MikeOH

Yep. I wonder how long before that will be the law (especially here in the People's Republic of Kalifornia)

Uh, NO! As a lifelong SoCal resident I have extensive experience with traffic, sadly! At rush hour, wrong direction, it's an hour and a half (that's the estimate right now; rush hour from Long Beach to Brackett (KPOC). Going the other direction it's an hour right now. Off rush hour, it's about 45 minutes (well, if you're the dufus doing 55 in the car pool lane, it'll take you an hour...assuming you don't get shot) I think acting like keeping it outside is okay, especially near the beach (Long BEACH), is somewhat delusional thinking; it's more than the paint that's going to deteriorate outside. Despite claims to the contrary the humidity gets quite high in the early mornings of many months out of the year. EVERYTHING has a heavy layer of dew on it. It's not the relatively few days of rain per year. If you really fly hundreds of hours a year, then even 45 minutes each way would be excessive; so, I get it...outside, or nothing. Maybe fly 100 hours a year and use the money you save to get the hangar? But, for a weekend flyer, I'd much rather be hangared and make the drive. We live 15 minutes from Brackett where we keep our Mooney hangared, but have property in Corona del Mar, near (15 minutes) KSNA (John Wayne). When I retire, we may move to the CdM beach house...but I assure you the plane is going to stay at Brackett at $360/mo. and a 45 minute drive....a nearly $800 premium is NOT worth saving 30 minutes!!

Well, depends on if you have a large flow pump

Well, maybe it's just me, but being a bit late to a meeting because I 'thought' my watch was a bit fast is quite different than looking at empty fuel gauges and saying, "well, I know the tanks still have a couple gallons left!"

At which point THAT guy has exhibited very poor judgement unrelated to the accuracy of his fuel gauges. KNOWING the real-world accuracy of your instruments is EVERYTHING. Expecting accuracy beyond that actual capability is dangerous. I use a conservative fuel burn and my watch and treat the totalizer as a cross check.

Exactly! YOU have NO control over the temperatures. Unless you refueled the last time at the same temperature that you are refueling now, there is an error. Also, do you ALWAYS refuel at your home airport? Finally, we are in violent agreement over your last sentence; with errors of around 1-3% it's pretty moot. As you say, "who cares?" That's the real point of all my comments: The idea that you can achieve sub 1% accuracy in your fuel totalizer is a pipe dream.

Just realize there is the delta T between that of the remaining fuel in YOUR tanks versus the temperature of the fuel in the storage tank; the temperatures are unlikely to be the same.

Yeah, then I agree that's troubling!

Sorry, but I don't think listing actual variables like how consistently level the plane is, and temperature, to be mere rationalization. Adjusting the K-factor WITHOUT holding those constant is bound to lead to frustration. That is NOT to say the K-factor is constant over all flows. That's just one more variable that is hard to account for. Trying to chase accuracy down to 0.1 gallon is a waste of effort and, unless you are down to your last 6 minutes, of dubious practicality even if that repeatable accuracy is actually achieved.

No, not that interested. I find it hard to know how troubled to be without knowing what the spec requires, is all I'm saying.

"a few" here, and "a handful" there...what does that add up to 10, 30, 50? For products that are pretty new. How many are out there and installed? Call 'thousands" 5,000. 10 out of 5,000 is 2,000 ppm failure rate. Not too impressive for something your life may depend upon, I'm afraid. I'd bet (and, I'm trying to research) vacuum driven gyros are MUCH better than that.

Do you know what the allowable errors are after 2 hours per DO-334? I have no familiarity with that specification/standard.

When I first bought my F I spent a bunch of time trying to calibrate the flow meter to the nth degree. What I empirically determined is that the variability due to how level the ramp is, and temperature, pretty much has made me accept about a half to one gallon error for a 45 gallon fill. So, maybe a 1-3% error. Last fill was within 0.1 gallon, but a couple of fills back was 1 gallon off. IMHO if I'm down to worrying about 1 gallon (6 minutes) accuracy I've really screwed up

WOW! Reading through all of this, plus what I've read on other fora, I honestly don't see how one can believe that safety and reliability are being increased! Seems to me the opposite! Certainly mechanical gyros wear out...over a long period...and with plenty of warning in nearly all cases. While the vacuum pump doesn't give warning, if you are proactive with replacement you can achieve practical reliability. Contrast with EXTREMELY complex electronic systems dependent upon multi-sensor input integrity and literally millions of transistors, not to mention millions of lines of code. What could possibly go wrong?? As @PT20J accurately points out, we are NEVER going to know how these systems work at any level of practical detail. What scares me, and short term history (who knows what long term will be!) shows, is that neither do the manufacturers I'm not without career experience with INS systems which relay upon accelerometers, MEMS or otherwise. You measure their error in miles per hour (makes sense if you think about it); stop to think about all the errors that MUST be ACCURATELY compensated for (temperature is a prime example) in order to achieve performance that does NOT require GPS, or other independent, position/heading information. Despite all the wonders of digital electronics the world is still analog and the sensors between those two worlds is all important. Throw in all the unanticipated software and software/hardware interactions, and I just don't believe present day electronic systems are an improvement in safety and reliability. Flame suit on! I realize that, on the whole, pilots like new fancy gadgets and gizmos. Just suggesting not to fall in love with new technology for its own sake, but for real improvement. Signed, a 30 year cynical EE

How much has the plane been flown in the last year? I'm a believer in recent, and consistent, use. My F had 2100 hours when I bought it nearly 4 years ago; 300 hours later and it's still running great. It was flown multiple times per month, over 100 hours/year, for a decade. I think you have a good opportunity here

All I can say is that I'm really happy my F came with an STEC already installed. Trouble free for coming up on four years...knock on wood

@carusoam Sorry to be dense, but I'm just not seeing the point of analyzing engine monitor data. We KNOW there is a problem with the sealing between the manifold and the head as evidenced by the dramatic blue stains. Of what use is revealing altered EGTs, or even CHTs? What would be done differently to fix the issue if you see something in the data versus not seeing anything? Either way, the leak needs to be fixed. In other words, I can't see how the data is going to point you to a more specific location for the leak than what is already evident. I love engine monitor data as much as the next guy, but in this case I'm not comprehending what it brings to the table??? Enlighten me, please.

I can 'see' the leak in the photo! What, exactly, will JPI data add to the situation?

100% agree. NO way I'd keep a wooden tail. I put an exclamation mark because I was shocked that the AD actually allowed the wood tail to be retained at all

If you say so I'll keep slipping my Mooney, thank you very much!

Yuup! I bought a baffle kit from him a couple of years ago and was impressed with the quality, and have been very happy. It also arrived shortly after I hung up the phone with him!

Maybe....I see your point. However, time has a way of changing things; the seller was facing reality, he's rational but not happy with finally taking the hit,...he just wanted the deal done with no possibility of getting yanked around by the buyer.

Just a guess, of course, but what we have here is an example of a RATIONAL seller! A very rare specimen, indeed. IIRC, the owner has been living outside the US, likely for many years, has been paying storage fees, knows he needed to sink the money into an engine IRAN and prop, plus whatever damage has occurred due to sitting....and realized it was unlikely he was going to get it in flying condition anytime soon...and might have to export out of the US if he actually wanted to fly it. Along comes the OP

Briggs & Stratton, or Tecumseh?

Nah, THIS is a flying lawnmower: