Jump to content

65eTurbo

Basic Member
  • Posts

    147
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by 65eTurbo

  1. Hello Mooniacs, I'll be heading to Fort Lauderdale for a few nights, staying between FLL and downtown. Where is a reasonable place to land/tie-down/gas? What are landing/parking fees like?
  2. Flown my manual gear E for 20 years. I love the elegant simplicity of the manual gear and hydraulic flaps. It is the only retactable gear approved without a backup. Saves complexity and I think Weight. Replace the download block every few thousand hours and have it rigged by someone who knows what they are doing. Hard to accidentally retract on the ground as well, and really easy to confirm down and locked. Love the F. Nice and light and space and load for 4 people. I wouldn't reject a plane with electric gear but would prefer J bar.
  3. I believe deep.cycle is a question of durability for multiple deep discharges which is not the design requirement for aircraft alternator failure, right? One hopes. If it starts reliably and runs the panel for an hour, I'll give it a shot. My IA has been installing variants of lightweight batteries in jets. Eyewatering costs. As for Lithium, the FAA won't field approve the available batteries because of crash worthiness issues and post impact fire. (We tried). I've seen them for race cars. Astonishingly light.
  4. I think you can shoot an approach if the database update is after the update date for the approach plate.
  5. I've had 4 guys 6 feet or more in comfortably. Range then is the issue. Nice to be able to remove the seat too.
  6. It was ait was a 337 by the previous owner of LASAR. Back seat back is narrowed and moved rearward. Seat bottom winds up longer. Seat back is made removable and flip fold. Also front sear backs are doglegged to move Seat bottoms forward relative to the back to create toe room. I'll try to dig up pictures.
  7. Yep, she flies best at aft CG. just don't spin her.
  8. My IA suggested it and has the field approval lined up. We will mount it to the aft of the battery box. With more work, I could mount to the back of the avionics tray with the CG a foot further aft, if I wanted to maintain CG. It is STC for Cessna 195 and has rave reviews online and word of mouth. My E is a little unique in that it has the back seat relocated rearward. If I want to carry back seat passengers I wind up at the aft CG limit and bags have to be positioned in the back seat. For example, flying 2 kids to camp or Airventue with camping gear. This will let me put a bag behind the seat. For solo flying, I'm going to add an emergency bag tie down in the back corner of the hat rack. Right now it is back floor of the cabin. Will push the CG as far back as I can. I'll report back with results.
  9. The old Gill died. Replacement is the same amperage but 12 lbs lighter. A mounting bracket can be bought with the battery. Anyone else do this?
  10. Since my garmin Gx 60 Can no longer get database updates, I'm looking at installing a garmin 355. I wasn't even aware of different frequency spacing standards but it sounds like Europe has a narrower frequency spacing? Can anybody give me the downlow on us plans for 8.33? From the GX 355 dales data: 25 kHz frequency channel spacing or 8.33 kHz channel spacing
  11. All true. In my case it is easy load aft of the CG envelope. Hard to load ahead of it. 20 pounds out of the tailcone would let me move a 30 pound bag to the back seat and carry an extra 3.2 gallons of fuel in my 90 gallon tanks.
  12. I buy all that. Regarding. Charging, discharging, and thermal management, it is all handled by integrated battery management systems. The relevant question is not whether the battery has those characteristics, but whether the battery and managemenr module has those characteristics. This includes shortened life from accidental compete discharge of the system, or overvoltage of the system. That aside, the failure mode from mechanical damage can be quite spectacular. If we suppose the manufacturer has hardened the unit against wear and tear, then our incremental risk is an accident so severe that it punctures the battery, and I doubt I'd be surviving that anyway. New tech is always a risk. Everyone has their risk tolerance.
  13. True. I hate to do it for that reason but the useful load is pretty nice and I'm already at the very back edge of the envelope. When I fly up to Oshkosh with my 2 boys, I put the gear in the back seat instead of the luggage area. I'm going to run the scenario but I think this will work out just fine. There is some stuff in my current pilot bag that will wind up tied down to the floor in the luggage area instead.
  14. Anyone try a field approval on one of these? STC already for a Cessna single. Less than 1 AMU to pick up 20 pounds of useful load. https://earthxbatteries.com/shop/etx900-tso
  15. John, Even if you don't buy let 10 gallons per hour while LOP is 73.5 percent for our engines, our engines are rated for 100 percent continous power. So, make sure you are within Turbo system limits and you can run any MP you want. When LOP, 10.gph is 73.5 percent.
  16. Thanks for the rundown. I had just assumed all of the lead acid replacements had battery management systems integrated. As these things get to scale in automotive applications I can't imagine that the power electeonics are that expensive. My A&P is digging around for options for a field approval. He is planning some for a Lear 60 and another application, and looking at field approval options. I'll report back what he finds. 20 pounds for a few hundred bucks makes sense. For a few grand, not so much.
  17. My battery is failing, So time for a new one. Last time I was at an automotive battery store I saw the new ultra light weight replacements. I asked my A&P about them and it sounds like they're some that are absurdly expensive and require a separate panel mount monitor but some that are almost 20 pounds lighter than a lead acid but don't need a monitor. Has anybody going down this route? I wouldn't mind extra 20 pounds of useful load and I tend toward tail heavy anyway and my battery is in the tailcone...
  18. I tun 10 gph LOP. When LOP for an IO 360 compression ratio, hp equal 14.7 time gph. 10 gph is 147 hp or 73.5 percent...
