philiplane

Keep the local regulators and the fire department happy while you're at it. You'll need a chain or strap to secure the tank/cart to the wall to prevent tipping while stored. And you have to post an NFPA compliant oxygen placard on the hangar door so the fire department knows you have oxygen tanks inside. https://www.mysafetysign.com/nfpa-sign/nfpa-placard/sku-nfpa-0007?engine=googlebase&keyword=NFPA+Signs&skuid=NFPA-0007-RE-6x6&gclid=Cj0KCQjw0vWnBhC6ARIsAJpJM6f9PSh6ltByiUSfz7m4kiPX_bbHXdGyIhLJnRIimay5tlLeNYNTNEAaAjV0EALw_wcB A lot of guys are getting tripped up by these things as airport managers look for something to do. But it's good practice anyway, so the tank doesn't get knocked over and become a projectile when the regulator snaps off.

The synthetic vision on the Aspen provides the green circle, flight path vector, and if you have ADSB traffic or active traffic, it puts the traffic diamonds in your attitude indicator field of view.

No to the dual EA100, without getting engineering/Transport Canada approvals. The dual Aspen to single EA100 is part of their STC so it's just a matter of spending the money.

If you have no vacuum system the KAP150 is getting attitude information from the Aspen/EA100. That allows the autopilot to maintain a heading or an altitude. The 750 gives navigation info to the autopilot. Left/right commands. And vertical commands for LPV or ILS approaches. If the Aspen fails, you have no autopilot whatsoever. So first, you would want a second Aspen as a backup. If the GTN750 fails, you still can hold altitude, and use the Aspen for heading hold.

fuel dilution does show up in oil analysis, but mostly as a product of people stuffing cowl plugs into a hot fuel-injected engine. Then the fuel boils from the lines and ends up in the oil pan. For simple over-rich operation, you will see lower viscosity, and abnormally black oil. People focus on the rubber seals, when the problems are usually gaps in the metal to the engine itself. There are large gaps near the oil pressure regulator and the engine isolators. And gaps between the front metal baffles and the engine case, and sometimes there are gaps that allow air to flow under the front cylinder fins. Also, any ram air getting into the lower cowl upsets the pressure differential. You want high pressure on top of the cylinders, and the lowest possible pressure below the cylinders. Depending on your lower cowl, or any cowl inlet closures, you may have many points where ram air is getting into the lower cowl. Such as around landing lights and front mounted oil coolers. The area around the prop, starter, and alternator need to be sealed as completely as possible.

Internal magneto timing determines the output voltage available for ignition. External timing determines when that voltage is available at the spark plug. So, late internal timing produces a weak spark, which manifests as hard starting, or fouling of plugs at low speed & idle.

post a photo of the #2 cylinder looking in from at the inlet area. And one from the top down.

Spend some time at GAMI's test cell, talk with George, and you'll find what I said is current and accurate. You can find all the pertinent articles online as well. I did not claim that an old radial has the same BSFC as a flat motor. I said that the knowledge base began there, and was picked up and further developed over the past eight decades. And yes you will find very narrow windows of fuel ranges to produce rated HP for N/A and for turbo engines. It's related to the BTU available in each pound of fuel. There's less variety now since we essentially only have 100LL in wide use, which has 112,500 BTU per gallon. Increasing max power takeoff fuel flow beyond what's needed to maintain detonation margins dilutes oil on the cylinder walls. In one case, I've got borescope photos from an annual inspection, and then a week later the owner and an advocate of crazy fuel flows decided to increase from 28 GPH to 32 GPH because they'd heard the 1 GPH per ten HP and decided to try it. Two months after that, the owner called me and complained about black oil and high consumption. It only took them one hour to ruin six cylinders. He didn't tell me at first what they'd done. I figured it out from the engine data. They made an $18k mistake based on internet ramblings. I've tuned well over a thousand engines in the past 25 years. Everything from M20C to Bravos and Ovations, big and small Piper singles & twins, anything Lycoming from the O-320 up to the IO-720, AEIO-580,& TIGO-541, and every Continental that Cirrus uses. Changed over 300 cylinders too, and only as a last resort. Also highly experienced in FADEC, aftermarket electronic ignitions, aero-diesel engines, pro gas drag engines, and I have patented engine dual-fuel control systems. No significant experience with Wankel engines though...er A flat four aircraft engine has pretty narrow fuel needs. The compression ratio also has little bearing on the fuel flow. It does change the thermal efficiency of the engine in part throttle operations. This is why the .088 gal per HP works on a 150 HP 7.5:1 CR Lycoming four cylinder, and a 310 HP 9:1 CR fuel injected Continental six cylinder. Below you'll find the formula to start the fuel/air ratio calculation before putting the engine on the dyno for fine tuning. You can find further info in SAE White Papers but you'll have to join to get full access. NASA also did some studies that I used as reference material during the patent application process.

ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT. You would be flooding the engine, degrading the performance, washing the cylinder walls and scuffing the pistons, and trailing black smoke like an old B52. The max power fuel flow recommendations are .088 GPH per HP for normally aspirated engines, and .11 GPH per HP for turbocharged engines. These come from extensive piston engine R&D beginning in the 1930's at Pratt & Whitney in East Hartford CT, and continued today by George Braly of GAMI in ADA Oklahoma. Hundreds of thousands of research hours over the past 80 years. Carbureted engines have two fuel flows built in. One through the main jet, and a second through the economizer valve when the throttle plate is at the full open position. This is why full throttle is recommended for climb, rather than pulling power back to some lower level like 25 squared. Most pilots don't understand the relationship of fuel flow to spark ignited piston engine power. More fuel is not better. Once you're outside the stoichiometric ratio you have to make compromises for either longevity or performance. If the engine fuel flow is set correctly, and you have excessively high CHTs, you either have a baffle problem, or advanced timing. Advancing timing from 20 to 25 degrees for example will raise CHT by about 15 degrees, and the EGT will decrease. Advancing from 20 to 30 degrees will increase CHT by about 20 to 25 degrees. We're also seeing this effect in engines with electronic ignitions that have timing advance. A Lycoming's CHT's in the climb can be up to 450 degrees without any concern. In level flight below 80 percent power, you want to have CHT in the 330 to 400 degree range with oil temperature at 185-210 degrees. Obviously at 65 percent or less the max temps will be lower as a function of power output. Everyone forgets that all the temperature expectations are based on a Standard Day. So don't expect to have the same results on a 95 degree summer day. You have to compromise with a higher speed, shallow climb to ram more of that hot, thin air through the cylinder fins, than you would on a 60 degree day. That's why you don't need to worry about a 400 to 450 degree climb CHT for a few minutes on a hot day. So long as you're below 400 in cruise, preferably closer to 350, there's nothing to worry about. Extensive research finds that staying below 380 continuous is key to longevity, and short excursions in the climb aren't harmful. For the most part, fuel injected Lycomings don't need any special tinkering regarding the fuel flow. It's automatic. Continentals are another story. Carbureted engines are already set to the correct specs if the correct carb for the application is used. Virtually every "cooling problem" on any airplane is due to faulty or insufficient baffles, advanced timing, or climbing heavily loaded on hot days at slow speed. More fuel is not only the wrong solution, it will harm the engine in short order. Baffles are more than the rubber seals. The metal parts holding the seals, and the intercylinder baffles, are often overlooked. In many planes there are large gaps around the starter and alternator. More air can be lost there, than if you had no rubber seals on the rest of the engine. I'm the guy who can make a Turbo Aztec climb at 85 percent power from sea level to FL250 with the cowl flaps closed, and no CHT over 400. Those planes are notorious for running hot because they weren't perfect from the factory, and years of inadequate maintenance worsens the cooling system performance. A carbureted Mooney is simple in comparison. Stop dumping excess $$$$$ fuel through your engines. It's not the answer.

dumping excess fuel through an engine is not the fix for high CHT's. Most baffle systems need work, especially at the front of the engine where air is just diving under the engine instead of cooling the cylinders.

target max power fuel flow for a normally aspirated engine is .09 gallons per HP. So .09 x 180hp=16.2 GPH. This should give 1280-1380 or so EGTs. The CHT's will be determined by how well your cooling system works. People mistakenly try to lower high CHT's with excess fuel, which is a bad idea overall. Excess fuel reduces HP, reducing your climb rate, and makes a mess of the inside of the engine. Proper max power fuel flow should produce EGT's that are about 200-250 degrees rich of peak.

you an use a large screwdriver to engage the alternator fan blade, and gently try to turn the prop. If it the engine won't turn, the coupling is good. If you can turn the engine with zero resistance, the coupling is bad. If you have significant resistance while turning, the slip feature is working, and the coupler is good.

Surprisingly, a good grade of 1/4" polyethylene has a working pressure of 200 PSI.

