MV Aviation

Basic Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

20 Excellent

About MV Aviation

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Munich, GERMANY
  • Reg #
  • Model
  1. SOLVED Last week I did a 50h inspection and my mechanic found one of the right magneto screws to be loose. He checked the timing and fastened the screw. The leak is gone. Thanks for all your input! MV
  2. We went to the AERO expo last Saturday. This year the exhibition was parallel to Sun'n'Fun. It's the biggest GA / Fly-in event in Europe, I believe.
  3. @all: Has anyone ever sent back their GAMIs because they needed more fine tuning? GAMI offers re-calibration, if the results are not satisfying. And, did you buy your GAMIs just according to your engine model or did you provide the company with detailed leaning data of your setup beforehand? Currently I'm wondering whether it makes more sense to go for GAMIs or an EDM-830 first. I do have an analog 4xEGT, 1xCHT, and FF on board already. GAMIs first might make the EDM unnecessary, if they are perfectly calibrated from the factory already. EDM first might make the GAMIs unnecessary, if I find out that my current setup works well as is. With the analog 4xEGT I did make two independent GAMI spread test (with .5 Gph increments), which is rather imprecise. The data suggests that the spread is in the area of 1-1.5 Gph. Yesterday I flew about half an hour LOP with my setup. My (unexperienced) feeling is that I'm better off getting GAMI's first and postpone the EDM. Any suggestions and opinions?
  4. UPDATE Apparently there is an EASA STC for the EDM-730/830 series. The generic EGT-701 STC ... ... links back to the FAA STC SA2586NM, thus applies to 730/830.
  5. Interesting, thanks. I haven't seen this yet. But this is just for EDM-900/930 series, as far as I can tell. However, they qualify as primary. IA and EI are both very expensive.
  6. Hi folks, I'm currently researching digital engine analyzers for installation in my EASA-reg Mooney. I need it to be TSO'd (obviously) but not necessarily primary. The minimum functionality would be EGT, CHT and FF. Nice to have would be all the other stuff (RPM, MP, OP, OT, OAT, FP, %HP, ...). The "Americans" have been wild about the JPI EDM-730/830's and I like them too. Unfortunately JPI doesn't provide EASA STC's. Did any of you install any modern analyzer of any brand in his/her EASA-reg? If so, please let me know which and under which circumstanced/certification and so on. Googling only reveals pretty old and outdated post on this topic. Thanks a lot! Marco
  7. Here's some footage I took after a flight: looks like we gonna change the mag gasket and see if that fixes the issue.
  8. The area around the dipstick base is dry. The oil traces start way above it.
  9. I don't have any reference, so I can't tell. I bought the plane with all the insulation installed. The inside is completely covered, even the (in this picture removed) side panel.
  10. Thank you, Gentlemen, for your input. I tried to wiggle both mags and the vacuum pump. Nothing moved. (doesn't mean that it's perfectly sealed, I know). My mechanic distance-diagnosed that it could be a loose mag, which may result in timing issues over time. My first fear, before I opened the cowling was the prop/governor. However, the oil trace on the backside of the engine (starting very high) and a (relatively) clean situation in the front makes me doubt that this is the issue. Prop is absolutely dry. I didn't check the oil cooler or the filter. Wilco + washing the engine. The backside is very hard to access due to all the accessories. What let's me become suspicious is the abruptness with which is issue suddenly occurred.
  11. no.
  12. Hi everyone, after a flight (M20E) last weekend I noticed some oil dripping onto the nose wheel. It was coming from the backside of the engine, dripping from the bottom onto the cowl flaps, and making its way backward to the wheel. It's definitely coming from inside the engine and it's not any spilled oil. Looking into the wheel case from underneath made clear that it had created kind of a mess in there. This has never happened before and the belly and wheel case were clean prior to the flight. I followed the traces to the top part of the engine on the backside. I couldn't locate the origin exactly due to obscuring pipes and hoses, but I believe it's coming from somewhere close to the right mag. Has anyone had similar experiences and/or any advice? Thanks. Best, Marco
  13. We've done it with a CS STAN. I swaped the light and the mechanic signed the CS form. 30 minutes of my work + 1.5h for the mechanic.
  14. Now I see what you guys mean. Yah, the cam was mounted on the rudder. Hence, the camera is moving with the rudder due to its defelction. The bit you see in the bottom middle of the video is the top part of the vertical stab, which is not moving (relative to the aircraft).
  15. I was using my desktop computer at work. The 13Mil. cells were in an order that just works. We do have way bigger high performance cluster at our institute, but they weren't necessary for this project. I was amazed by how quickly the turbulence dissipates behind the cam. It doesn't even reach the trailing edge of the wing. Thus, I suspect that even if the cam was mounted on the horizontal/vertical stabilizer, the effect on the control surfaces would be minimal. The main flow velocity is 50m/s, which is roughly 100kts. By the way, the legend in the video is m/s as well. For comparison, I did the exact same simulation with an angel of attack of 15° to see whether the flow detaches from the wing earlier. This would have come close to traffic pattern operations (low and slow), where stalls and spins end up way more disastrous. But the flow did not detach, not even locally (see attachment). True. But ice forms at least somewhat symmetrically and doesn't influence the flow field massively in the beginning. The cam is mounted to one wing only, which may cause asymmetric phenomena (spins) to occur more easily. I figured that this position (underneath the wing) is the most commonly used and the most influential in regard to the control surfaces downstream. From the results I expect that wherever you mount the cam on your aircraft, the effect will always be local. I'm not exactly sure what you mean. The cam is hanging down from the lower side of the wing. Both wing and cam are "rigid" in the simulation and cannot move. Any movement you see is the air. Thanks for your thoughts, Marco