Basic Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About squeaky.stow

  • Rank
  • Birthday 06/24/1959

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Barrie ON, Canada
  • Reg #
  • Model
    M20K 252TSE

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Experience certainly helps but it really comes down to 3 things: 1) Incredibly accurate fuel planning. At my airline (yes, the one of Gimli Glider fame) the planned fuel burn calculated by our flight planning system is usually accurate to about 100kg on a 10 hour flight that will burn about 50,000 kg of fuel. 2) Extremely accurate fuel Totalizers. The "cost to carry" excess fuel is a big deal in the airline world, so we carry exactly what we need and no more. That translates to destination + alternate + legal reserves plus a statistically determined "contingency fuel" for unforeseen events. Then we add deviation fuel in minutes of additional burn for known weather or ATC delays. 3) SOPs. Airline pilots live and die by SOPs. You have an estimated and a minimum fuel quantity at every waypoint on your flight plan which you monitor throughout the flight. If your burn exceeds your plan, you spot it early and come up with a plan. You always have an out, and you exercise it when it is required. All of the above can be applied to my Mooney. The only difference is the somewhat lower degree of accuracy of items 1 & 2, which can be compensated for by adhering strictly to item 3. Most GA fuel exhaustion accidents I have read about were the result of either not having a fuel plan, or failing to follow it. Minor trivia note: Years ago I was instructing in the 767 simulator and we had to review the dual engine failure drill as part of the recurrent training scenario. I made some comment about it being good training but extremely unlikely that it would ever happen. "I mean, have any of you ever had a dual flameout?" I asked. The Captain was a quiet and very competent old guy, very close to retirement. He smiled and said, "Actually, yes I have." His name was Maurice Quintal. Everyone at Air Canada knows the name Bob Pearson, the famous Captain of the Gimli Glider, but few remembered the name of his FO. It was Maurice.
  2. squeaky.stow

    Battery Minder

    Thanks for the feedback. It appears there are 3 issues to consider and the BatterMinder covers most of them. 1) Getting a charger designed for the slightly lower float charge voltage required by AGM batteries as compared to lead-acid batteries. 2) Temperature compensation during charging. 3) Desulphation. This one seems to be somewhere between science and snake oil. The most legitimate peer reviewed study I could find seems to indicate that the various desulphation techniques can have some value in keeping new batteries from developing sulphation but have little to no ability to "restore" severely sulphated old batteries. As the author pointed out, if this were possible, there would be "battery restoration" shops everywhere serving the automobile market. Two and a half out of three is not bad. I will put one of these on my birthday list. 13 years out of a battery is pretty impressive. Mark
  3. squeaky.stow

    Battery Minder

    I have a new 24V Concorde battery in my 252 that I would like to get the maximum life and reliability out of. I have read a lot of conflicting reports on the value of desulphating battery minders. Concorde endorses the BatteryMinder brand and suggests that other smart chargers are not appropriate for aircraft batteries because they charge at too high a voltage. I am somewhat skeptical about this claim because my alternators are cranking out 28v whenever the engine is running and Concorde doesn't seem worried about that. Does anyone have experience with this or any other brand of minder? Is it worth the extra money over a regular 24v smart charger? Mark
  4. squeaky.stow

    Advice on turbo Mooney

    Agree completely. If you can find a good 252, you won't be disappointed. You can always do the Encore conversion later if you find you really need that extra 230 lbs.
  5. squeaky.stow

    Inadvertent Spin- wheels up or down?

    I wish we had a Guard or Reserve option to fly fighters in Canada, but our fighter force is way too small and remote. When I got out of the reg force I had to fly helicopters just to keep a foot in the reserves. (Oh the shame!) I completely agree that the POH recovery procedure is paramount. It was written by test pilots who have actually spun a Mooney. Any ramblings from me should certainly not be considered to carry more authority than the manufacturer's guidance and are intended to be for discussion purposes only. Consider them like tweets from a politician at 4AM. I still suspect however, that a fully developed spin in a Mooney with any kind of aft CG and that small tail would take a LOT of forward stick to break the stall. But please, nobody go out and try to prove me wrong!
  6. squeaky.stow

    Inadvertent Spin- wheels up or down?

