Jump to content

MikeOH

Supporter
  • Posts

    4,422
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Everything posted by MikeOH

  1. Really no reason to wait to see if they print again. I bought my copy, signed by the author, on Amazon about a year ago; like new condition. Paid under $100
  2. M20F with NA 200 HP. Here's the Cliff Notes of what I do: 1) Take off with all levers forward (DA less than 5000 feet) 2) Above 5000 DA I lean to maintain my take-off EGTs of 1350 3) Once at cruise altitude I set desired rpm, usually 2500-2600. 4) Pull mixture to set desired power (typically 8.5 gph and around 65%) I do NOT use the engine monitor (EGT/CHT), only the FF gauge. After things stabilize I'll check that CHTs are okay. (Typically I don't even bother closing cowl flaps as I get virtually no speed increase and oil temp/CHTs rise) Note the throttle stays at WOT. Even in descent. I just start enriching mixture as I descend. That way I make up some of the time lost in climb. I'll only pull power back when I get within a couple thousand feet of TPA in order to slow up.
  3. Excellent! You just made me feel REALLY good about my M20F...EXACTLY the same engine story: PO found cracked case and replaced along with new cam, lifters, bearings, etc. but didn't spend the coin to call it an overhaul. So, I'm over TBO, as well. I've got the STEC-30 with alt. hold, 430W, slaved Stormscope, speed brakes, a G3 Insight and all the speed mods. Paint's decent. I paid tens of thousands less....maybe my plane IS an INVESTMENT
  4. Well sure. But, good planning allows for a reserve, right? If we were all so perfect why have a reserve? Why do we keep having fuel exhaustion incidents? So, I plan for 10 gph, and run LOP at 8.5 gph; I look at as a another 'reserve' on top of the hour I built into my flight plan at 10 gph. No guarantees of course, but I absolutely think it "lowers the likelihood of fuel exhaustion."
  5. I flight plan for 10 gph, but run LOP at 8.5 gph. Very comforting
  6. Carson's speed explanation for dummies: 1.3 x Best Glide Speed
  7. Can't seem to keep my fingers off the keyboard...please don't take offense. 1) My number one criteria was a plane that had been flown a bunch (50-100 hours/year) for the last several years. I figured that the important bugs must have been worked out or the PO couldn't possibly have flown that much. 2) All other things being equal I'd pay a bunch more (like $20K+) for a plane that has NOT been sitting. More I think about it, I'd probably walk from a FREE plane that had been sitting for a decade; see number 3. 3) Are you buying because you want to fly when you want, where you want... RELIABLY? Or, are you a guy that enjoys turning wrenches, hangar flying, etc MORE than flying? 4) What's your FLYING budget? NOT your purchasing budget. Don't ever confuse the two: the FIRST one is what you MUST make sure you can afford. IOW, don't buy cheap because your after purchase maintenance costs may eat up ALL, and then some, of your FLYING budget.
  8. I, too, switched from Falcon to Parker last fall when my rate went up and Falcon ignored my requests for an explanation/re-evaluation. Parker's communication is EXCELLENT! He answered the why's and put up with my many back/and forth questions. In the end the rate was the rate, but I had a good explanation of why. Funny thing, AFTER Falcon got news of the new 'broker of record' letter they called me! To their credit they listened and understood why I left and were apologetic. A little late, I told 'em.
  9. Nah, with their pricing I'm thinking they've got more serious 'habits' to support!
  10. 285 friggin' hours??? WTF??? Ask them if the price is based on using their BLIND employee! Actually, a blind guy could probably beat that time...maybe they're using the guy with no hands
  11. I didn't see where you said, 'volume.'. Your comment about fewer air molecules was spot on; you 'splained it fine
  12. Perhaps..but, I have found one never thinks of things they've never considered
  13. I was under the impression rates were up significantly for all GA, not just Mooneys. @Parker_Woodruff What say you, Parker?
  14. I agree with your earlier comment that the seal just doesn't seem like it was only a few days old...maybe the if seal material is wrong and the 100LL got to it...but, it just looks 'old.' Any chance you got someone else's gascolator? You know, the innocent screwup where you got the other guy's pre-overhaul unit. Any idea of the thickness of your old gasket versus a the 'new' one? I think your idea of soaking the new gasket for several days is a great one! No signs of swelling or deterioration would be a big confidence booster that leaks won't develop later after install.
  15. Thanks. Good to know no action required.
  16. It's the go-around in actual (at mins) that has me wondering...if I understood you correctly, you were doing this for real. Was a SE miss doable?
  17. Does it auto switch to GLONASS if GPS is lost? if not, how do you select?
  18. Two random thoughts from a member of the peanut gallery: 1) Is the seal really the correct size and material? (could be deteriorating when exposed to avgas) 2) Is the bottom half 'bowl' fully seated? (Maybe not enough torque, or a burr preventing the bowl from properly trapping the seal)
  19. So, what's the Seminole's SEL ROC? Curious how exciting a missed on a for real minimums ILS might have been on one engine
  20. Rather than panic that this is something serious, the first thing I'd do is remove BOTH rubber moldings and measure the distance from the fuselage to the edge of the horizontal stab on BOTH sides. If they are the same I'd just replace the moldings as M20Doc suggests.
  21. BINGO! Just how I do it. It's a dead simple procedure; I don't even use the engine analyzer anymore. Once I've set MAP and RPM I just pull the mixture back to the desired fuel flow. Then, after things settle for a few minutes I check CHTs and EGTs. I'm not too hung up on the exact percentage; I figure if I'm much over 5,000 DA, I really can't hurt anything. End up somewhere between 20 and 40 LOP depending on which cylinder.
  22. @Parker_Woodruff Did the cost of those claims increase in such an amount that would justify 30-50% rate increases that we are seeing? I'm sorry, but my cynicism suspects that our dramatic increases are the result of paying for industry losses unrelated to anything we GA pilots have any control over.
  23. I don't know about tornadoes, but I thought Nall accident report data has shown a decline for the past several years.
  24. LOL! Me, too....and $0.30 auto gas!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.