-
Posts
3,818 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
25
Everything posted by GeeBee
-
You are correct, Lycoming cannot design a valve train TSTA. The H2AD problems were not corrosion problems. I know. I dead sticked 3 of them. The push rods exploded out the tubes, one even went through the cowling. The issue with other Lycoming engines is corrosion.. While a roller cam is not a panacea to corrosion, it is less susceptible. Mercury Marine knows this fact too which is why their premium engines, based on GM blocks are rollers both for corrosion and performance reasons. That all said, IMHO Lycoming is very bad about sticking the customer with parts they knew for a long time were bad. I use the IO-540 rocker arm bushings as an example. They knew for over a year they were bad, but kept shipping them to engine shops. Then they say, "Oh let's make a. SB and an AD. They walk down the hall to their FAA rep and get it done and you get stuck with the bill with absolutely no allowance for labor IF you did not have the engine work done by them.
-
Welcome to General Aviation. Wait until you find out some internal engine part is a POS that has to be replaced, and you have to pay the full bill. (and they wonder why sales and starts are so low.)
-
My field O/H O-320 B2B turned up 173hp on the dyne (rated 160). I also paid 27K for the engine alone. As I said, I am a fan but....quick, good, cheap. Choose two.
-
It does make you wonder how PIA managed to pull it off.
-
Mine too. I don't use them except in freezing temps.
-
Calculated fuel on board versus indicated fuel on board
GeeBee replied to MooneyMark's topic in Modern Mooney Discussion
I've spent many minutes with my hand on the fuel selectors of twin Cessnas and Navajos getting every last drop of fuel out of the aux tanks for max range. The last thing you want to do is have to go back to a tank with a few gallons in it. So the answer is, yes, the fuel pressure will start to wiggle when. the tanks starts to empty. I've never had the engine quit, but I've seen the needle start to wiggle. -
My error. Still I think he would benefit from a roller cam even at 15 hours.
-
Calculated fuel on board versus indicated fuel on board
GeeBee replied to MooneyMark's topic in Modern Mooney Discussion
Point taken, and with Hall effect which is magnetic field disruption, you still have hysteresis both in the field and the circuit. I certainly would agree they are an improvement over resistance sensors. -
First, is terms. Is a field O/H better than a factory zero time? Depends on the tolerances used.. O/H to new tolerances with new factory cylinders? Yes the field O/H is better. I guarantee you that 16K quote is not to new tolerances. Second is how this engine is used. The poster said he flies only 5 hours a month. That means corrosion is a distinct possibility. So a roller cam would be a high priority as it is less susceptible but not entirely free over a traditional cam. He can only get a roller cam with a Factory zero time. Third. At 5 hours per month he is likely to dispose of the airplane before the engine term is up, so resale enters into the equation Fourth. He wants minimal down time. Minimal down time and field overhaul are not synonymous terms. Fifth. Warranty? Remember just a year ago Lycoming had a batch of bad rocker bushings on the IO-540? Now Lycoming gave new bushings to all the people who bought those. But only people who purchased Lycoming zero times were covered for parts and LABOR and labor was 99% of the cost. People who had field O/H were at the mercy of their shops. Sixth. Resale: We have already established this airplane will be sold in the future. Imagine this airplane with an identical cousin being compared by a first time buyer (there are a lot of those on these very pages). He has a "zero time factory engine" and the other has a field to new tolerances by a highly reputable shop. Which airplane will the WIFE pull out the checkbook and write? To the knowledgable purchaser you and I know makes no difference. To the wife with a first time buyer? Simply put the airplane with a factory zero time will move faster. Simply. put, based upon the conditions laid down by the OP, the factory engine is the only way to go.
-
Calculated fuel on board versus indicated fuel on board
GeeBee replied to MooneyMark's topic in Modern Mooney Discussion
Capacitance senders are in general more accurate, but any electrical circuit is subject to hysteresis. Running one tank dry will tell you how far the gauge is off when empty. But what about at say 25 gallons? You need to know you have a "fuel disagreement" before the tank leak has bled dry. -
Depends on how far removed. However I know it is difficult for you to imagine, because you have integrity, honesty and bring professionalism to your shop and you take pride in being a professional. I have seen some pretty wild stuff, like a factory owned service center that pencil whipped a wing bolt exchange 4 years prior. The buyer had the service center do the pre-buy who told him everything was tip-top. A while later at an annual across the country the shop called to say the wing bolts were still factory because the factory inspector's sticker was still on one of the nuts! By that time the previous service manager at the factory shop was gone as was the chief inspector. Just last year a fellow on our field bought a Mooney M20C with "fresh annual". We found more rat's nest than a New York subway tunnel. Turns out the guy who signed off the previous 4 annuals has been in a rest home for the last 5 years. His son opened a shop under a new name and signed off the annual with his newly minted IA certificate to cover for Dad. The names should have been an alarm. If you engage Savvy pre buy they will do the same thing. Seek a shop that has no prior relationship to the airplane or its owners.
-
Because you don't know what their relationship is with the current owner or owners.
