skydvrboy

I dropped my plane off for annual six weeks before I told them I really needed (wanted) it back. They told me they could make that happen. I was a little worried when they hadn't pulled it into the shop after four weeks, but once they got it in the shop, it was done in a week. Fortunately, there were very few discrepancies found this year. On the other end, my longest annual was a little over six months!

Not really any engine work done. They fixed a cracked spark plug thread on cylinder #3; compression test; changed the oil and filter and cleaned the oil screen; cleaned the fuel screen; cleaned and gapped the spark plugs. Basic stuff done at every annual. Could have allowed some contamination to enter fuel, oil, or engine, but just as likely the timing could be completely coincidence.

I have one cylinder (#2) that is giving me high CHT's and EGT's when operating LOP. This started the first flight after annual inspection and has progressively become worse. Before when I would lean, all cylinders would peak in the following order 4-3-1-2 and the CHT's would drop to around 310-310-285-335 respectively. During climb, ROP, the CHT's were around 390-350-320-375 respectively. Other parameters: RPM 2500; MAP 24"; FF 8.0 GPM After, when I go LOP the CHT's still peak in the same order, but cylinder #2 seems to stay at it's climb temperature. For the first flight, climb CHT's were 385-355-320-370 respectively. However once LOP, the CHT's were around 310-320-280-355. Other parameters: RPM 2500; MAP 25.5"; FF 8.7 GPM On later flights it has progressively become worse, though admittedly the ambient OAT has climbed as well. On one of my later flights I climbed to 9500' in search of cooler air (to no avail) and the LOP CHT's were around 340-360-310-390. Other parameters: RPM 2500; MAP 21.5"; FF 8.0 GPM. When LOP Cylinder #2 always seems to be about 40 degrees warmer than the others. Meanwhile EGT's on #2 are peaking around 1500 and I have always run about 5-10 degrees LOP after the last cylinder peaks. Of note, on one low altitude flight, I set RPM at 2400 and MAP at 24" and #2 EGT peaked at 1550. That is the only flight where that happened. Now for my amateur incoherent ramblings... It seems that #2 is getting too much air and fuel and is peaking later and later. In order to get the #2 CHT's to start dropping I have to lean so much that the engine is running rough. This was never the case before. In flight (and ground) mag checks show no issues, so I don't think it's a fouled plug. I would think a partially clogged injector would cause that cylinder to get less fuel and run hot when ROP and peak sooner, which is the opposite of what I have going on. Could an intake leak cause one cylinder to get too much air? Is the exhaust valve sticking? Any advice or other things I need to check out would be greatly appreciated.

Unless the airport manager is worried that adding the symbol to the chart might keep GA pilots away and impact his fuel sales, thereby refusing to add the symbol to the chart. This happened at the airport where I trained for my PPL and it's one of the busiest DZ's in the state! So keep in mind that parachute operations can take place at any uncontrolled airfield at any time... or even not at an airport at all. A couple skydiving buddies and I jumped into my wedding reception at my parents' farm. We also did demo jumps at numerous rodeos and sporting events, often in small towns that didn't even have an airport.

Great news! I went out tonight and test flew a few different ILS approaches. The glide slope still functions perfectly at the other airports I tried (higher frequency LOC's). It's still frustrating that I'll be stuck flying the LOC approach to my home drone, but at least I'll be able to finish my rating.

It's a problem with the receiver in the CDI. The visit before they were supposed to check it out and instead checked out and tuned up the Mac1700, so it's like new now.

Currently working on my instrument rating and the glide slope on my KI 211C went kaput. It would never work on the local ILS frequency, (108.9) but seemed to work just about everywhere else. I took it to Bevan Aviation to see if they could fix it. When they could get it working on the higher frequencies, it wouldn't work on the lower ones and vice versa. Now, I'm not sure where it will work... if at all, so I'm looking for a cost effective option to finish up my instrument rating (should be done in the next few weeks). The KI 211C was paired with a Mac1700, which apparently is a face plate on a KX 170B radio. I really like the Mac1700 and don't really want to replace it so if there is anything compatible, that would be my first choice. Anyone got a spare KI 211C laying around!? If not, what can I do to get an inexpensive glide slope display to finish my rating?

I can only envision two scenarios where I’d give up the Mooney: lost medical or financial disaster. Either way, I’m going ultralight, a Quicksilver MX. Never more than 50 mph nor more than 50 feet AGL… I’m going low and slow.

I have never been able to find a way to close the air at the foot well tubes. Mine looks like it just has a bunch of open holes with no way to close them. Maybe I'm missing something. It would sure be nice to be able to shut those vents holes in the foot well tubes so the copilot seat doesn't get so hot.