    Do you have a reference source for this? The part about increasing your rotation rate I mean. I agree that my "full down and patience" was pretty generic. The actual Mooney POH says "Control Wheel......FORWARD of neutral in a brisk motion. Additional FORWARD elevator control may be required if the rotation does not stop." In other words Mooney appears to be saying that more nose down may be required to stop the rotation, not less. I have never spun a Mooney and don't plan to try, but I have done literally hundreds of spins in aircraft that are certified to do so, and one inadvertent one in an aircraft that was most emphatically NOT certified for spins. (F-5) What I can tell you from that experience is that the longer you remain in a fully developed spin, the more likely it is to flatten out due to rotational inertia, and the more it flattens out, the more forward elevator you will need and the longer it will take to recover, hence my generic comment about full down and patience. Whether or not an GA single is certified for spins depends largely on whether the flight controls can generate enough aerodynamic force to overcome the combined forces of CG location and the gyroscopic inertia functioning in a spin. A tail that is too small, has limited control surface authority, or is blanked aerodynamically by its position (some T-tails) may not be able to do this. For those interested in PARE and a great summary of spin aerodynamics, here is a good source with lots of additional references: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin_(aerodynamics) M016576, you have me curious about how you ended up flying both the Eagle and Hornet/Super Hornet. Did you go from the USAF to Naval Reserves, or do an exchange or something? I have always been envious of the American Guard and Reserve programs. My F-16 time came courtesy of an exchange tour with the USAF, but you don't often meet someone who has flown both USAF and Navy types. Oh, and Merry Christmas to everyone on Mooneyspace! As a newbie Mooney owner, this forum has been an incredibly valuable source of information. I would never have known about WeepNoMore or LOP or so many other technical issues without you folks. And Happy New Year. Regards, Mark
  7. squeaky.stow

    Canadian tank reseal

    Hi Peter, I am not aware of any Canadian shops that do this but I just got my 252 back from Weep No More in Willmar MN this week and would rate them a 10 out of 10! It was a six month wait to get it in, but if you want it done right, it is the place to go. I stopped in Sault Ste. Marie (US side) for customs and then direct to Willmar. Paul Beck and his team were very helpful and friendly and arranged to drive me to and from KMSP. Plan to leave your plane for 3-4 weeks. The experience is a bit like getting a new roof on your house. It costs a lot of money and your house looks exactly the same afterwards, but you have the peace of mind knowing that it won't leak for another 20 years! And no fuel smell in the cockpit! Dont go cheap on this. You will just end up doing it again in a couple of years. One word of warning : No tax payable on the job in Minnesota but Canada Customs will ding you for full HST when you bring it home. I am still steaming about that, but you can't fight them. If you want more details I can PM you my email address. Cheers, Mark
  8. squeaky.stow

    Inadvertent Spin- wheels up or down?

    Agreed that fighters can require some very different techniques for spin recovery. This is partly because of the ratio of fuselage mass to wing mass (which is the opposite of GA aircraft design) and the partly because of the effect of fly by wire flight control computers on the pilot's control inputs. There is some good literature available on the topic of fighter aerodynamics, but none of this is really relevant to the question which this thread began with which is the discussion of spin recovery in a GA aircraft like the Mooney. The Mooney POH is pretty clear (at least for my K) Don't do them. But if you do end up in one: 1) Full opposite rudder. 2) Control wheel forward (as much as it takes to break the stall. 3) Ailerons neutral. 4) Throttle idle. Deviate from this advice and you are now a test pilot. But not the cool kind. Other than slight variations on the order of the above steps, I have never seen a GA aircraft (canards excepted) that had any other spin recovery procedure recommended by the manufacturer.
  9. squeaky.stow

    Inadvertent Spin- wheels up or down?

    If you are in a spin, you are stalled. Your priority is to reduce the angle of attack to get the wing flying again. That means full down elevator and some patience. Stopping the autorotation if you can with full opposite rudder and idle power will help with that process but you may not be able to stop the rotation until you break the stall. No matter what, you need LOTS of altitude below you. If you need to be tinkering with drag or c/g items like speed brakes or gear (which have little or no impact on AOA) you are probably already dead. When I started my aviation career as a CFI almost 40 years ago, full spins were part of the PPL test in Canada. I believe they still are but I have been out of that world for a long while. C150s would spin all day and pop out as soon as you applied the correct recovery. C172s were a lot harder to spin but would pop out if you just let go. The scariest was the brand new Piper Tomahawk. If you didn't recover in the first 2 turns it would go flat and the airflow over that silly T-tail was partially blanked by the wing, making the standard full nose down ineffective. I experienced this once and was able to recover after about 7 turns by alternating between full up and down elevator synchronized with the pitch oscillations until the nose dropped enough to break the stall. After a change of underwear I never went past 1 turn again, but in the next few years there were several "unexplained" stall/spin crashes and the Tomahawk kind of faded away as a trainer. These techniques don't change much with aircraft type. Some are just harder (or impossible) to recover from a spin. Many years later, instructing on USAF F-16s we still taught that rocking technique for recovery from a deep stall. Only difference was we didn't go out and try it for real. (practicing bleeding) We just showed the students a HUD tape of an Edwards AFB test pilot soiling HIS underwear instead. Mark Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  10. squeaky.stow

