Ragsf15e

One other point… Someone else with a -550 will be along to discuss this, but generally climbing full rich, full throttle, full rpm (no reduction) is the best for your engine. Unless there’s a “takeoff power” limit. I’m sure you’ll get some opinions on that, but there are some good articles by John Deakin on avweb to read.

As long as you were full rich at the same time, then no problem. Either set full rich before final or make sure it’s your habit to get the mixture full in as the throttle goes full in. moving it “authoritatively” isn’t going to hurt it. If you want to be real hard on the engine, 100% power at some reduced mixture setting will do it.

That seems weird, because that line is pressurized in mine no matter where the on/off is. Sounds like yours is like mine - the high pressure line is always on?

You’ve actually pretty much got it. Look at “ICP” in the charts. It’s already falling at peak but it starts falling much faster the leaner you go. We are trying to manage ICP, but we don’t have an ICP gage, so we use egt and it falls off much slower. So yes, there’s a huge difference in ICP with only a small difference in egt. It’s not perfect, but egt is the only quick measurement we can use to get fairly close.

Yeah you’re right, mine too… i know i saw that somewhere. Now im going to be looking everywhere! Either way, peak/1650 tit or 50 rop don’t seem very healthy to me!

I feel your nerves! I just had my annual and beforehand I put blue painters tape on every fuel panel under the wing with a big “NO” on it! There are a couple monroy ones that are easier to miss as they used to be normal, removable ones with the little holes in the middle. If you look closely for sealant and tap them and look down from inside the monroy tanks you can tell which ones are fuel.

Especially on the non turbo engines at high altitudes (so lower power), peak doesn’t hurt anything and is actually recommended as best economy setting. However, it’s not as good place to be as power increases. You’ll start to see higher chts, higher internal cylinder pressure, and eventually detonation at higher power. As @Pinecone said, below 65% it’s not doing those things. ~50 rich of peak is even worse… yet isn’t that where the Encore power setting table in the poh has you?

Interesting, I didn’t even think there was a spec for that. I used TLAR (that looks about right) and it seems to work. The spec must be pretty forgiving, but you’re right, if it’s off too much in either direction, it won’t work.

I use the same 65% power setting and technique. Mine is also smooth there. It has gamis and fine wires and less than .3 spread. No surefly for me, i bet that helps yours a lot. I’ve also been using 11.2 gph for ~70% lop. Typically 31”/2400. It’s smooth there as well and still cool (around 1570 tit, 330chts). But it’s about 0.8 more gph for only ~5kts.

Thanks. It seems weird that there’s no easy way to use some other (newer/better) regulator with our existing oxygen system. Say one from MH for the O2D2. There are multiple options, i guess it’s just that nobody bothered to get an stc? I really like my built in system after having used a portable one in my F. Typical trips are 2 adults and two children. The portable was a mess. The built in system with 2xO2D2s and a 115cf bottle is great!

Awesome! Glad you got her back! The altitude compensating reg scares me. Where did you get one, was it hard to find, and how much did it cost?

I don’t even think it takes a “massive” updraft to do that. Strong for sure, but in convective turbulence, i think that kind of speed increase is definitely possible.

I had a similar issue that they likely would’ve caught as well. I trusted my broker (and me) to catch issues and we missed one.

Definitely you should check the o rings. There are two, one big one you can see and one tiny one you can’t (it’s inside, on the shaft). There might be one other issue… the caps have a nut with a cotter pin on the end of the shaft holding the whole thing together… the nut needs tightened just right or the cap will be too loose or too tight when you put it on the tank and close the lever. I just took mine apart and put new O rings on. The caps had the blue flourosilicone large O rings, but surprisingly, my IA found one of them was a little loose and might not seal properly. Then when I disassembled the caps to clean them and install new o rings, I found that the inner ones were the old style. No idea when they were last changed.

Ha! Flatlander talk there for sure! Bend is on the east side of a rather large and unpopulated mtn range. North Bend is west of a different range (coastal range ). The roads are fine, just not very straight, and no 6 lane interstates through there! One more reason to have an airplane on the west coast. The Oregon beaches are beautiful, but most driving routes to them are along the coast along pacific coast “highway” which is more like an east coast country road.

And wow, the tcm injectors weren’t close!

I would agree that as you get to higher Lop power, you’ll want to be more lop to be “safe”. I’ve only gone as high as 70% and I feel comfortable with ~20ish lop. You’re running above that (~73%, so not much), so being deeper lop makes sense. Our chts seem to indicate the engine is fine there.

@jlunseth What was your gami spread with the TCM injectors that couldn’t run LOP? Also are you using fine wires (with new plugs it’s probably not a big difference). What MP/rpm were you using when you tried LOP? I’ve read your earlier posts about using “very” high mp and low rpm (something like 31/2350 and ~10gph). I know these aren’t your exact numbers, but if I recall your earlier posts, they are in the ballpark? I have an SB engine, so a little different, but mine wasn’t particularly happy at similar settings. It was much smoother at a little lower mp which puts it ~20 degrees lean of peak at 10.4gph (65% on my engine). I’ve left rpm at 2350. 11.3gph and ~31” for 70% works as well and keeps it about 20f lop. I guess my point is that at 65 or 70% power, you don’t need to be very far lop to be “safe” and efficient. At all of the above power settings, I am below 1575 TIT and CHTs are low 300s (or even cooler, sometimes I’d actually prefer a bit warmer). *for the record, our engines are different as I have an SB with a TCM intercooler and waste gate control and 10 more hp. I have gamis and fine wires. Both were put on when the engine was oh by previous owner, so I don’t know how it ran on stock injectors.

But if the “instructions for continued airworthiness” dictate the service, is it airworthy without it?

That would be an interesting place… are you sure it’s not coming in from the sidewall to your left? There’s a more common place there. You gotta remove the carpet and maybe the seat and look.

Lets say your airplane lives in a hangar, rarely flys in the rain and you use AS 22 as directed each year so your speedbrakes work perfectly… are you still required to send in the speedbrakes at 1000hours for “clutch lubrication and spring replacement”? Are ICAs required? It would seem they are based on their name…

No, but I will get new bolts for that. I didn’t realize they wear as well. We just looked up there with it on jacks and wiggled it, but it’s ok right now so we didn’t take it apart. It was my first annual with this airplane and we had enough other things to lighten my wallet.

Strangely, the parts are pretty easily available and not that pricey!

Unfortunately it’s the actual holes in the joints.

Can someone please help me ID this part from the nosegear of my 86 252 K model. I think it’s part 27 from the attached IPC picture but the diagram is killing me. It’s two heim joints screwed together. Steering is ok right now but my IA showed me how these were most of the slop, so he wants them available next time it’s on jacks.