philiplane

Just place 3/4" masking tape over the lines of rivets until you get good with the buffer.

EGT's above 1300 dF on takeoff are an indication of improper max power fuel flow. This is a fuel servo adjustment, not a mixture control adjustment. This is the one place where EGT is NOT a relative number. 1200-1275 is the normal full throttle full rich full RPM range for most piston engines, turbo or normally aspirated. Any lower and the engine will bog from over fueling, any higher and the engine will overheat. 18 GPH is a little too low for that engine. It should be closer to 18.5 to 19 at full throttle, full rpm, at sea level. Ignition timing has very little effect on EGT in this engine unless it is very far off. In which case it wouldn't run very good at all. It will run OK between 15 and 25 degrees BTC, but it is optimized for 20 degrees BTC.

The best products for restoring the paint are not inexpensive, but they are well worth the money since you'll save a lot of time. You'll want to use the 3 step system from 3M. They have compounds numbered 1, 2, 3. 1 is a machine rubbing compound that literally works miracles. It brings back the worst chalked finishes easily. 2 is the polishing compound that restores the freshly cleaned surface to a high gloss surface. 3 is the swirl mark remover that makes the finish like glass. You can also skip step 2 in most cases. These polishes use different wool wheels for best results. You don't need an expensive buffer, the $50 Craftsman 6 inch buffer can take the backing pads and wheels needed. You can also use this system by hand, if you have to. But the #1 compound really works miracles using a lambswool polishing wheel. Clean the wheel often with a spur, a blow gun, or even a screwdriver to throw off the old paint residue. You'll find this at auto body supply shops. You may also see it a Pep Boys in some locations, but in pint bottles. Expect to pay $45-55 for the quart sizes. I've been using this system for years in high end auto finishing, and also in refinishing 10 year old planes where we install new vinyl graphics. (1996 and up Cessna, and 1998 and up Cirrus normally use plain white paint, overlaid with vinyl graphics.) This system is specially engineered to restore enamel finishes. Once you've restored the gloss, a hand glaze compound or any good quality wax will keep it protected.

It is simple. Peak EGT is the most stressful on the engine and exhaust. Either side of peak, the stresses go down. But on the lean side of peak, they decrease rapidly with every degree past peak. Leaner is better. That said, any muffler with more than 1000 hours on it doesn't owe you anything. Most OEM's recommend replacement, not repair, somewhere between 1000-2000 hours due to thermal fatigue.

If the Cirrus and the Cessna 400 (previously Columbia) planes have been in the market essentially the same length of time, why would the "better designed" plane be outsold by a 5-1 margin? From my perspective as a professional mechanic & flight instructor with experience on all the planes in this comparison, I can say the Cessna is what it is: a heavily revised home built design with many shortcomings. The Cirrus is a clean sheet design that is easy to service, durable, and modern. The Mooney is a wonderful evolution of a good design, with the Bravo being superior to the Acclaim as far as engine durability.

You have to run a Corvalis pretty hard to make the airspeed numbers, and that will eat cylinders every 600-800 hours. If you run it LOP it's no faster than a Cirrus Turbo, and slower than a Bravo. Other negatives: Small fleet size means parts are expensive, tiny back seat, poor visibility out the windows, a side stick that slaps your wrist when checking mags (the switch is right behind the stick, you need to use your left hand to firmly hold the stick while you reach around with your right, DUH), doors that are a trick to close, wobbly ground handling due to the narrow gear track, wingtips that do not come off if damaged (the wing is two pieces top and bottom glued together) so hangar rash is horribly expensive... I'll stop there for now and catch my breath....

Do you have Champion spark plugs, and/or Slick magnetos? If so, there is a possibility you have a developing ignition problem you don't want to ignore.

No. This lamp is not part of the PMA'd or STC'd Whelen aviation lamp series. The best lamp right now is the Teledyne Alphabeam. It has width and depth, is brighter than the Whelen LED, and is the best option if you are not ready to drop $500+ on an HID.

They are not legal. You need a PMA to manufacture and offer replacement parts for TC'd aircraft. Yes even for the lowly 4509 GE lamp. Which, by the way, is produced under an FAA PMA by GE.

It's on the inspection checklist- check engine controls for full travel in both directions. You want it to idle correctly so you don't eat up runway upon landing, and you want it full open for takeoff to develop max power. That said, a problem with travel INSIDE the carb is highly unusual. Normally it's simply a misadjusted or slipped control cable. There is also more than one throttle lever arm available for the early carburetors. The arm holes are drilled at different lengths and can present a problem if someone puts a long arm where a short one was or vice versa. It will also not make full travel.

Running at high power LOP during a break in is risky business in this particular engine. Better to go ROP until the rings are seated, and then explore LOP without the burden of possibly ruining one cylinder. You can run LOP on the IO-550N series used in the Bonanza and Cirrus because they are well tuned from the start. On the other hand, as a mechanic, I am more than happy to fix something once it's already gone wrong...

