Schllc

completely agree with this assessment, the challenge is when you buy an engine with 1600 hours and come to the point of tbo and you do not know how it was treated those 1600 prior to you. Not saying this changes the guidance, but it certainly is a factor few of us can ignore. The best thing that can be done to fly an engine past tbo is to actually fly regularly....

All you need to replace these lenses is a belt sander mounted on its side, a sharpie, some tine snips, blue tape and some patience. The snips get you close, then sand the rest of the way. I did the two on my plane recently, and it took me less than three hours to do both. one tip, drill one hole at a time after they are sized. Place the screw and mark/remove/drill/replace for each screw. It’s tedious, but I didn’t do that on the first one and I had to waddle two of the holes to make them fit. Fortunately it was small enough for the head of the screw to cover my error. do. It be intimidated by this job, it is not difficult, just make sure you have the tools. Trying to sand without a belt sander will make this a LOT harder.

I’m pretty sure cylinders are in stock and shipping immediately from AirPower. that being said, if it’s making full power, and running smooth I would keep flying. compression tests are just not that critical. are you sure it’s burning and not blowing out? all of my airplanes have had a sweet spot between 5-7 qts indicated and anything over that just blows out.

Ok, it was approximately 3k to supply and install the flight stream 210. I had an available breaker that was used for a CD player, and I had the .37 software. I’m sure there will be some variances for each plane, but I double checked with Brian and that is a reasonable budget. The best 3k I have ever spent for an upgrade. This was the single best upgrade that was in the NXI. If you don’t fly ifr much, you won’t likely see the value in this upgrade, but where I live involves a minimum of four reroutes regardless of how I file, and atc never provides transitions for airways which makes entering them in the g1000 a challenge. with the flight stream all you have to do is type it your phone or tablet and send it to the gps. MUCH easier!

@tomgo2 I am a HUGE fan of the bob fields door seal and anyone who doesn’t consider it an upgrade; has not flown with one. I elected for the manual just for simplicity. like @LANCECASPER said, it is very easy to reach by the pilot, even with a passenger, and it’s 4-5 pumps at the most. I will never own a Mooney without this upgrade. it is also available for install without the STC, at least the manual model.

Not sure yet, haven’t gotten the bill.

Good question. with the 3.7 software you get xm and Adsb weather so that is not something I care about, and wouldn’t know how to check it, since I already receive it, but I would imagine the flite stream could send whatever info it had to an phone or a tablet. edit but I am pretty sure you need 3.7 to install this unit.

Well, it is now done in the US as well. we got the flight stream working on my acclaim. Brian Kendrick has the only install in the US under his belt. I can’t wait to have this feature enabled in my g1000. It was the only thing I really missed from the NXI. This is great news!

If you are seeing the red X where the horizon is, then it isn't your autopilot. you should be able to go to the aux page and see which component is malfunctioning.

It is usually pretty easy to see the lines do where the strip was aligned. I laid a tape line with marks to show me where it was when I cleaned the panel. it’s within 1/8” of where it was prior to removal. The key is to mark it prior to removing the strip, if possible….

7k-ish per side.

My understanding is that the ultra’s are not “certified” or whatever language Europe uses so in order for owners to keep them there, they must retain an n-number. it may be the acclaim only, not sure, but that was the reason one I looked at ferrying from Switzerland still had an n-number. I believe the only advantage would be the ease of selling since the US is the majority of the worlds GA.

The conversion is subject to parts availability. the most expensive element is the prop, the second is the nose gear truss and doors, which are not available. the flap gap seals and the cowl vanes are not expensive and available. the last item is the removal of the hinge covers. I think the prop is the bulk of the speed gain, and the others are a benefit in the higher altitudes. I already changed my prop, and am about to paint the plane so I installed rhe items available. It was more advantageous financially bc of everything I’m already doing to the plane. I’ll be able to give a p-rep once the work is done.

Not many, for sure…

Wouldn’t they have had to do the conversion in 1998 at the tear down, or when they topped it in 2008? They said the Lycoming factory did the tear down. That may be an error in the brokers listing using the old engine model. Everything in aviation is a trade off. Even if someone were to choose to put the 400 it takes to restore this plane, they would end up with a nearly new plane, outfitted to that individuals tastes and specifications. It comes with a premium for sure, but if you own and fly it for ten years that premium is somewhat irrelevant. There are probably cheaper candidates out there, but there will be compromises with all of them, pick your poison….

That blade looks like a casting in that picture. I always thought they were machined out of billet for this reason. it is possible the billet had a defect but it’s a whole lot rarer than it is with cast aluminum. defects from porosity in casting is very easy, and once that corrosion starts its inexorable. wonder if McCauley is going to replace it so they can analyze.

Well, after flying east yesterday with 60-80 knot headwinds the entire way, I feel like it does not have enough power!

I’m pretty sure that centrifugal force would preclude it from coming even close to the airplane. I would think vibration damage could be bad enough to rip the engine from the plane.

I can’t even imagine the vibration/oscillation that engine was going through. I always wondered what would happen if you lost a blade in cruise. it probably wasn’t as bad with the heavy half staying on the plane. im dying to know if he shut down the engine to land. I’ve always thought you would have to…

The 135 only requires planes that carry 10 or more or “require” two pilots. Does Lear 55 require two?

I got overhaul quotes, including accessories from several shops for under 60. From some well recommended shops I would add.. That’s assuming crank, case and cam are good. but all the “while you are there’s” will easily creep it to 120, then Avionics’s or interior could easily be another 100. However, or 320 you’d be in a pretty nice bravo. I do believe some of the early ones had lower UL, and assume that can be rectified with an stc, but the bravo guys can opine. 320 for an early bravo would be the best if you had to sell, but if your going to fly for five-10 years it wouldn’t be money poorly spent. And it would likely be much easier to sell.

No one would accept the work, because they don’t have to. It’s the captive element of the market. I get it, I won’t allow someone to box me in either, but I communicate with my clients daily! And schedule overruns are usually 90% a result of their inability to decide, or they change their mind. This becomes frustrating for them at times I’m sure, but with constant communication and me explaining the implications over and over, they are seldom upset with me. Aviation shops, even the good ones just don’t take the time to communicate. when my avionic work that was supposed to take three months went 14 months over schedule I received exactly zero calls or emails. They had no good reason so they took the path of least resistance. At one point I waited to see how long it would take them to contact me. At two months I couldn’t take it any longer and I called.

That appears to be the original n number.

Not so quick…. You would save over 300# from the two turbo piston engines, your nacelles and cowlings would be a LOT more aerodynamic simply because the engine is so much smaller. You would absolutely have to fly in the FL to take advantage of this mod. i have time in a twin C but am not as familiar with what they did for CG. Is there an equivalent of Charlie weights for the piper? There are also a lot of performance benefits to the reduced weight. The TC already has incredible short field performance, the stol kit makes it even better, dropping 300# would probably let it take off in less than 500’. Then there is the turbine reliability… Lastly, There are not a lot of turbo Comanches around, and there will likely never be a new conversion. If nothing else, the cool factor of a turbine TC could only be bested by a twin turbine Mooney!

You do not need the waas boxes to get Adsb, you can install the 345r with the waas capability. But be aware this only provides waas for the Adsb, it does not provide waas for navigation. And no, the 275 will not provide legal waas to the g1000