-
Calculated fuel on board versus indicated fuel on board
GeeBee replied to MooneyMark's topic in Modern Mooney Discussion
The calculated NEVER wins. It is one merely a confirmation of a known set of facts, IF you have mapped your gauges and lights. The problem is........you never know if you have a leak and if so which side of the flow transducer. If you have a leak before the flow transducer, you'll think your calculated is just fine, but in fact you've lost a bunch of fuel and the low quantity gauges or lights are in fact telling you tragedy is around the corner. Ask Air Transat 236 when they deadsticked an A330 into the Azores how that works. There is always gauge hysteresis on the tank levels and you should have a map of it for each tank. I have mapped mine (it is in the form of an Excel spread sheet) and I know for instance what the gauge should read based upon the calculated flow. If the gauge is significantly less than that of the mapped quantity compared to the flow, you know you have a leak before the transducer. You should know, to the gallon when your low fuel lights come on and you should be able to predict that almost to the minute with the flow meter. Again, if the lights come on early, something is amiss. -
I did not see the difference either until one day returning from KUCY to KGVL. As I was dodging CBs, I was switching back and forth between FIS-B and XM. I do not use either for tactical use, but I do use it strategically. Basically if I cannot see blue sky, I'm not using these products to stay out of the nasty. XM picked up a thick line of TS over CHA much earlier than FIS B and I was able to reroute myself down around Huntsville, where there was a much looser line and back up to north Georgia. As I came up to GVL I could see quite clearly that the XM representation was more accurate. If I lived in the South, the Ohio/MS valley or the OK, TX panhandle I would buy XM in a heartbeat and use both FIS-B and XM looking for the latest update. Out west or up north where things are a little more distinct, slow developing and isolated FIS-B may be enough. In the above mentioned areas, you can spit on the sidewalk and get a TS going. Things develop too fast and make the risk of stumbling into embedded weather to risk less than maximum update rates.
-
I guess I’m out of the cheap b@st@rds club..
GeeBee replied to ragedracer1977's topic in Miscellaneous Aviation Talk
Very nice. I flew a Turbo Q model all over the US years ago. Great airplane, flies solid. I also flew. one of the "Sky King" 310s. -
Make sure who ever you choose has no connection to previous work on the airplane.
-
Quarterly is not often enough
-
You need a GDL 69 https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/p/228
-
Mooneymite is correct. I had the same question when a MSC signed off my annual in the airframe log then signed off the engine and the prop as "100 hour" inspections I inquired to my personal IA. He said what Mooneymite said and he said if you notice I write mine up as "performed 100 hour inspection on engine in conjunction with an annual inspection" on NXXX. I think either by habit or tradition we have mostly seen engines signed off as "annual inspection" but Mooneymite's assertion is absolutely correct. Either way, you're good.
-
I was looking for this. Found it. https://www.kitplanes.com/the-effects-of-ignition-advance-on-cylinder-head-temperature-speed-and-efficiency/ The money line, The gains from varying just the ignition timing are real, but small. Most of the efficiency advantage of EI systems likely comes from a higher energy and longer duration spark that allows LOP mixtures to be ignited reliably at high altitude. Once you can ignite a LOP mixture, subsequently varying the timing only has a small impact.
-
The problem is, this. The manufacturers have raised parts prices so much it is difficult for a rebuilder to replace all the things he wants, and come out ahead after figuring his labor. The last O-320 B2B I had rebuilt was a thing of beauty. Pegged main bearings, flow matched, ported and polished cylinders etc. The reality is, after all was said and done I would have been better off just calling Air Power Inc. and buying a Factory Zero Time engine. Cost would have been the same, and there would have been less down time. A Zero Time will provide the best resale value and it is likely you will sell this airplane before the next engine. You also get the added benefit of a roller cam and lifters. Lycoming is the only folks who can put these into a rebuild. Exchange from Airpower is 37K. Continental is even worse. They raised the prices on parts and lowered the overhaul price of an IO-550 it is impossible for the field shops to come out. A field is about 43, Factory zero is 46 and brand new is only 55! I used to be a big advocate of field overhauls by a good builder, but now unless you really want some boutique items like flow match cylinders, etc I would go with a factory exchange. Quickest way back to the air, best resale.
-
You want to be checking your tire pressures regularly.
-
Looks to be a blast to fly and if it meets your mission needs (2 place, limited baggage, limited IFR) go for it! (Does not have a magneto ignition though, just sayin )
-
Most the problems I am seeing with electronic are mechanical, not electrical. The largest producer of aircraft gasoline powered engines right now is Rotax. Are they using magnetos? Hear of a lot of ignition problems with Rotax? You can continue to defend magneto ignition, invented in the 19th century to run our airplanes in the 21st century. We should demand better because we should be getting better 20 years into the 21st century. So many good things would come out of a hotter and longer spark for the efficiency and longevity of our engines. If I were a cylinder or valve manufacturer, I would be cheering on fixed timing, magneto ignitions.
-
As an FAA friend once said to me. "IF I wanted to retire, I would go to the. small plane air cargo ramp at LAX or MIA and just start in. I could generate enough violations to last a career." I flew for several companies in that time period, and the operation of Part 23 aircraft in daily scheduled operations is a perilous one. The airplanes are not designed for that kind of use and it shows quickly. In the 70's flying jobs were not easy to come by (lots of VietNam vets), multi time was a god send, and a dismissal from a crap operator would be the end of airline dreams. Things were not always as fat as they are now. Back then, you were expected to complete the mission, or they would get someone else very quickly. I worked for on operator who would fire a pilot who shut down engines and could not restart, even if it was a starter failure. You were expected to leave them running, during loading and unloading.