mccdeuce

Supporter
  • Content count

    321
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

181 Excellent

About mccdeuce

  • Rank
    Lives Here

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Norfolk, VA
  • Reg #
    201XK
  • Model
    78 M20J

Recent Profile Visitors

730 profile views
  1. Electronic Ignition

    Hmmm. I have had a completely different experience with mine installed Feb 2017 and I have over a 100 hours on it. My point I have made before if we start with electronic ignition as is and continue to develop we can get better. We need to improve the ignition. Just like we needed to improve from my vacuum powered gyro. Development must go on.
  2. Electronic Ignition

    The FAA first and foremost says there has to be a magneto for certified setups. So there is not currently a setup to build a half mag half electronic ignition. I personally think the electronic ignition is far superior to a magneto and the mentality of "magnetos are reliable because they don't require electricity" has kept aviation engine configuration stalled. But not everyone agrees. And that to me is why we have experimental aircraft and certified aircraft. I just wish there was a way to take a certified airframe and put experimental engine and avionics into it and call it good (for more than a year). I could do some pretty cool stuff with a M20 frame.
  3. Electronic Ignition

    I have an electroair on my J. Previous owner had the engine reman from Lycoming and therefore had the magnetos split. You cannot legally do a Dual Mag electronic ignition on a certified aircraft right now. Pretty much you don't have options unless you are willing to redo he case and split your mag.
  4. Electroair ordered for M20C

    Issue with a few of my friends experimental sites with E-mags is heat. The "all in one" gets quite hot. They have had to pipe fresh air over the system to keep it operating right. Easy for experimental. Not easy for certified. As for OP I really like my electro air.
  5. AGL wide open!!

    I have used AGL twice and plan to drop my Mooney in for Annual again this year. Great people, excellent work and priced fairly.
  6. New Klixon switch covers

    Any movement on this? Broke my strobe cover on my last flight...
  7. Still got this? Broke my strobe rocker on last flight.
  8. The Golden Shower Case for LOP

    I have never been able to get my J setup to run smooth LOP. With both magnetos and with one electric. Bigger issue I have is I seem to get a fuel smell in cockpit when LOP. Which makes no sense to me on why LOP vs ROP would create this smell. I do really like the idea of extended flight with only a few knot loss.
  9. Family pressures?

    I fly all over with my fiancé. She loves it. In fact she hates it when we have to drive now. Her father was nervous for sure when we first started. I am a professional pilot - but I chose much ore conservative numbers for everything to build his confidence as well as mine (while I have 2000 hours total I only had 10 in Mooney when I started). I also recommend removing additional stressors. Thanksgiving is a stressor for them - and you. Get there itis - even if you don't think it does it does. So I recommend you start small. Use the in laws as "flight Plan" filing with lots of short trips. if you have any big trips just give them a call and let them know of some risks you have identified and how you plan to mitigate (that one may sound counter intuitive but knowing that you have thought of these things will help them keep their mind at peace). as for your last question - just because it forecasts cavu in mountains doesn't mean it stays cavu. (Even short mountains can cause weird weather systems) and finally some people may not be familiar with Mooneys. You say they are pilots of old. They may be thinking of some other aircraft that would really struggle to climb as needed above 4000 AGL. it will get better.
  10. So over the years there have been a few companies trying different things with Engines. Corvair / NSI / Powersport to name 3. Corvair has done quite well for a niche market of less HP. NSI was a Subaru based system and powersport was a rotary one. In my opinion both of those companies went under for the main reason of trying to sell “too much” “this is the cheapest - most powerful - most reliable - easy to build” reality is pick 2. You look at the main 2 companies still trying Mistral and Deltahawk. They have excellent products but I think their Marketing departments are all wrong. They are targeting certified customers with an experimental product and a price tag that just doesn’t make good business sense.
  11. You have hit it exactly. This is the nature of experimenting and the true essence of the “Expirmental” category. I have dived into the discussion of engines over and over at my home field. People constantly trying to talk me out of my Rotaty choice for my Glasair - I must be crazy to not use a lyco/cont. ultimatley to all the people who don’t like experimenting that’s ok. You are welcome to stick with certified engines. Or certified engines in kit airplanes. For those that want to try something different - keep tinkering.
  12. 9 Mooney Formation over VA

    Looks like you guys had a blast and that's an awesome video. Sorry I wasn't around!
  13. Some great points on your earlier post about "experimental" vs "kit" and not using a traditional engine. Agree 100%. My point on engine choice was only that I prefer converting Rotary engines for airplane use over the diesel. And for my rotary I have a 2 ECU system. Cause you are right it just doesn't make sense to only have one. The weight is miniscule. The cost is miniscule. (In comparison to traditional means)
  14. Thats not entirely accurate - there are quite a few rotary engines powering plenty of aircraft out there. Is is the same number no not at all. But it requires a ton more work. Most people reach there exhaustion point in the construction and don't want to tinker or work the engine. And that is the number one reason the alternative engines get repurposed. The largest issue most of these engines have is cooling. Once you get the cooling worked they can be very reliable. Problem is that every installation is one off so getting it to work is the challenge. But that is truly the nature of Experimental and why I take issue with Vans RV. They don't want you to experiment, in fact it has been my experience that they discourage it. All for saying "hey we designed this around X engine" but progress requires tinkering. The other thing that often gets misled is cost. For initial cost I could put a used Lyco upfront for about the cost of putting in my rotary. For me its about the reliability, cost to overhaul, operating cost, smoothness and performance.
  15. I am not as skeptical as others. I do have a deposit down if nothing more than the intrigue of it all. I also am building a Glasair - the first pre-molded composite kit aircraft. (although mine is a super 2 so a few thousand kits down the line). It was manufactured about the time I was born. No computers. No CNC. Nothing fits well together. Some of the first advice I was given when I started to build was buy a dremel. Then go and buy 2 more, cause you are going to spend quite a bit of time getting the "pre-molded" pieces to fit together. So I am intrigued at the precision at which the Raptor team is building their prototype and the molds for construction. Do I think they are padding their numbers - yes. Just like Mooney did. I routinely get my 201 mph airplane to top out at 180 mph... Audi engine - not my first choice. but in no way would it be a Lyco or Cont. (other threads I talk about my project of converting a rotary) and we will see if I go through with the purchase based mostly on whether or not the Raptor team is on board with being part of the experimental market. Vans is not. Put the engine we tell you to put up front. Oh and buy through us so we get the commission. (Maybe we can see where my pessimism and skeptical nature lies). In the end though - I applaud the Raptor team for giving something different a shot. It won't be for everyone though.