flight is handy, is for setting an initial pitch attitude if you lose your airspeed indicator. In that case you'll use known pitch and power indications. For IMC flying you'll set a pitch attitude (with the yoke, not the adjustment knob) then check the performance instruments (airspeed, altimeter, VSI, and HSI or DG). If they are not showing what you want, go back to the attitude indicator, look at what it shows, and make an adjustment. Trim if need be. So if you want level flight but your altimeter shows a descent and your VSI shows 200 fpm descent, go back to the attitude indicator. Whatever it shows, whether that be 5 degrees nose down, level, 2 degrees nose up, it doesn't matter; raise it up a degree or so, then go back and check the performance instruments again.... and don't forget to trim, trim, trim so the nose doesn't fall again. Here's a rule of thumb for you too. Since 1 degree of pitch equates to 100'/nm, if you'll take your TAS in nm/minute times 100, that is about the VSI change you'll get from a 1 degree pitch change. For example, if I'm cruising at 150 KTAS, that's 2.5 nm/minute. Multiply by 100 gives me 250. So as a rough starting point a 1 degree pitch change will result in about a 250 fpm change on the VSI. It won't be perfect but it should put you in the ballpark, then crosscheck your performance instruments and continue making fine adjustments. Did I mention trim, trim, trim? By the way, you can use the same rule of thumb through different logic to get a rough guess of how much crosswind you are fighting. Again, if I'm flying 2.5 nm/minute, every 1 degree of crosswind correction will cancel out about 2.5 knots of crosswind. So if I'm having to fly with a 6 degree crab to stay on course, there is probably about a 15 knot crosswind component. Have fun, Bob

I personally would not mess with the pitch setting. On any given flight the pitch of the plane for level flight will change with any change in airspeed or configuration. Given enough fuel burn, it will even change due to weight. If you adjust it for one speed/configuration, it will just be off later. Develop a good cross check and trim, trim, trim. Best of luck and have fun. Bob

Best of luck finding a good partner or partners. With good partners you'll really enjoy the cost savings and the options it makes possible. Bob

I'm right there with you. That's why I have 3 partners instead of owning the plane myself. Bob

Should probably buy a 4 cylinder EGT/CHT system.

Looking at the POH for our '78 J, it provides data for 2300# and 2740#. Looking at the 8000' performance chart, the difference in speed between the two weights varies from as little as 2 knots at high power/high RPM settings to as much as 11 knots at low power/low RPM settings. Of course this probably assumes a constant CG location. By moving the CG aft, as mentioned above, you not only reduce drag caused by the requirement for extra lift, but you also reduce drag from the tail as well. How much? Good question. Let's say you have 30 pounds you can put in the front seat or the baggage area. For my J the baggage area is about 46" further aft, call it 4' for simplicity. 4 x 30 = 120 ft-lbs. Since the plane is about 25' long, again for simplicity, let's guess that the center of lift for the tail is 16' aft of the aircraft CG. 120 ft-lbs/16 ft = 7.5 lbs. So moving 30 pounds from the front seat to the baggage compartment would make a difference of about 7.5 pounds less down force on the tail, and 7.5 lbs less lift required by the wing. So even if we consider both to create equal drag, that would be the equivalent of 15# less weight. 15/440 = 0.034. Even if we apply that at the low RPM and low power difference of 11 knots, the difference here would be about 0.375 knots. At the high RPM and high power setting, it would make a difference of 0.068 knots. Not much difference. On the other hand, if you are taking a beautiful 110 lb woman and a 250 lb man with you... putting the beautiful woman next to you might be a good idea... for more than one reason.

Aeroshell 15w-50 is the one oil that Mike Busch does not recommend because it has too much synthetic oil. The synthetic oil cannot carry lead like mineral based oils. Don't know why it would reduce oil on the spark plugs. Since synthetic does not break down over time and remains in longer chains, that could explain the reduced oil usage. As time since oil change increases, mineral based oils would get thinner and slide past everything easier. Synthetic would not. As for running slightly rough when you reduce power... Are you talking about pulling the throttle back but leaving everything else set? Are you talking about leaving the throttle and reducing RPM? Are you running ROP or LOP? Are you sure the deposits are oil and not soot? Have you tried one of Mike Busch's airborne mag checks? (I have not done that yet) Bob