The Teledyne Alphabeam has more depth penetration than the Whelen, by about 30-50 percent. It also has the same spread, so you get the best overall lighting available without going to an HID. I've done field approvals for cowl and wing mounted XeVision HID lights in Mooneys. They are a good solution if you want the most light available for the money.

Tempest prices only went up because they ran out of the iridium wire they had bought at the old price. Iridium wire is one of the world's most expensive materials, at around $1000 a pound.

In some cases air oil separators are just as Mike describes, "like putting a hose from your butt to your mouth." Those are the cases where temperatures are low enough that you are returning oil, water, and acids back to the case. Warm engine compartments don't do this, and those are typically found only with turbocharged engines. Four cylinder Lycomings probably suffer more harm from separators because they run too cool. And if you have a separator, only the Airwolf is worth anything. The M-20 is virtually useless IMHO. FWIW, I have managed fleets flying over 10,000 hours annually with both types of separators, and maintained dozens of customer planes of all types in addition to the fleet work.

The HSI is just a display for the remote gyro. If the heading is erratic, the problem lies in the KG-102 remote gyro. They are well known for hiccups like this.

I am a former Mooney ASC Director of Maintenance, mechanic, avionics tech, and flight instructor, that installed & proofed the first Acclaim retrofit heat system back in 2007. That was in Norwood, Massachusetts just before Mooney went on life support in 2008. I've done HID landing light Field Approvals, Powerflow exhaust installs, one piece side windows, etc. I'm now in Fort Lauderdale and do annuals, pre-buys, and flight instruction by appointment at KFXE. Glenn Juber

In your case the factory OH or reman will get you the latest updates, that you will NOT get aftermarket. No matter which option you choose, you get far more new parts than you would expect. When you exchange you get roller tappets, and the roller tappet engines have new cases automatically, so that's a $6000 upgrade. I have an IO-540 Cherokee Six engine in my shop now. The customer elected to send his original 1976 engine in for OH, and in return he got a new case, new crank, new fuel injector lines, flow divider, pumps, mags, all new accessories, induction tubes, etc. I think he got his data plate back and maybe the accessory case. Everything else is brand new, even the flywheel. Yet he only paid about $3000 more than for any of the popular shop overhauls. As far as support goes, I have seen Lycoming step up to the plate even for engines well out of warranty. Especially for metal issues and oil leakage. Go straight to the Lycoming regional rep for problems in or out of warranty.

one more detail, from our Friendly Aviation Advisors: Who Needs A PMA? a. General Requirements. Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) § 21.303(a) requires any person producing replacement or modification parts for sale for installation on a type-certificated product to get a PMA. A PMA is a combined design and production approval for replacement parts. Also we may use a PMA for the production of modification parts from supplemental type certificates (STC). The prior STC approves the design and installation of these modification parts in products. However, if any replacement part alters a product by introducing a major change, then 14 CFR § 21.113 requires an STC for the approval of these parts. See FAA Order 8110.4, Type Certification, for STC procedures.

Here's the killer. These lamps are supposed to replace NAV lamps, but, and I quote from the manufacturer: "When these lights are in strobe mode, do the red & green nav lights still illuminate between strobe flashes? Per the supplier: No. There is no light output between light bursts. Do these satisfy the anti-collision beacon requirement for night VFR? Per the supplier: My strobe lights do not meet the requirements for anti-collision lights. They are only a replacement for the standard navigation or position lights, with the additional strobe feature for safety." ********************** So you no longer have nav lights when the strobes are on. That's a deal breaker, since nav lights are required for night flight, and they do NOT meet the requirements for strobe lights. So you've now lost your nav light function (intentionally to boot), which is a Part 91.205c, violation in addition to the Unapproved Parts that made your airplane Unairworthy the moment you installed them. Although you might install them on a homebuilt without approvals, you can't use the strobe function at night since it kills the position lights, which are required.

