Jump to content

0TreeLemur

Supporter
  • Posts

    1,904
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

0TreeLemur last won the day on February 27

0TreeLemur had the most liked content!

About 0TreeLemur

  • Birthday September 1

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    : TCL
  • Interests
    Airplanes & things that make them go.

  • Reg #
    '03L
  • Model
    '67 C
  • Base
    KTCL

Recent Profile Visitors

3,892 profile views

0TreeLemur's Achievements

Veteran

Veteran (13/14)

  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Dedicated
  • Very Popular Rare
  • Week One Done
  • One Year In

Recent Badges

1.4k

Reputation

  1. Looked at a video on youtube this evening of a guy who experimented with fixing bicycle tubes with "flex tape"!!! Meh. Thanks Don. I'll keep your extra retract boot in mind. I'll follow up with a possible solution if I find one. Fred
  2. Maybe. I think thinner is better given that this thing has to fold back on itself as the step retracts.
  3. Hi everyone, The step retract servo boot on our C has a leak. It stops retracting with about 8" left. I've got one spare. Before I replace the boot, I wonder if there might be a way to patch it to get some more life out of it. Access is great, this little tear is about 1/2" long on the downward facing side of the servo. Anyone ever do this? I can see that changing the material properties by applying a patch might create problems/stresses elsewhere on the membrane, which suggests a thin patch. It also must be a thin patch because it must roll around and not hang up as the membrane changes orientation during retract/extension. Any ideas, or should I just bite the bullet and replace it? In 2021 is there a really cool way to patch this so that we might get a few more years of life out of it? I know about the excellent electric conversion, but I don't want to do that now. I'm fully committed to the Brittain system and my vacuum pump is brand new.
  4. Nice work Dev. Numerous confounding effects I suppose. The effects of several eras appear on this plot: 1961-1975- Growth of the fleet. As you make more planes, flown by more new pilots inexperienced in the M20 plus the common bravado/machismo back then, makes for a lot of twisted metal. 1976-1985: Survival of the fittest. the Mooney pilots that didn't get killed between 1961-1976 were actually a pretty good group, but they flew a lot and continued to take too many unnecessary risks.. 1986- present: Era of increased costs, improved training, aging fleet, aging owners. Sum it all up, annual flight hours per airframe are coming down. Fewer fatal accidents are mostly caused by poor decision making, which can never be eliminated. That explains why the graph is coming down to a plateau at about five per year. Here's a link to a similar thread from earlier this year.
  5. If you added in M20T's your bar graph will better represent the fleet.
  6. My shop just installed the Artex 345 in our C. Ran two wires. One for the GPS signal to the 430, and the second to the test/arm/on panel switch. Yes, the whip antenna does look kind of dorky, but I can't see it when I'm flying.
  7. I'd love to attend, but I'm fully booked 20-21 Oct. Drat. Might you record it and have it available for a limited time?
  8. Question for Parker- does the $148M verdict for the collapse of a shelter at O'Hare that injured a dancer get charged as an aviation incident? Are liability policies for large public airports in the same pool of insureds as our Mooney's? Seems odd to me if so.
  9. Pulled a/c outside, and acquired satellites. Did a 1 second test with permission of my local tower Thursday night. No call from Air Force. Beep sequence said that installer didn't put in loop from pins 5 and 12 to activate the G-switch. Visual inspection of sub-D connector confirmed. Co-pilot and I soldered in loop between those pins today, and did another 1 second test with tower permission today. Beep sequence confirms proper operation. Again no call from Air Force. Guess the Artex 345 one second test doesn't transmit to satellites. This is good news. Install done. Don't have confirmation of accurate GPS signal, but beep code sequence says that it is getting GPS position data.
  10. When I lower the gear, I move my right leg to the right and use my right knee as a fulcrum supporting my right forearm. Pushing down with my right shoulder causes my hand that is gripping the j-bar handle to put quite a bit of upward force on it. Then I move my leg back and pull down as hard on the handle as possible to make sure it is locked. I only look for the green light on short final GUMPS check.
  11. I've read that the GPS transmission with position info on 406MHz occurs once per minute starting about 50 seconds after activation. The docs that came with my Artex ELT model 345 say that having it on for a few seconds will not cause a transmission on 406 MHz, just a weaker audio transmission on 121.5. That you write indicates that this is not true, it can't be because the satellites no longer listen to 121.5. Hmmm. Seems like they picked up a 406 MHz transmission during your brief activation. Anyone else confused? What model do you have? Maybe different manufacturers do it differently?
  12. Called them. Sadly, they didn't seem bored. I was instructed to go to here: https://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/Beacon Testing Policy.html and fill out a form. I'm gonna do that. EDIT: Follow-up. 3 days advanced notice required. Gonna sit and think about it. Maybe I'll ask a big avionics shop nearby if they have the test rig and give that a try.
  13. Digging a bit more, I found this from the M20 STC. He seems to have taken the example moment arm literally. Instructions say to use the same moment arm as the prop replaced, which makes a lot more sense.
  14. Table doesn't say that 1 beep+flash means that position data are available or accurate. Like I said that manual is thick as chowder. I think I'll do as @PT20J suggests. See if I can make a deal with the Air Force. I'd like to know that the position data are present and correct.
  15. Somebody ought to know this. According to the Type Cert, for a M20C, the original HC-C2YR-1 7666-2 propeller had weight of 53.75lbs and a moment arm of -30.16". Looking at the post install update to the W&B, my A&P listed the weight and moment arm of the HC-C2YR-1BFP/F7497 "Top Prop" as 58.1 lb and -35.5". Ok, I get that it is heavier. Why does it have almost 5" more moment arm? Looking at the Hartzell manual, I don't see this data. Must be in the Mooney STC. I can't seem to find that paperwork right now. Anybody have reference to this? Just checking my A&P's work. He's a genius mechanic, but I check his math. Thx.
×
×
  • 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.