When an airspeed indicator reads higher than normal after an IFR certification, it's usually because the tech goofed when bringing up the airspeed and altimeter with the test box. This results in running the airspeed indicator backwards, and now the needle will rest above zero rather than at or just below zero. The fix involves repair of the ASI.

no matter who sells this type of foam, it's made to the same specs by only 3 or 4 US manufacturers. You would treat them as the same product. Chemically they are the same. This type of foam is also used as carpet backing, and I'm seeing that crumble too after 7-10 years. SCS Interiors lightweight carpets use this foam and it's degrading/crumbling by the ten year mark.

Personal experience. And now I've got to take it out of another Aztec starting next week. What a mess. Installed in 2012, and it's self-destructing. They also put it in behind the panel, on the firewall area, and it's fouling the control cross chain and avionics. This plane came from Texas so it sees 90-110 degree temps most of the year, in the hangar. I suspect this material lasts longer in cooler environments, but in the south, forget it. Wrapped fiberglass is lighter and doesn't hold water. This foam does hold moisture, more so as it ages.

do not use the thick black foam type insulation as linked above. It turns into black dust in 5-8 years in warm environments, and it is heavy. Wrapped fiberglass is best, that's what the turbine crowd uses. Air bubble type is second best. I'm already pulling it back out of customer planes, it makes a huge mess, black sticky crumbles everywhere.

was an auto-fill typo there...Aeroshell 6 is junk, but 5 is OK, and is is the replacement for 6. Should have read "Aeroshell 5 is not affected by the slinging problem" Bonus- you'll only need one grease gun now, since 5 is also used as general purpose chassis grease.

There is normally some initial wear on the nylon part of the points that rides on the steel cam. This few thousandths of wear will result in the timing becoming retarded by 2-3 degrees in the first 100 hours. Knowledgeable shops will set the gap slightly wider to account for this initial wear.

Aeroshell 6 was the problem grease, and replacing it with Aeroshell 5 fixes the slinging problem. Aeroshell 6 was specifically formulated for extreme low temperature operations. And they forgot how to make it after 40 years in production, so the oil would separate from the carrier and ooze through the prop seals. Aeroshell 5 is not affected. You can substitute 6 for 5, but you're limited to flying in warmer than -40C temperatures... BTW- the NYCO grease is not a cure-all either. I've had several fresh overhauls, using this grease, seeping grease after 6-12 months/200 hours. Not bad like the Aeroshell 6, but enough to question the seals in the prop.

the last batch of Desser retreads I got in January started weather cracking like crazy in three months. It was weird. They looked like they were 20 years old. Not just little check marks either. The treads developed deep cracks in the grooves, and between the casing and the cap on the sidewalls.

the wires can break where they exit the sensor body. Sometimes there is enough conductor left to solder or crimp as a repair. Also check the connection between the sensor and the extension harness, they are noted for failing there. It only takes a bit of corrosion on one pin to stop the signal to the tach.

There is zero performance benefit to a dual Surefly installation. But there is the risk of a dual failure if electric power fails, or something as stupid as a wire breaks, or breaker fails, or one of the coils inside the Surefly fails. By keeping one properly maintained conventional magneto, you retain backup no matter what. Remember, we know the failure modes of magnetos after more than a century of experience with them. A well maintained magneto is pretty reliable. We have less than five years experience with Surefly, and it contains an electronic control board inside. Electronics have difficulty handling high heat long-term. In this situation, we're asking a circuit board to live in an environment that would kill most boards quickly. 200 to 300 degrees are seen in the engine compartment, and most electronics are only good to 150. The jury is still out on longevity. And I'm otherwise happy with the Sureflys I have on my Aztec. But there is no way I would put two on each engine at this time.

You really don't want a WX500. While they used to be pretty good, they have been discontinued. There is no new production. The WX500 and Skywatch systems are now owned by Extant Aerospace in Melbourne FL. The worst possible company for service and prices. We used to send our Stormscope and Skywatch systems to L3 for service before they sold the line to Extant. L3 was OK, usually a 10 day repair time and $2k per repair. That is no more under Extant. Prices are ridiculous and there is no definite turn time. The last repair quote from them was over $5k. And, they don't have any spares for exchange either. This company also service the Avidyne Entegra PFD/MFD line, with equally bad results. Avidyne is supposedly taking the repair pricing and booking back in house to smooth out the customer complaints, but Extant is still the one repairing the items. A Strikefinder on the other hand is a better unit. It can't display the strikes on other screens, because the display and processor are combined. The only other component is the antenna. It's a simple, lightweight, highly accurate lightning detection device. I wouldn't fly without mine. It is slaved to the HSI so when you turn, the strikes move to maintain the orientation, making weather avoidance easy. In the event you need service, Insight is the best. I had my display upgraded to the latest LED display and they had it back to me in a week.