irishpilot

Supporter
  • Content Count

    256
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

irishpilot last won the day on July 6 2019

irishpilot had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

186 Excellent

About irishpilot

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Texas
  • Interests
    Family, flying, innovation, start-ups
  • Reg #
    N42JD
  • Model
    M20M

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If you are running between 18-19 gph at 29/2400, you should be nowhere near 1650 TIT. Something is off. What is your peak TIT when leaning? Confirm you are leaning to peak and then enrichening to 50-100 ROP? If not, you probably should. My Bravo usually peaks between 1625-1650 and I run 75-100 ROP at 18.3-19.0 GPH. My cylinders run 370-380 at that temp. It sounds like timing is the place to double check and ensure it is set right. Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
  2. I have PT6 time and he probably used the GPU because of low battery volts for start. I don't have 206 time, so maybe there is another reason to use the GPU. However, this accident is attributed to complacency and decision making. There were several ways he could have solved the lack of crew problem. Bummer because accidents like this are preventable and raise insurance rates. Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
  3. Again, I stand by my hesitance against speculating without evidence. In the safety world, no conclusions are made or drawn without all fact-finding complete. In the military, there is usually a lot of data to go through; flight data recorder, engine files, logged faults, controller interview, ground crew interviews, etc. For general aviation, without recorders, and many flights under VFR rules, VMC, there is far less information to gleam. For this crash, the onsite investigator will examine the position of the fuel selector, will note if there is any residue within the wreckage or in the immediate vicinity. They'll note whether the prop is still on the plane, the impact markings on the prop (whether it was turning when the plane impacted), as well as an engine inspection looking for signs of catastrophic failure. Because this plane is mostly intact and not consumed with post-crash fire, I expect this report to be complete enough for us to have a focused discussion. I still stand by my request to wait for more details & facts to come to light on this particular crash. However, I've seen two great topics that warrant in-depth discussion on this forum. 1) fuel starvation, fuel planning (IFR & VFR) and real-world techniques we have to not run out of fuel. 2) How does a Mooney respond to an in-flight departure of the propeller? Does it stay within W&B, does the lack of P-factor cause yaw as the propeller departs, actions post-departure for pilots to do, etc. I think these would be great topics to start as threads if anyone is wanting to honcho that. ------------------------ Back to the tragedy at hand, I'm focused on the loss of a Mooney couple who loved to fly. For me, the loss hits home because we have many on MS who personally know them. My heartfelt condolences go out to their family and friends.
  4. Speculation is different than choosing specific "what if" scenarios to walk through. So far this thread is speculative. If you'd like to take the prop falling off as a first discussion point, I support it because it is specific and safety-oriented. For one, I know what engine failure feels and looks like, but I have no idea how these planes respond to a propeller departing inflight. Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
  5. Let's hold off on the speculation until we get evidence or analysis from eye witnesses or the NTSB. Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
  6. Thank you for the detailed follow-up. This is a perfect example of knowing your aircraft and continuing to look into a symptom that isn't right. Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
  7. Indeed very sad. When information is available, we will discuss the cause and how to learn from this tragic event. Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
  8. Buy the and you want with the avionics you need. For IFR XC travel, get the panel you want. Trust me, you'll find areas to work on/upgrade...it's the nature of plane ownership. Welcome aboard! Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
  9. I've found that 40 kts or less in the FLs will warrant the climb into the wind. I've found that the trade space between glide distance and TAS going into the winds typically puts me between 6-11k. Glide distance is critical, especially over water. During the winter westbound, it can be humbling with a 70-100kt headwind.
  10. @Gatlin Gun, I come from a similar background. Get an HSI or G5.
  11. @erin fink, I have experience in solo and partnerships. How much flying do you plan on doing a year? If it is less than 100, then a partnership is good. Planes do well when flown frequently. I co-own my Bravo with a partner. It works great for us as we are co-located. I think a partnership that is no co-located would be pretty tough because of logistics.
  12. @carusoam, thanks for the ping. I agree with @Gary0747. Tracking incidents and accidents gives us a good look at trends within our community. Even if we can't track down the causes of incidents (since not reported to the NTSB), it still serves as a good discussion to ensure our general knowledge is up to snuff. If someone can merge the duplicate threads outside the safety section, I'd be much obliged. I can move threads, but not merge.
  13. Attached is the NTSB Monthly accident report. Pulled is the Dec 19 accident list. In total, there were 56 reported accidents, 15 of them fatal. There are two accidents I want to highlight: 1. 12/31/19 M20S crash preliminary report. This has been discussed in-depth on the forum, so there's not much to add. From the limited data available, I'd say this accident will be attributed aircraft loss of control resulting in fatal injuries due to impact. The cause of loss of control is still being investigated. 2. 12/01/19 Piper PA24 crash. This one hits close to home because I was on frequency with SAT approach going into Stinson when this crash occurred. The controllers are consummate professionals; I didn't know this occurred until the next morning. North East of KSAT, the pilot told Approach that they had an engine problem. Flight Aware shows the plane at 4,300' (3300' AGL)The engine failed and they were attempting to land at SAT 13R. The plane got slow on the final turn to Rwy 13R. Causal factors will be engine failure and subsequent loss of aircraft control. a. From Flight Aware, I can't tell if they were within glide distance to KSAT. It was at night and I'm not sure if they were aware of Bulverde (1T8). However, flying an engine out at night to 1T8 would be very challenging as it is a short runway with high trees south and power lines to the north. If they were within glide distance to KSAT, that was a wise decision Recommendations for MooneySpace: Top three causes of accidents continue to be loss of control, CFIT, and engine failure. Knowing your plane's glide ratio, doing the mental math for glide distance at given altitudes, and using tools such as Foreflight's glide distance ring and your GPS direct Nav, can help give you your engine out options. Additionally, I highly recommend you practice engine-out procedures with a CFI or another pilot so you can practice "turn, climb, clean, check" and feel how your plane handles at glide speed. This is easily practiced near/around uncontrolled airfields (using radios to clearly state your intentions if using non-standard pattern entry). If you are in towered airspace, pulling power abeam the numbers, picking a spot you want to the airplane to touch down, and then grading yourself is another way to practice aimpoint control and energy management. The San Antonio crash highlights the need for all Mooney drivers to practice engine-out approaches and be comfortable knowing how far you can go, building a gameplan, and maintaining glide speed until the flare. RadGridExport.csv
  14. I don't fly myself because it's cheaper, that's for sure. I fly because it's awesome, but more importantly, I fly myselft because of the flexibility and because I can make travel an adventure with my family. Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
  15. I have a 2000 Bravo and my last annual was $4,700 and that was with one jug replaced. I budget $25-35k of ownership costs per year at around 150 hrs of flying. Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk