Browncbr1

This kind of makes sense because my FF was fluctuating up and down as much as .5 gph and does seem to happen at higher altitude

Brain farted and forgot to pull data before leaving airport. But I was watching normalized egts closely and there was never any indication on screen.

I was flying last weekend and opened ram air during a climb to 9000... It just wouldn't run as smooth and I chalked it up to intake turbulence caused by the ram air. It missed a few times so I closed the ram air. But then I started to realize it may have been that I had WOT rather than pulling it back until it just starts to drop MP. This weekend, I climbed to 10k and setup cruise and never touched the ram air. It started missing again, so I pulled throttle back until MP just started to drop then eased it back it to get what I lost. It seemed to eliminate the missing. During the process, I noticed the fuel pressure wasn't very stable so I took the video. After the video, I turned on the boost pump for a bit, then turned it off. It seemed to help it run smoother the rest of the flight, but that is likely not causation. Any ideas or advice? I usually lean to peak. IMG_1350.MOV

The basic rule of thumb in aviation is ... Pay now or pay later.

I agree, which is why I do exactly as you described, but he is 76 years old and isn't going to change. He can keep popping jugs until he quits flying, but I sure as hell cant win an argument with him on anything. Haha

I mentioned lead scavenging to my uncle and he said for turbo charged engines, there is the issue of carbon in addition to lead. I don't know if he is right or wrong. Just passing along what he says. Personally, I think it's because he doesn't fly LOP. Haha

My uncle flies a c401 for 30 years and he says because of the turbo, he must run hotter than a NA engine to keep carbon deposits from building. Not sure how true this is.

These three graphs should settle this debate once and for all.

40 seconds is an eternity.. "In my opinion" there is clearly some level of corruption in this finding. Yet another reason why I am nervous to do anything in the aviation industry.

Any model introduced before 1980 I consider "vintage" I never really understood why the J and K weren't included in the vintage forum to begin with..

Thanks, I had originally thought my 67F was type certificated as Part23 because it was introduced after 1965, but I just looked to make sure and found this from the TCDS file from Mooney.. Certification Basis: Model M20F CAR 3 effective November 1, 1949, as amended to May 18, 1954, with paragraphs 3.109, 3.112, 3.115, 3.118, and 3.120 of CAR 3 effective May 15, 1956, as amended to October 1, 1959.

Hi Craig, for some reason, as of late, I can't comment or PM when using my iphone.. I use the chrome browser on an iphone mainly. after clicking the reply button, it will not show a field to type into.. FYI

Can you post a link to these materials ?

Mooney space is for mooney stuff. Everything else belongs on Facebook... However, I wouldn't mind there being an AOA rant and rave that could be hidden. Haha

+1

Just the PC system, I'm using my bi805.

I usually cross through ashville airspace. I crossed once when winds aloft at 3000 were 25kts so I went to 8500 and it wasn't too bad, but very rough below that. I told myself, next time I would go higher or not go at all.

I know they were omitted on J's because of the different cowl design/fiberglass, but I'm worried that you may be missing these critical parts. They make the lower cowl rigid even with cheeks and top of cow are removed. This is the best photo I could find, which has the lower cowl removed, but these tubular steel cow stays are still on there. They connect the upper firewall to the lower front lip where the cheeks attach.

My 67 has the support rods on both sides of the lower cowl. If they weren't there, the cowl would just flop down.

Interesting how garmin requires their units to be installed by an authorized garmin dealer, then put the onus on the customer to make sure the installer does it right. Unbelievable.

90 knots gear out, no flaps. Prop forward, 13.5"... If there is a lot of head wind, then an additional inch or two. I do no flaps because it is much easier to go around on a miss like this. It also helps you maintain energy a little better until you have landing assured. And there is plenty of time to set flaps before landing from minimums.

AOa or not, this guy was hot doggin it and obviously not attuned to, or respectful of the limits of the aircraft. He just wasn't being safe, and if an audible AOA is needed to keep pilots safe, then there is no such thing as a safe pilot IMHO

I have an extra complete PC system. I actually didn't realize i have a complete extra setup. I originally thought I would keep parts for backup, but these things seemingly never go bad. If anyone is interested, pm me.

Congratulations,. Let the spending begin!