  19. My E is normalized with all J mods except cowl closure instead of 201 cowl. It was a 145 knot bird before and 165 now at 8000 ft, and during the re rig it was plenty out of spec, so a few knots in the rig. Also, I run 27 inches 2400 rpm 10 gph LOP which is a true 75 percent and might be a few knots better than 2500 wide open ram air at 8000 ft. So, maybe 15 knots less drag on a J. A J is also longer and heavier and I think trim drag is a bit worse.
  20. Yep. Some old fuel injection systems used %CO measured in the exhaust by the mechanic as a means of setting mixture as CO rises predictably as the mixture richens. My Porsche was set to 1% CO for example. It had never occurred to me, however, to be sure to be lean of peak if the CO monitor alarmed as it would resolve any CO issue on a single. Obvious after the fact.
  21. Hi all. A further follow up on my CO issue. I continued to have issues in flight, but low level. No issue on takeoff, but leveling off in the pattern increased CO and gear down made it worse. I was also seeing some CO in cruise, but only toward the back of the plane. I finally found one more culprit. The Johnson bar boot was a loose fit on the bar, allowing a quarter inch gap which generated quite a breeze of 30-40ppm (sensor in the flow) air. A zip tie installed very loosely while on the ground then slipped down mid-swing and tightened while gear-up in flight resolved that leak and seemed to knock it down to near zero. Now I need another long debugging flight to see just how much residual CO I can find. Another thing I discovered in reading a response technique for CO in the cockpit, and then validated in flight is... go lean of peak! Lean of peak, CO is zero. So, ever get CO in the cockpit in a single (won't work with a fuel heater on a twin)? Go lean of peak. I couldn't detect any CO anywhere while lean of peak, even before fixing the Johnson bar boot. Just one more reason why lean of peak rocks! Also, I kept scaring myself, wondering how much was too much to test fly. I kept freaking out when seeing 15 ppm on my sensor for a minute. Turns out, residential sensors only show a non-zero value above 29. I finally found these guides, which I found credible and indispensible: https://www.handlebar-online.com/writing-tips/what-is-a-dangerous-level-of-carbon-monoxide-ppm/ https://www.carbonmonoxidekills.com/are-you-at-risk/carbon-monoxide-levels/ 0-0.5 = level of CO in clean fresh outdoor air, such as far out at sea or in remote wilderness. 0.1-1 = level of increases in average outdoor CO–within current outdoor ranges of 0-5 ppm– that are associated in over 100 epidemiological studies with significantly increased risks of mortality and morbidity from many cardiovascular and respiratory disorders and, in growing fetuses, with low birth weight and birth defects–even after adjusting for the effects of other pollutants (ozone, SO2, NO2 and particulates) in multi-pollutant analyses. 0-2 = CO level in exhaled breath of healthy non-smokers who do not live with gas ovens, but only if not recently CO poisoned, not acutely stressed, and for women, not in the premenstrual phase of their cycle. 0-3 = range of max 8-hour avg. ambient CO in most US cities. This range has declined significantly since 1970s when above 9ppm as use of catalytic converters in vehicle exhaust became more common. See EPA graph of ambient CO data. 0-29 = CO range in which consumer CO alarms are allowed to continuously display ZERO but not allowed to display the actual CO level, according to CO alarm standards developed by Underwriters Laboratories (UL2034) in collaboration with the US Consumer Product Safety Commission. (The display and alarm specifications of UL2034 are matched in a Canadian standard, CSA 6.19-01) 3-15 = CO level in breath of non-smokers with flu, PMS/PMDD, chronic diseases, chronic low-level CO exposure (such as living with gas ovens) or recent more acute CO exposure. 7 mg/m3 = maximum (max) 24-hour avg exposure established by WHO for Europe in 2010. Although ostensibly meant to allow less total exposure than other WHO CO standards (see below), this standard actually allows more than twice as much total CO exposure as WHO’s max avg 8-hour exposure standard. 9 = max 8-hour avg outdoor ambient CO level allowed by US EPA, unchanged since first adopted in 1971. 9 = max indoor CO level recommended by the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers in a voluntary building industry standard (ASHRAE 62.2). 10 mg/m3 = max 8-hour avg CO level allowed by WHO and the European Commission. 10-30 = CO level in exhaled breath of smokers within one to two hours after they last smoked. Exhaled CO in smokers remains chronically above 5ppm until days after they quit smoking. 25 = max 8-hour avg CO level allowed in occupational settings for an 8-hour workday over a 40-hour workweek by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists. 25 = CO level above which Baltimore fire department requires firefighters to put on self-contained breathing apparatus. 30 mg/m3 = max 1-hour avg CO level allowed by WHO. 30 = CO level at and above which consumer CO alarms are allowed (but not required) by UL2034 to continuously display the actual CO level. 30-50 = lowest CO range in which consumer CO alarms are required by European Norm standards (EN50291) to sound, but only after this level has been continuously sustained for 2 hours. 30-70 +/-3 = lowest CO range in consumer CO alarms are required by UL2034 to sound, but only after this level has been continuously sustained for over 30 days. This is meant to (and effectively does) insure that consumer CO alarms never provide any warning at CO levels below 70ppm. 30-999+ = CO level exhaled by smokers while smoking and by non-smokers during acute high level CO poisoning. In any high level CO environment, your exhaled breath CO level will gradually rise but remain lower than the ambient level because you always absorb some of the CO you inhale as long as the level in air is higher than the level in your blood. As soon as you stop smoking or move to a lower CO environment, you start exhaling.
  22. It looks like we finally nailed down the CO issue. A lot of the aluminum tape inside the cabin had been removed during the new interior install. The worst leaks were an untaped area in the copilot wing root area that was open to the belly but full of tubes and such and the entire panel separating the tailcone from the cabin. In particular, holes with wiring and tubing passing through on the pilots sidewall into the tailcone. Thanks for all the help everyone.
×
×
  • 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.