A64Pilot

The whole returning dirty oil to the engine is nonsense. The oil mist / vapor that goes overboard is no different than the oil in the crankcase, it’s not dirtier. Every modern automotive engine I can think of has a separator in its PCV system, because of course you don’t want the engine induction system getting liquid oil into it. Automotive engines haven’t dumped blow by overboard in what maybe 60 years? I’ve seen no difference in oil analysis on engines running separators from ones that don’t. Don’t you think Blackstone etc would have raised a flag years ago if there was? Having said that neither of my current airplanes have them, I’m lazy and cheap, I just clean the oil off once in awhile with mineral spirits. I know some aren’t even allowed to wash their airplanes it seems, if I were that guy I’d probably want one. Some perfectly Airworthy engines blow oil out, some don’t. Wrt pumps are “better” in that they are extremely reliable, and last as long or longer than the engine, but they do pump out an oil mist in their exhaust, it’s not an excessive amount, you don’t have to run a separator but it will increase a greasy belly if you don’t. Oh, wet pumps are bigger and much heavier and more expensive than dry ones.

Ref Wet wings being bad, leaves two choices. Metal tanks which are rare, but do exist or fuel cells. Problem with fuel cells is most are made from the same materials as regular O-rings, perhaps a Viton fuel cell exists, but I’ve never heard of one. If it “eats” O-rings, why won’t it fuel cells? I suspect it will, just will take longer. Then we have a great many composite aircraft, which often have composite fuel tanks. What about them?

Be careful with Lithium battery packs unless they are LifePO4. If you must get a LIPO pack, be sure it has “good” batteries, I forget what they are now but they come in three grades I believe and you want one that’s CE or UL rated, in other words cheap Chinese packs are known to catch fire, good ones much less likely and LifePO4 AKA Lithium Iron etc is very difficult to make burn, Earth-X and many others are LifePO4. To emphasize the post above, there is no such thing as “cold” there is only the absence of heat. It’s like light, you can make a flashlight, but you can’t make anything that projects darkness as darkness doesn’t exist, it’s the absence of light. Ice absorbs heat in the phase change of melting, a vapor cycle air conditioner absorbs heat in the phase change of the liquid refrigerant evaporating, but that heat it absorbed has to be released in order for the cycle to continue, if the heat isn’t dumped outside you will actually heat up the space your trying to cool. Why your house AC is blowing hot air outside, and your refrigerator is heating up the kitchen as it just dumps it removed from inside the fridge into the kitchen.

Mine is an 81 I think and has the upswept tips if that’s what you mean, factory equipped not added. Other than appearance, I’m nearly certain they have no effect, although I’ve heard some say they increase aileron effectiveness. I’ve done a lot of Certification flight testing, it’s not as cut and dried as we want to think, meaning there is some variance from one aircraft to another and frankly pilot technique, if I approach the stall slightly more aggressively, I’ll get a lower number, then those numbers are “corrected” to standard day, and the correction factors aren’t perfect, usually they are conservative, meaning you will get better numbers if your flight condition isn’t corrected. I bet for some reason the aircraft was reflown, a flight test report sent to the FAA and the POH corrected, maybe the cause was an increase in gross weight or something ?

Location too of course Using your example I believe Rejex will last at least a year and WAY less expensive and very easy to apply. It’s lasting 6 months on our cars in Fl and they are taken through the car wash several times a month. I believe the overwhelming majority of the benefits of professionally applied Ceramic coating is the paint “correction” I believe in my day it was called cut n buff or similar.

It’s been a couple of decades ago, but I built a few copies of the M20, it worked OK, nothing great. I believe the Airwolf is really a Walker Air Sep, which is or was the gold standard if yiu are running a Detroit 2 stroke in a boat, without one it’s nasty, anyway if it is a Walker it’s probably the best. I built my own because I could and I’m cheap, plus I had an Airwolf wet vacuum pump, which really is a Pesco. Oh and for I guess nearly the last 70 years or so every automobile has had an oil separator, many looked like a small can and connected to the top of the valve cover, often it was as simple as being full of steel wool or similar, but they worked. I guess since PCV which I think may have been early 70’s? the separator part moved usually inside of the valve cover, but auto engines have had a form of separator for a very long time. Oh, and if you don’t have a “whistle slot or hole in your crankcase vent, it can indeed freeze in cold weather, and if it does you find out when the crankcase seal is blown out and your windshield is covered in oil. I believe you could connect the crankcase vent to the exhaust and that couldn’t freeze, and if done right it could even give a slight negative crankcase pressure, which would be desirable, but as that’s a modification to the TC, I can’t do it without a lot of work and likely $$. I’ve heard one model of Mooney has done this but it needs cleaning regularly to prevent the hole from coking closed?