On another forum I read, a couple guys reported lots of static that made the radio unreadable. In their case it was caused by the ELT. They disconnected the ELT and the problem went away. Can't remember what brand their ELT was, but apparently it was picking up local radio stations, amplifying it, and sending out a signal that caused static on the radio. Bob

Is that 14V or 28V? If it is a 14V, try this: http://www.chiefaircraft.com/zef-r15300.html Bob

Rob, Actually, I'm saying if you are flying a round trip and all you care about is fuel burn, do ...not... increase your speed into the wind, but ...do... decrease your speed with the tailwind. If all you care about is time, go as fast as you can all the time (as originally posted). What you say is true about headwinds but only if your normal no wind cruise speed is L/D max (about 90 KIAS). Since none of us cruise that slowly, you've already made your speed increases. I even posted a message in which I defended my point. Try this: Pick an altitude, any altitude. Use your POH and look up the TAS and FF for 55%, 65%, and 75% power for that altitude. Use those numbers to compute MPG (TAS/FF). You'll see that you get the best MPG at 55%. And after all, MPG will decide how much fuel you burn between point A and point B. Now let's assume you run into a 10 knot headwind. Since FF won't change for any of those power settings, all we do is lose 10 knots of groundspeed. So, subtract 10 knots from each of the speeds you used in the previous calculations. For example, if 65% gave me a TAS and GS (no wind) of 155 K, with a 10 knot headwind my TAS would still be 155 but my GS would only be 145. For each of those power settings, do the same thing (TAS-GS)/FF. That will give me MPG adjusted for wind. After doing that you'll see that the lower power setting still gives you the best MPG. Now try it for a 20 K HW, a 30 K HW, a 40 K HW, and a 50 K HW. At least for a J model cruising below 10,000', it will take about 50 K of headwind before you are better off pushing the power up from 65% to 75%. Here are some numbers from my POH (using 2700 RPM @ 8000 and ignoring the further potential fuel savings of using a lower RPM for lower power settings): No wind 75%/169TAS/10.8FF = 15.6 MPG ***** 65%/157TAS/9.7FF = 16.2 MPG ***** 55%/145TAS/8.6FF = 16.9 MPG ***** 55% wins 10 HW 75%159/10.8=14.7MPG ***** 65%/147/9.7=15.1MPG ***** 55%/135/8.6=15.7MPG ***** 55% still wins 20 HW 75%149/10.8=13.8MPG ***** 65%/137/9.7=14.1MPG ***** 55%/125/8.6=14.5MPG ***** 55% still wins 30 HW 75%139/10.8=12.9MPG ***** 65%/127/9.7=13.1MPG ***** 55%/115/8.6=13.4MPG ***** 55% still wins 40 HW 75%129/10.8=11.9MPG ***** 65%/117/9.7=12.1MPG ***** 55%/105/8.6=12.2MPG ***** 55% still wins, but not by much over 65% 50 HW 75%119/10.8=11.0MPG ***** 65%/107/9.7=11.1MPG ***** 55%/95/8.6=11.0MPG ***** 65% finally becomes best and 75% equals 55% What do you think? Bob

I may have mis-spoken. I'm trying to find where I saw it, but the Continental starters use a friction fit for engaging the starter to the engine. Lycomings do not. I thought I saw that using Camguard increased the likelihood of a starter that would not engage on the Continental. However, the Camguard website says it will not cause that problem. So.... disregard all after good morning. Sorry, Bob

I think that is a good plan. Bob

Always use Camguard on a Lycoming. Never use Camguard on a Continental.

Cruise high only makes sense for long flights. Under about 200nm the burn will be about the same for any altitude and you actually save fuel by staying low. The difference will be less than 2 gallons in most cases. If you go high for a short flight, fuel saved at cruise is wasted getting to altitude. I'm only WOT until some time during the descent. I don't cruise as fast as I can. I use about 65% power for a compromise between speed and efficiency. Carson's speed works only if you don't care how long it takes you to get there or if you are going far enough to climb above 10,000' Disagree with the increase speed for a headwind. You do not improve your range by speeding up unless you are looking at over about 50k of headwind. On the other hand, if you can get rid of as little as 5 or 10 knots of headwind by changing altitude up or down, it will usually be worth it in terms of fuel burn. Slow down for tailwind will save fuel if you don't mind the extra time it takes to get there. Life is a compromise. Bob