    252 Cruise Speed

    If TKS does cost speed (the company claims it doesn't) I'm certainly not seeing it. I am seeing POH speeds pretty consistently. On the other hand, while I certainly don't go out seeking ice in a piston single, it sure is nice to know you can climb out of it or get down safely if you get caught. I couldn't see paying the retrofit costs, but since it came with the airplane for not much of a premium it was a big bonus. Mark Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  11. squeaky.stow

    252 Cruise Speed

    According to this article by a former Mooney test pilot, the 231 is about 10-12 knots slower than the 252. If true, then you are right in the ballpark at 65%. http://www.mooneypilots.com/mapalog/M20K252_evaluation_report.htm By the way, I came very close to making an offer on C-FLQQ before you bought it. It looked like a great airplane for a steal of a price! I was not quite ready to commit at that time. Hope you are enjoying it. Cheers, Mark
  12. squeaky.stow

    252 Cruise Speed

    Thanks Jack, Looks like my OAT on the EDM830 is over-reading by about 20C in flight. It's accurate on the ground before start so I suspect the probe is too close to something hot. Interestingly, the POH says to add about 1" of MP for each 10C above ISA to get the required %HP. I was running about 2" MP higher than POH to get the EDM to show 65%. I think I need to find a better location for my OAT probe. Cheers, Mark
  13. squeaky.stow

    252 Cruise Speed

    Thanks everyone for all the good feedback. I am getting a better picture after recording data on a few more flights. First, it appears I was running significantly higher power settings than I thought was. This goes a long way to explain the higher temps and fuel flows I was seeing. For the last couple of flights I have used POH settings and am seeing almost exactly the POH speeds at the POH 65% and ROP. Fuel flow at that setting is around 12.5 GPH or less at 100 degrees ROP and 9.5 GPH at 20 degrees LOP. It runs a little rough at LOP so I will wait until I have timed the mags and installed new plugs before operating that way on a regular basis. I can also fully close the cowl flaps now and keep CHTs under 380 now. My EDM 830 will evidently need some tweaking. A 65% power setting from the POH at lower altitudes shows right on 65% on the EDM, but at higher altitudes it shows lower settings. At 10,000 feet today on an ISA day, 65% POH settings showed 59% on the EDM. Looking back on some notes I took at 15,000' some weeks back, my EDM showed 65% but by the POH I was actually running 75% or higher. That explains the high temperatures and fuel flows I was seeing. Lesson learned? Verify my power settings with the POH. I was far too trusting that my EDM was set up properly. Any EDM users have any tips on getting it tuned up? Before I start messing with the Horsepower Constant I want to be sure it is getting good input data. RPM and MP match my primary gauges almost exactly. OAT does not. I am not sure where the OAT probe is, but it reads much higher than the OATs displayed on the Aspen and the analog gauge. According to the ADM manual, it needs RPM, MP, FF and OAT to calculate %HP. If the temperature is over-reading, I am guessing that my % HP will get more inaccurate as I climb.
  14. squeaky.stow

    252 Cruise Speed

    Hello all, After the worlds longest pre-purchase it is time for me to come out of the "lurker" closet. As of today I am a brand new proud owner of C-GKRP, a 1986 252. I have been flying it for several months while the seller and I worked the bugs out, so I am feeling pretty comfortable by now. During that process I have learned an awful lot about Mooneys by reading this forum. Nice to have such a great source for advice and opinions. She's pretty nicely equipped with Aspen, 530W, XM weather, EDM830, TKS, Stormscope, Radalt and a 3 blade hot scimitar. The only big thing left to do is ADS-B out, but being in Canada I can afford to wait for a while. The piggy bank is kind of depleted after the purchase. I ran the GAMI spread test and sent it to folks at GAMI. They tell me I already have a .3 spread and they wouldn't try to improve it. Bonus! There are two things I want to change, based on advice I have read on this forum. I want to switch to Tempest Fine Wire plugs. Getting my mag timing checked will also be a part of the process. I can't currently get more than about 15 degrees LOP before it starts feeling rough and my TIT is uncomfortably close to 1650 at that setting. That's starting from 65% (27" 2500 rpm) and leaning to about 10.2 GPH. I also plan to replace my baffle seals with a set from Guy Ginby this winter. Right now I have to trail the cowl flaps 1/2 way open to get stay below 380 CHT at 65%. I am running 100 degrees ROP until I can get the plugs changed which gives me about 14 GPH. So finally to the question: At 8000 ft, 65% and 100 ROP I am seeing about 156 KTAS. (OAT was 14C) I know TKS can cost some airspeed, as can a hot prop, and I am probably losing 2-4 knots with the cowl flaps half open, but that seems a little slow compared to some of the 252 numbers I have seen mentioned on this forum. Any 252 owners care to comment? Regards, Mark