I find many comments interesting, like the old King stuff isn’t any good. That old stuff is very reliable, easily and cheaply replaced and very repairable. Vacuum instruments have been the standard for more years than any of us have been alive, vacuum systems are reliable if you replace the pump on schedule. And that latest greatest glass will be obsolete in five years and likely won’t be supported in ten, almost all modern electronics use custom IC chips, that once they are no longer available, become unrepairable. Not all of us fly hard IFR anymore, I don’t and don’t “need” glass. Most I see buying it, don’t, they want it because it’s cool, and that’s fine, but most don’t have the need, they desire. What I find interesting is that very often those that say vacuum is unsafe, think nothing of flying old engines well past TBO, and I’ve met many that are spending all their money on “glass” when their engines are old and tired. It all depends on what you desire the airplane for, many would tell you that ALL Mooney’s are nothing more than antiques, like buying a Model A as your daily driver. My J model is an 81, roughly I think about the average age for a Mooney, but that makes it 44 yrs old? That is awfully old for any machine. Most Mooney’s are OLD as most GA single engine pistons are. You really have no idea what that pretty airplane your looking at with its new interior, panel and paint looked like five years ago. Now I’m the first one to advise to buy the airplane you want and not to buy one with the idea your going to make it what yiu want because almost always that’s more expensive, but not every one has the cash. IF you have a good working relationship with an A&P/IA, the place to do the work and are willing to put the time in it, often yiu can save $$$ in restoring an old aircraft. But more and more people like that are building Experimentals now.

I have not done it, but think it wouldn’t be that bad really, nothing compared to dis-mounting the wings. Even supporting things while you did would be hard I think, then you have to have some kind of lifting device to lift the fuselage off of the wings. Takes about an hour to remove the wings on my C-140, what takes the longest is draining the tanks. Two bolts hold tge wing on, then from memory seven for the strut? Two on each end and three for the jury strut.

A Huge number of fasteners.

No Reason is as soon as the engine stops, oil pressure goes away and the pitch goes to min, meaning it may move on you, or not who knows? Besides I didn’t think to try it. Idea was more than anything is if you were at altitude and needed to stretch the glide, a stopped prop has way less drag, but while I didn’t run the numbers I think it’s a fools errand I think because the altitude you will lose accelerating back to best glide is worse than if you just stayed at best glide and I guess pull the prop all the way out, I think. To pull this off for a gear up it’s my thought that you would have to stop the prop at altitude, then modify your pattern to make the runway. I don’t see any way your going to pull it off on final.

I can’t imagine how anyone could pass judgement on something sight unseen. You can inspect a cam for corrosion by pulling a couple of jugs, but even then you can’t be sure My advice is take a competent A&P out to inspect it, you would have to to get a ferry permit anyway. It could be the deal of the Century (unlikely) or it could be a piece of junk (also unlikely in my opinion) Corrosion is what kills airplanes, gear rust is very common and easily dealt with, interior spar and fuselage tubing corrosion, not so much. I’d bet it’s something in between, however it’s very likely to get overly expensive if the plan is to drop it off at a well known and therefore expensive shop, you need an A&P / IA that will “work with you” that is you work under their supervision to the extent of your ability, and you need a good hangar with electricity etc. In short a good bit of sweat equity, assuming the A&P finds it worth doing. ‘In a couple of hours I can get enough of a look to know if it’s got severe corrosion and I’m not a particularly special A&P/IA.

