Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


DXB last won the day on April 26 2018

DXB had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,388 Excellent

About DXB

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Model

Recent Profile Visitors

4,629 profile views
  1. A little encouragement for those of us who irrationally hope that manufacturing the M20 still has a place in the modern world https://airfactsjournal.com/2019/05/visiting-the-mooney-family/
  2. Thanks! This is a clearer explanation than I've heard to date and probably a far better one than most A&Ps could give. I still am a little confused by what design problem this "economizer circuit" system was originally intended to address. If the purpose of the economizer was simply to provide "economy" at full mixture operations outside of WOT, then the same could be achieved simply by leaning. Perhaps it prevents an uncombustibly rich mixture if one does not remember to lean at lower power settings under certain conditions?
  3. Lots of things to like here - a great economical option if it's corrosion free and engine has really been taken around the patch every few weeks consistently. The bladders save a lot of headaches. With the paucity of good low cost Cs on the market lately, I'd think this would attract a lot of interest.
  4. Actually the higher flap speed appeared in 1968, when hydraulic flaps were still standard. So mine has the 125mph Vfe.
  5. I think the gear speed on all the Cs is 120mph right? The J bar disappeared in 1969. The mechanical gear on these planes is very stout and can take deployment much higher speeds. Not sure what the electrical actuators can handle. The gear doors may be susceptible to damage, but the time my C's J bar unlatched accidentally at >150mph, they escaped unscathed as well. The violent swing of the J bar does get your attention. In a real life emergency descent, I would not hesitate to deploy the gear and also descend at well above Vle/lo.
  6. @lithium366 might be a good economical option
  7. I wondered that too - but no - this is a '68C. That plane N921W is a '64C and is owned by someone in Florida presently and is flying regularly on Flightaware.
  8. My personal version of this race requires still having a carburator to qualify for entry - it is as essential to the C model identity as being a short body. Installing an IO-360 is aircraft model reassignment surgery in my opinion, and that plane should be granted its wish to be called an E model, even if the FAA disagrees .
  9. Since I've never known you to be prone to hyperbole on here, I would posit at that you have the fastest C in current existence and can hang comfortably with the 201s in cruise. I hope one day that mine will be able to hang with yours after installing a Powerflow Exhaust and STC of the Sabremech cowl, but I am skeptical. It may need electronic ignition too for a shot at it. It's odd your useful load is so low. I'm on the low end with 580lb with the 54 gallon bladders full, and my prop is a heavier than yours (though your powerflow is a bit heavier than stock exhaust). I can't imagine your J cowl weighs much more. Streamlining your panel, including getting rid of the vac, will help a decent bit.
  10. Can someone authoritatively comment on the cooling and speed gain of the ARI mod? With the LASAR closure, both are marginal at best, though it is a real aesthetic improvement. Aesthetics are not much better with the ARI mod than the LASAR one in my subjective opinion. I think the ARI mod may have some cracking/durability issues with flexing of the fiberglass and overlying paint? Yet another option is to do nothing now but save your money for @Sabremech to have this amazing soon to be PMA'd upgrade for the J cowl to also get STC'd for the vintage Mooneys. Then you'll get all the speed, cooling, and aesthetics dividends in one masterful stroke.
  11. Dang it. It might have been worth writing a check for the 50k on first sight before the broker showed up and taking your chances - if it turned up with corrosion on the prebuy, one could still recover much of that upon scrapping it. Who cares about paint and seats. Offer 55k and no further prebuy or investigation beyond a review of the logs and what you can accomplish in a half day looking for spar and tubular frame corrosion and other major airframe problems. At 75, it needs a careful prebuy including making sure the avionics squawks you mentioned are easily fixable, and deducting the cost of any work needing to be done to get them in full working order. Putting the autopilot through its full paces in the air, etc. If all the avionics can be made to work flawlessly, and the engine doesn't croak quickly from sitting 2 years, it is worth 75 easily. If you buy it, get rid of that primitive engine monitor and Garwin cluster - they look out of place in an otherwise outstanding panel.
  12. @lithium366 SWTA and Dugosh are old and reputable Mooney shops. Texas is a kind of a utopia when it comes to Mooney maintenance. Glad to hear you're making progress!!
  13. This seems like the correct interpretation of the AD standard, though practical application of the AD's language seems problematic. One is generally not staring at the rpm gauge at the moment the bird or whatever else hits the fan. Hearing a transient audible decrease in rpm seems more likely, but that's very subjective. Also I think the AD was probably written before so many people were flying around with a data-logging engine monitor, which might very well have captured this particular event if the sampling rate was set high enough....
  14. The only time my oil pressure runs high in the normal range (sometimes even touching red line) is upon first going to full power for takeoff. This sounds like a very different issue. Consider posting the downloaded tracings from the engine monitor if you have them. They will attract more input from the experts. I struggle to grasp the oil circulation system on my Lycoming and haven't a clue about your turbo Continental.
  15. Avionics shops can do whatever they want right now - they have way more business than they can take on. So doing crappy work doesn't affect their bottom line, and moving stuff through quickly is particularly lucrative at present. They should still care about avoiding the time and hassle of rectifying bad installs, dealing with pissed off customers, not getting sued, and their reputation in the long term, but the lax culture bred by lack of competitive pressure probably makes a few shops forget these concerns as well. I had to delay some work until January next year at the earliest because my preferred shop couldn't get to it until then. In retrospect, I think it's just as well - I want them doing it when incentives do not favor fast and sloppy work so strongly.