Wow! Wish I had all that. Did you have to sell your house to pay for it? Bob

Garmin does have a free simulator to learn how to use their GPS. Download it from the intenet if you like. Helped me figure out what I could not understand by reading the manual. However, they do ...not... update the database. It is for training, not planning a flight. That said, the terrain does not change much so it works pretty well for looking at terrain clearance. As for transferring data, I always let the engine idle until the oil temp comes up to 90F before I taxi. While I'm waiting for that to happen, I program the radios. Since we have the GTN650 and it knows airways it makes it pretty easy to set in a route. Even so, I think your wish will eventually come true. Bob

Thanks for the offer but I'm good for now. I'll get two more from Delta before I retire and one of my partners is a CFI. Good luck with your JPI. Bob

I downloaded and looked at the 930 primary pilot guide and installation manual. Oil temp limits are one of many that the pilot cannot program. They are set by JPI. Supposedly JPI sets them to POH limits. One manual says the oil temp low limit default value is 90F. Obviously JPI must have reset it. On my '78J, the only red radial is at 245F with a green arc of 175-245F. I do not know where they came up with 150F. We have an 830 and have the low alarm set to 90F. We do not want to take off until oil temp is over 90F. I think it is time to call JPI and ask them where they came up with the numbers and unless they have a good reason for setting them the way they did, tell them you want them changed. Before you call, check all the other alarm limits and know which others you want changed, what you want them changed to, and why. On the 830, the default value for DIFF is 500F, which is totally useless. We changed it to 150F for example. A CHT of 475F is way out of line too even though the manual says it is acceptable. We have ours set to 400F. Good luck, Bob

I love the magazine too. I look forward to it every month. I almost always learn something when I read it. However, from the Busch and Deakins articles I've read, except at high power settings, EGT is not what burns valves, an improperly seated valve is usually the culprit. Warped valve, warped head, improperly ground face, misaligned valve guide, worn valve guide, dirty valve guide or manufacturing defect for example. I'm talking normally aspired of course, not turbo. Deakins also has an article that says the most efficient prop speed depends on the prop. If you really want to know what the most efficient prop speed is, you'll have to test your own airplane. If you are talking cruise altitude high enough to allow WOT, it is moot. RPM will control both speed and efficiency. You have to decide which you want more of, high RPM for speed or low RPM for efficiency. At lower altitudes where you are setting both RPM and MP, pick a combination, say a target number of 47 for a J, like 2700 RPM and 20". Lean to LOP, check the fuel flow, write down the IAS. Set 2600 RPM, 21" lean to the exact same fuel flow and make sure you are still LOP. If you are, write down the IAS. Change to 2500/22" and do it again. Then 2400 and 23" and so on until you run out of throttle, can't get the same fuel flow LOP, or you don't want to run the engine any slower. The combination that gives you the highest IAS is the most efficient combination. Bob

No, ours is a 14V M20J. I tried looking at the Chief website, the Aircraft Spruce website, and the Zeftronics website. None of them list a 28V regulator for Mooney. You might have to call one of those places and see if they can help. It would also probably help if you have the OEM part number. Good luck, Bob

I do not plan on using paper. I have no desire to go IFR in the cockpit (unable to see because all the paper is blocking my view). However, if you want to use paper as a backup, you could print parts of the sectional off the internet or copy parts of your paper sectional using your printer. You could then do what we used to do in the AF when we flew a low level route. We would plot the route, cut the chart up to give us just the route and some distance (maybe 10 or 20 miles both sides of the route) and create a folded strip chart. Made it smaller for use in the cockpit and easy to use because all you had to do was flip to the next section as you flew off the piece you were looking at. When we made the plot, we would estimate the groundspeed and put tick marks every so often (5 minutes would probably work for the Mooney). Using an elapsed timer we would then have a good idea of where we should be at any given time and if we were ahead or behind on the timing. Whatever you decide, have fun. Bob

I agree. We bought one for our plane and it has worked great. Got it from Chief Aircraft in Grants Pass, OR (no sales tax either). http://www.chiefaircraft.com/salesperson/result/?q=zeftronics Bob

Because the DC9 still did not have RNAV, GPS, or glass until the day it was retired. Steam gauges all the way.