A large portion of Ag plane accidents are from engine failures (They run them WAY past TBO) Anyway most it seems miss the point of intended landing and end up in the trees or fence at the end of the field, Most Turbines auto feather on oil pressure loss and it’s a big reduction in drag. On edit, I’ve climbed to altitude to practice stopping the prop, on my 201 with factory prop, it won’t stop until I bring it real close to stall, and even then it has to be bumped by the starter to get level, often of course flipping past compression and ending up where you started. I gave up on the idea of prop stopping on both engine failures at altitude and forced landing gear up. Any that think it’s a viable practice I encourage them to try at altitude within easy gliding distance of a runway, just in case. Maybe your airplane is different? I don’t think attempting something in an emergency that you haven’t practiced is a good idea myself. Ref it’s only $20K, no it’s a LOT more than $20K by the time you have to pay for engine R&R, tear down, inspection etc. depending on insurance limit it may push into being totaled, so I wanted to if possible save the prop

Sigh, Shock cooling is not a myth, statements like if it was real then shock heating would ruin engines on takeoff etc are non sensical. As is the belief that sudden engine cooling is going to result in sudden engine destruction. There are very few if any limitations that exceedence results in nearly instant damage. Like the avoid 1500 - 2000 RPM at manifold pressures below 15” MP on my J. Some people ignore it saying it’s a myth, thinking I did it a few times and nothing bad happened so it’s not real, but the damage is real, it’s cumulative. Like over revving, or exceeding the redline on cyl head temp, just because the engine didn’t seize doesn’t mean you didn’t cause damage. Ever wonder why some seem to crack cylinder heads and others don’t? Just like dropping gear at max extension speed causes higher wear than if you don’t. In almost all limitations there is no exact point where below it causes no additional wear but above it causes instant damage, even VNE isn’t like that. I know someone that hit VNE with the flaps in T/O position and it didn’t damage anything, does that mean that there is no airspeed limit for flaps in the T/O position? Of course not. Most damage is fatigue induced, and fatigue doesn’t come from one time occurrences. As much as practicable, avoiding operations at the limits and rapid changes will result in longer component life, and that’s true for everything from slamming on the brakes to overheating starters as well as engines

Anything going on? Have the problems stopped? Are they selling fuel still? I would have thought by now I would have heard something, but it seems to have gone away, where I would have thought with time things would have worsened.

Fine wires I think should be good, I’ve never done it but feel sure you can check resistance without pulling the plugs, would of course have to remove the wire, but I’m afraid that’s honestly not it. If you swapped them from another cylinder, and the problem reoccurred in the same cylinder, there is an almost zero chance that’s it’s plugs. If your sure it’s not valves, then the only other likely possibility that jumps out is Injection or ignition, might not hurt to do a flow test and possibly clean that injector, very unlikely I know, but I like to troubleshoot with the free stuff, then the easy stuff before I start spending money myself. If nothing else you eliminate systems. It could be an ignition wire or even cap. If it happens to you again if you can do a mag check looking for increased EGT on the “bad” cylinder, if a plug isn’t firing then of course you won’t get a rise when you turn off that plug in that cylinder but will of course on the others whether the cause be the cap, plug or wire. I’m afraid that testing when it’s running fine won’t show anything, because it’s not “broke” then. Call Lycoming’s help desk, they are very knowledgeable and they don’t cost anything.

They might depends entirely on insured hull value, but if they do I’d love to have it, it would be a cheap and easy fix to resell.

Understood, my main point is to keep looking. However if the reamer is of the right size and the guide is also correctly sized the reamer won’t do anything, it will only remove metal if the guide is undersized, but I understand if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Try this, exchange the plugs with another cylinder, it’s rare but sometimes you just get a “bad” plug, one that fires correctly when hot but not so much when cold, if it’s a bad plug then the problem will move to the other cylinder. This is unlikely, but it costs no money, is easy and does no harm, so eliminate plugs as a possibility. Oh and check the plug resistance when you have them out especially if the are Champion’s, many say resistance doesn’t matter but by definition high resistance resists electrical flow wasting some energy as heat, the result is less current to the electrodes

Yeah I’m sure he was overly stressed and not at the top of his game after prop striking the airplane.