Let me clarify. First of all, changing one lamp to another is not even a minor alteration. It is maintenance. That is where the IA first went wrong. Second, anything on a Type Certificated aircraft has to have both a certification basis, and an installation approval through one of several channels. If your IA thinks these LED's are legal, he is wrong. No shade of gray here. There is no room for opinion on the subject, only facts. Fact #1, NavStrobe does not possess a PMA for the manufacture of aircraft parts. Stop here, do not pass GO, do not collect $200. Fact #2, TSO'd parts are REQUIRED by regulation to be clearly marked with the applicable TSO and or PMA number, or STC information. NavStrobe lights have none of these markings. Fact #3, nav lights are REQUIRED by regulation, and the nav lights required by reg have a certification basis. Nav lights HAVE to to conform to a TSO. The parts that comprise a nav light assembly are TSO'd. Remove the existing TSO'd 7512-12 lamp, install a NavStrobe lamp, and now you have an Unapproved Part performing a required function. Simple as simple can be. Fact #4, these lights combine two normally separate functions. The controls for the functions have to be clearly marked, so the switch needs appropriate placarding to describe the functions and how to select each mode. That alone rules out your standard parts argument, since the lamp functions differently depending on its' mode of activation. I think these lights could be a winner, but absent any approvals, they cannot be installed legally on a Type Certificated Aircraft. The approval can be as simple as a Field Approval. Or as complex as a TSO'd part produced under an FAA PMA. Or equally complex as an STC'd part. People are confusing this as a standard parts issue and it is not. The bulb is not the same as the lamp it replaces so it cannot hope to meet the definition of a standard part. There are NO standards for LED replacement lamps, therefore there are NO standard LED lamps. All LED approvals so far have been as entirely new assemblies, such as Whelen and Aveo are producing. Those assembles use multiple LED's carefully arranged SPECIFiCALLY to meet the field of view requirements that an LED replacement lamp could not.

Please post the 337 so others can have a basis for a follow on Field Approval. Thanks

The FAA doesn't care so much about the nav lamp assembly as a structure, they really care about the light it emits. They are primarily focused on the lamp, not the holder. There are several varieties of standard parts, some are accepted as relics from the pre-FAA and pre CAA days (before 1938). Others meet TSO's developed since then. You are correct that the 311 does not have a TSO, because it does not perform a function that requires one. But GE and others have PMA for aircraft lamps, some TSO'd some not. All are subject to FAA audit of the QC system. However, we are talking about external nav lamps, which must meet brightness, color, and beam spread incorporated into a TSO that is referenced by the CFR that governs navigation position lights. Those particular lamps must be manufactured IAW the TSO by a PMA holder. You absolutely cannot substitute any lamp into a nav lamp holder that does not conform to the TSO C30c. You talked about installing an equivalent, which you can do, provided the equivalent meets the same TSO and is an approved part. These LED's are not equivalents because they have not been tested & accepted by the FAA, nor has the maker applied for PMA approval or STC. Fit Form and Function rules governing standard parts do not apply when the subject part is required by regulation, and the regulation specifies a standard to be met. Strobe, beacon, and nav lamps must conform to a TSO, because they are required equipment for certain Kinds Of Operation, and there are defined standards for them. The FAA doesn't care if you can see your charts or engine instruments in the dark, but they do want to be certain that you can see other planes and they can see you. Thus the external lighting standards. The hazard with LED's is the very narrow beam of each LED. You'll notice that any certified LED nav lamp has multiple LED's arranged in several directions. They may also incorporate mirrors to aid in spreading the light around. Traditional incandescent lamps do not suffer from narrow beams and use a reflector to help intensify the light, and an external lens to increase the spread even more. The faster an object moves, the wider the spread required for it to become visible and remain visible as it passes an observer. Here in busy South Florida, you really want to be able to pick out and maintain contact with the many other planes you come across at night. The FAA is way behind the developments in lighting, but that's how they function. Someone has to spend a lot of time and money to get new technology to the market. Let's hope the Part 23 rewrite actually helps. I was an early adopter of HID lighting and installed many XeVision lights through the Field Approval process for myself and customers. I did the 337's that got HID's on Cessna Citations in 2005. Those have morphed into a full product line for an aftermarket supplier. It wasn't easy working with the FSDO at first, but they finally saw the light...

No one has mentioned CG yet. Manufacturers optimize the CG when doing tests. You can find 3-7 knots on most planes by simply moving your CG back to 3/4 to 7/8 of the allowable envelope. All the way forward slows it down, and all the way back slows it down too. Two people, full fuel, and bags means the CG is pretty far forward.

Let me simplify. The lamp holder does not emit light, so there is virtually no concern about it in the lighting TSO. Anything you put into the lamp holder must maintain the original TSO. That means lamps and lenses must comply. The lamp itself is the subject, and anything that replaces the original lamp MUST be built, tested, and accepted by the FAA under a TSO. AND, the manufacturer MUST apply for and receive a PMA from the FAA that approves the manufacturer's Quality Control System. If the manufacturer does not maintain the conditions of the PMA, it is revoked. NavStrobe has no PMA and therefore no Authority to manufacture parts for Type Certificated Aircraft. They also cannot make any claims to "meet a TSO", since they have not applied for one, don't possess one, and by the way, there is no TSO that covers a combination lamp such as this. It's still an innovative product, but we can't install it on anything but Experimentals so far. The fastest route at this point is to obtain a Field Approval but I haven't been able to put together an acceptable data package yet.

It's almost always the transducer connector causing this fault. Remove the connector, check for distorted pins & sockets, correct as needed, then apply Stabliant 22 to the contacts and re-install. Very common problem on anything with this style transducer. Cirrus, Mooney, and Beech use it.