My setup is about the same as yours except for missing the center vent. The mixing box leads to the footwell, defrost, and to a small slot behind the pilot seat. In the winter, the copilot is burning up, pilot is hot, back left seat is cold, and back right is nearly frozen. That center vent would sure help even out the temps between the various seats. Direct fresh air vents are the eyeball by the pilots left leg and the overhead vents. The rear overheads put out a lot more air than the front. Do you have a way to change the amount of air diverting to the defrost? Mine is open to all heat vents at all times. I don’t have any valves on the tubes in the footwells.

What?! I have a '67 F and I'm almost positive I don't have that vent. I certainly don't get any airflow from anything in that area. Maybe it was added part way through the production year?

As long as they slapped an "INOP" sticker on it... good to go!

Yes, electric gear.

The new owner was getting transition training from a very experienced CFI. Engine just stopped mid flight.

I don't have many details, but it appears the pilot was training and had a mechanical problem. Executed a safe emergency landing in a field. Well done! https://fox4kc.com/news/plane-makes-emergency-landing-during-practice-flight-in-clay-county/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR0vPvypyqmqUKGO0911MeaBg-nUqBGKKsrXrYzI4bVWtC_AbY1XDHNe0k8_aem_ARRhZd8Ht0HZrM15C6Dn4cxaRNrHiZSLh2Hpsz5erQ5Ivy5l9c9IU6LDI1c8CLh1PftmMEEUh1Ssx0URBPhXP48m

Believe it or not, it helps to complain about these. At my airport, the FBO implemented a ramp fee for single engine pistons about 5 years ago. I complained and suggested to the various local pilot groups I belong to that they do the same. When I needed to use them a few months later I was told they ended all fees for single engine pistons due to the complaints they were getting. Another nearby airport also implemented a ramp fee for single engine pistons. I had a meeting with the airport manager and he was showing a graph that indicated a 30% decline in annual operations from one year to the next about the time the fee was implemented. I explained to him that was because local pilots just won't use airports that have ramp fees. Unfortunately it took a few years, but they also eliminated fees for single engine pistons under pressure from the airport manager because the decline in operations was affecting their funding. I'm not saying it will help in all situations, but here in middle America, it's pretty rare to find an FBO that charges anything other than overnight tiedown fees and most don't even charge those.

I don't understand why they have a problem with a screen shot, but clearly accept entries for planes in a dive. The M20F record clearly shows that he's in a 1400 fpm descent. Whoopie, you can go fast with a strong tail wind if you point the nose at the ground. Like @201er I'm always more impressed by the speed in a headwind, especially when I'm flying with my buddies who are in slower planes.

I have ran both sides of my F dry in flight (different flights of course. One side took 33.0 gallons and the other took 33.2, so it is possible though obviously not advisable!

Is it possible to upgrade these to the manual Johnson bar? Seems like a much better and more robust design.

I think you're overestimating the amount of work involved in maintaining a grass runway, but your conclusion is still spot on. I pay $110 a month for a hangar with a 12,300' x 150' runway, a 6500' x 100' crosswind runway, and another 3600' x 75' crosswind runway. That's a real bargain compared to building a runway, hangar, taxiway, and maintaining each, not to mention purchasing all the equipment needed to maintain it.

A 40 acre square is 1320' x 1320'. In your example, you're numbers don't work for a 40 acre square, only for 40 - 1 square acre sections, all stacked in a row. I'll stick with my numbers.

160 acres is 2640' x 2640' which gives you a diagonal of 3733'. You;re probably going to need a "freakishly long" rectangular track if you want a 4000'+ runway. Our land around here is all laid out in 1 mile square sections, so 5280' x 5280' (640 acres). If you want a 4000' runway, you're going to need at least a 3/4 mile long parcel (actually 3960'). If you plan to keep that to 40 acres it will only be 440' wide. A square parcel of 40 acres is 1320' x 1320' with a diagonal of 1867', so you'll either need more land or more rectangular land. A gentleman around here had a 2600' strip on a 10 acre parcel of land. He basically owned a 100' wide strip a half mile long and then some extra ground for the house and hangar. I thought about buying it when he passed, but the wife was NOT interested. If you don't want to own a bunch of land, your best option is going to be buy a parcel with at least as much length as you want your runway. Then subdivide your runway, hangar, and house area and sell of the rest.

120 lbs is a lot of stuff and often it won't fit in the baggage area anyway. Anytime I need more than 120 lbs of baggage capacity, I just put the heaviest stuff in the rear seats.

A bottle of champagne would be high on the list! Congrats!!!

That's exactly why I replaced my original... keep mama happy!