You should still ream them, but do so slowly to keep a smooth finish, they may just be tight, it happens. Ideal world valve guides are honed not reamed, the finish is important. A Sodium filled valve runs cooler, it does so by transferring the heat from the head to the stem better, the stem then transfers the heat to the head of course, but the stem in a sodium filled valve runs hotter than an unfilled one as metal expands with heat, if you run LOP as I do your EGT is higher than ROP which could run a valve slightly hotter. It’s though that Lycomings are more susceptible to sticking valves due to sodium filled valves. Not taking away from LOP, as I said except for high power I run LOP myself. Sticking valves can lead to bad outcomes

I have seen more than one R-1340 that will stick exh valves unless MMO is added to the fuel. Having said that I don’t run any additives in my airplane. Unless things have changed MMO is not approved, but it’s been widely used for decades, probably before I was born. Who formulated it and what it was formulated for is an interesting story. https://marvelmysteryoil.com/pages/our-story I have heard but do not know that’s it has changed ownership and they changed the formulation, I don’t know if any of that is true. It does keep my air tools clean and I think lubricated.

I guess the guy in the video crashed and died right, must have There are limits to everything, I never land beyond the first 1/3 of the runway, usually much less, so I have thousands of feet left. Add power if it’s not smooth and accelerating you’re going to land anyway, if you stall and crash it wasn’t the prop or engine, it was you. Not much can happen to an engine and prop to make the flight controls inoperative. Of course I hope to never land gear up, but concede it could happen to anyone that’s been studied and proven decades ago. However if I almost do and by instinct pull up and add power and she’s accelerating, I’m likely not to chop to idle and let it settle onto the runway. I like to think I’d drop gear and land in the last 1/3, but who knows maybe I would go around Face it, that wasn’t planned, nobody thinks that fast, instinct got him away from the runway and yes he made the decision to continue. I think it likely that he was one in a hundred anyway, I think it’s very unlikely for my reactions to be so fast that I could pull that off, I bet 99 out of 100 people are sliding down the runway prop stopped wondering what happened

I disagree for many reasons, but it all depends on condition and price and we can’t tell any of that on the internet, sure worth a look I think 1. Compression is no big deal, worst case it needs cylinders, my bet is it won’t, but use it as a bargaining point on price, can even be a good thing, because you might get a good deal and odds are they will be fine with some flying, a borescope will tell the tale. 2. Low hours flown, usually low time airplanes sell for more, but the add for me is always hangared, many airplanes aren’t and I believe sitting outside in the Wx is a killer. 3. Prop strike is another not a big deal, actually I think it’s a value add, because he now has an engine that has been overhauled, but prop strike inspections often add years and hundreds of hours to the life of an engine due to all the wear parts that are replaced. Old Avionics? From 98? For most of us that’s not old, but the potential buyer has said he wants to pick his Avionics anyway so no big deal Finally how many 98 Model Mooney’s are for sale? Depending on condition and price this could be a heck of a buy, the interior and paint for instance if truly always hangared ought to be pretty close to pristine. I’d take nearly pristine factory paint myself over even a new paint job because paint stripper is hard on the airframe.

You have had some good answers already. I’ll tell you what I do on most Annuals now, but of course this is what I do, I’m not saying it’s what should be done by others, but I believe each aircraft and the conditions and frequency it’s operated and stored in should be taken into consideration. Realize my Annuals I do are for older Retired guys with Champs, Cubs and the like, not fire breathing twin turbo complex aircraft that fly in the flight levels and fly hundreds of hours a year, none fly 100. They also almost never spend a night outside or in the rain. The problem as I see it is there is an attempt to cover every aircraft flown in every environment under every condition with one yearly inspection, then add in the most conservative response is to do it and we see why wheels are pulled on aircraft that fly less than 50 hours a year and have never been rained on. The FAA relies and gives mechanics the ability to use their experience to adjust the scope of an inspection, but not the frequency. I jack up the wheel, check for radial and axial play, spin it, check for noise and smoothness, in my opinion I have inspected the bearings. Fuel injectors, comply with the AD of course, check for condition and security, leaks and if operation is normal I don’t remove them. I do clean, inspect and repack bearings if the wheels are removed like for example tire replacements. If aircraft wheels were sealed as well as automobiles are then we could not bother but they aren’t, if water ever gets to the axle for example, they need to be repacked. I do check engine oil filters / screens and we usually change the oil, but if it was changed last month and 5 hours ago I recommend we don’t. Compression test, borescope, check / adjust timing. Rarely bead blast plugs, I’m of the dig the carbon / lead out and don’t blast myself. I do check resistance. Condition and security of everything else. I do require checking of all flight and engine control ends as in every bell crank pulley etc, run a Cossosion-X soaked rag over every inch of control cables looking for meat hooks, pulleys for wear / play etc. Gascolators are just too easy not to do, and occasionally I find evidence of deteriorating fuel lines, looks like black granular bits. I think that’s often what clogs injectors (opinion) Owner does all of the manual work, cleaning, and usually if we have to pull mags etc they do so under my supervision, now not all are at the level I’m comfortable with, for those I do the technical stuff myself. For that I charge $300 and I approach Annuals as a teaching event for the owner. Not that I want or expect them to do more than they should unsupervised but I think it helps understand how things work if you took it apart and put it back together yourself. Those that own and fly twin Comanche’s, Bonanza’s and the like there are local Professional shops that usually specialize in a Type that I recommend for them.

