PT20J

The Mooney has effective slotted flaps of wider wing span than most airplanes. If you compare the calibrated Vs1 and Vso stall speeds to other single engine GA airplanes, you’ll find a larger spread in the Mooney than with most others. In other words, full Mooney flaps are more effective than many other airplanes we may have flown. The most common problem with landing Mooneys with full flaps is not adjusting airspeed for lower than gross landing weights. If it floats it was too fast. Skip

It might be best to recall what flaps do: 1. They reduce stall speed allowing a slower touchdown speed reducing runway length required to stop and reducing tire wear. 2. They change the effective angle of incidence allowing a lower pitch attitude improving visibility. 3. They increase drag allowing a steeper descent for a given power setting. So, I use full flaps when I want any of those attributes (which is just about always). Skip

Power = voltage X current. So, the current is higher for a 14 V system than a 28 V for the same power. Wire size is based on current carrying capacity, so the wire for a 14 V system should be larger than for a 28 V system, not smaller. Skip

Here are a couple of ideas: 1) Any MSC has access to dealer information (I think they call it the parts portal or some such) about Mooney part numbers that sometimes has this level of detail. Maybe @M20Doc can help out. 2) Stacey Ellis at the factory usually turns around answers pretty quickly technicalsupport@mooney.com. He'd have access to all the manufacturing specs and drawings. Skip

Russia Developing Helicopter UAV To Destroy Other UAVs Air Force Times (12/17) reports that Russia is developing a helicopter UAV “to assist anti-aircraft weapon systems in their counter-UAV mission.” The new UAV will “‘track down small and low-speed enemy drones at low and extremely low altitudes,’ a source in the military-defense complex told the Russian government news agency RIA Novosti this month.” The project, which has been accelerated after the recent Armenian-Azerbaijan conflict, will fill a gap in the country’s military capabilities. Specifics were not provided, but according to the source, it has been under development since November and existing technology is being used to speed up manufacturing.

Ah, that explains why the postage rates keep going up -- storage costs!

Sounds nasty. Here's a company that claims to make the stuff -- maybe they can help. https://www.ptipaint.com/products/polyurethane-coating-polyurethane-for-protection-of-integral-fuel-tank-sealing-compound The Mil Spec (MIL-C-83019) is listed as INACTIVE in Everyspec.com

I know of at least one airline pilot with a valid ATP that was violated during an FAA inspection because he had left the certificate at home. The rule is pretty clear. According to my DPE friend, any FAA person that deals with pilots can extend the temporary. If it were me, I would call everyone in the FAA that I could get a phone number for. See if your DPE has any direct contact numbers. AOPA probably has direct contacts, and I’d try to get them to help. Forget email; you ‘re probably message 1574 down in someone’s inbox. Good luck, Skip

The fact that you’ve had so many failures coupled with the loud “pop” sounds like you might have a short somewhere. The bulbs don’t draw a lot of current and transistors don’t make a sound when they blow. If you do replace the dimmer, I’d get a pulse width modulated one that will dim LED lights as well as incandescents. Skip

Interesting question. I asked my DPE friend. Here's what he told me. 1. The temporary certificate supersedes the previous one rendering it void. This is signified by the DPE punching a hole in it. 2. The temporary certificate expires in 120 days and then you have nothing. The temporary can only be reissued by the FAA and not by the DPE. 3. The airman registry does not get updated until the new certificate has been processed, but that's neither here nor there because 61.3 says you must possess or have readily available a pilot certificate and you don't if the temporary has expired and the earlier certificate has been invalidated by punching a hole in it. So, you really need to get the certificate issued or the temporary extended to be legal. No one will ever know unless you have an accident or violation. Then there could be an issue with the FAA, and since insurance companies will go by the language of the policy, you would likely find yourself uninsured. Skip

On my 94 J it’s in the tail by the battery.

For the rod ends, the AD suggests silicone spray. The good thing about that is that it won't attract dirt which is what wears out the rod ends. The bad thing is that it isn't a very good lubricant. Later Mooney service manuals call for Triflow which is a light oil containing teflon. It's a better lubricant, but the oil remains and can attract dirt. I contacted RBC (manufacturer of Heim rod ends) and their engineering department told me they recommend MIL-PRF- 81322 grease (Aeroshell Grease 22). I think most use Triflow. Skip

No idea if this is related, but I did run across this Service Instruction a while back. sim20-103.pdf

I know that, but that's no reason not to answer his question

It’s the airplane file. It should have copies (including 337s) of all the documents that the FAA has for a particular US registered aircraft.

Wonder what the head temps were for water cooled auto engines back when mogas had lots of lead?

Clarence @M20Doc, what’s your maintenance experience been: McCauley vs Hartzell?

Is that the test where they strap on a piece of oak to protect the tail at the high deck angle? Seems the max sink rate tests are pretty dicey, too.

Hey Ron, @Blue on Top, here's a question for you. In another thread someone said that they believed that the stall speed was lower in ground effect. My understanding has always been that the primary effect of a nearby ground plane was to reduce the tip vortices which makes the wing appear as if it had a higher aspect ratio and increases the lift curve slope resulting in a lower AoA required to generate the same lift (with less induced drag). But I never thought about whether it affects stall speed. I guess the question is whether CLmax changes. (Probably an article on ground effect on the offing ) Skip

It sounds like an interesting project. Please keep us posted on your progress. If no one ever tried out their ideas, we would never learn anything. Skip

No, I think I was unclear in my original post and I just wanted to better explain my thinking. I am more concerned about the rapid decay of airspeed, and significant pitch change required in a scary direction (down) near the ground to maintain control after a power loss in a nose high and low airspeed condition, than I am about maximizing altitude by what turns out to be a relatively small amount.

What’s the turnaround time on getting the CD?

Just to be clear: I don’t fly the 201 the same way I flew the draggy Beaver on floats. But, I don’t spend a lot of time at Vx or Vy in the Mooney either. I start the takeoff roll with TO flaps and some back pressure and let the nose start up when it’s ready. After lift off, I reduce the back pressure to hold about 10 deg pitch until clear of obstacles and passing 86 KIAS (Vy) at which point I raise the flaps and lower the nose to about 7.5 deg and accelerate to a Vz climb. I use 2700 rpm and WOT for the entire climb. I’m interested to learn how others do it. Skip

I usually cruise my little IO-360 at peak EGT and max. CHT of about 380 F. I live out in the west and often cruise 10 - 12K feet. Once I get my Surefly working, I expect to get about the same performance slightly LOP. Down low, I often use 2500/24" and 20 F LOP. (Probably 2400/25" would be a better choice). I don't ever think about red boxes: It makes my head hurt. As an engineer (electrical, not mechanical -- but I did take thermodynamics) I find the idea that Lycoming and Continental engineers don't know how to operate their engines offensive. I think both companies have long track records of good engineering -- excepting a few inevitable goofs along the way. As for assertions that we now know more than was known when these engines were designed, I invite anyone with an interest to search the NASA Technical Reports Server for old NACA reports from the 1930's and 40's -- everything that has been stated in the last twenty years about engine operation was researched and understood back then. Especially interesting is NACA-TN-772. At 75% power and below, with CHTs below 400F, I'm convinced that my little Lycoming four banger will live long and prosper. Skip

I used to climb at Vx and then Vy thinking that quickly gaining altitude on takeoff was the safest thing to do. Then I got a job flying seaplanes in Ketchikan and the chief pilot emphasized staying in ground effect and building up speed. He pointed out how quickly the speed would bleed off if the engine quit right after takeoff with the nose high. His favorite saying was, "Always remember the speed of life." I was completely cured of slow climb outs after reading John Deakin's analysis. https://www.advancedpilot.com/articles.php?action=article&articleid=1842 Skip