I’ve said that so many times here for many to decry that I don’t know what I’m talking about etc that I’ve stopped. An Annual is not a maintenance activity or servicing, it’s an Inspection activity, it’s in the name. Sure there can be excellent pre-buys, however there is no definition of a pre-buy, as far as the FAA is concerned there is no such thing. There is no list of things that must be inspected. A Pre-buy can be a pre-flight or a nearly complete tear down, if you insist on a Pre-buy for God’s sake have a written contract where every inspection you want performed is listed and signed off with results noted. I won’t perform a Pre-buy myself without the purchaser participating, but I’m Retired and not having to make a living turning wrenches. However the Annual is defined, it has a min performance requirement etc. Any IA that’s not a fool treats an Annual seriously as their Professional License is on the line, pre-buy they may have the new kid do because they are busy and the purchaser wants it done now, who knows? Any decent mechanic if conducting a pre buy can tell you on day one if you ought to give this airplane a pass or it’s most probably a good one. If they say it’s most likely a good one, then in my opinion you turn that pre-buy into an Annual, which of course takes an IA. If they tell you they keep running into sloppy maintenance and unairworthy items, then let it pass. Ideally you want the person who you intend to care for the airplane to conduct the pre-buy / Annual. That way they have skin in the game. There have been many posts in this forum that I have read that talk about the serious issues found on the first Annual, that were missed on the pre-buy. Most mechanics take an Annual more seriously, because it’s legally defined and has a list of items that must be inspected. They can get into trouble with an Annual, but not a pre-buy. I’m not sure why but apparently an annual for many people has turned into a major maintenance activity where there is a lot of services performed, instead of the inspection activity it’s supposed to be, maybe it’s to increase revenue, or more likely it’s because the owner wants to get all that over with at one time, rather than performing such servicing themselves as preventative maintenance. Most pilots I guess will not even change oil, some shouldn’t.

This, So far as worrying about pulling jugs, it’s been done frequently for way over 60 years, a qualified knowledgeable mechanic won’t screw up, plus you have new jugs, so it’s pull one, replace it. Sure someone who isn’t can cause problems, so use a good engine shop or be darn sure the A&P is good, don’t go to someone your not sure about. The problem comes when the jugs are off, without the studs being retorqued and the aircraft sits for quite awhile while the jugs are being overhauled etc and someone moves the prop. Or possibly an unknowing mechanic rotates the engine with cylinders off to position it to remove pistons on the other cylinders. Simply relaxing the torque and retorqueing without turning the prop won’t cause any issues, the bearings won’t move unless the crank is turned. I would however have a good engine shop rework the valves and possibly guides though, maybe even port and polish them. I’d call Gann Aviation and ask if he would. Conti was notorious for sloppy valve guides as in very poor finish, don’t know if that’s old news or not, maybe they fixed that long ago. So far as treating just the offending cylinder, it works for some, but also some end up spending way more money in the long run and buying lots more down time having the airplane in the shop to replace the next jug that goes bad, the one after that etc. Sure sometimes a jug goes bad and the other 5 are pristine, but more often I think one goes bad and the rest are not too far behind, if you flew infrequently and not that many hours per year, maybe one at a time is the way, but if you fly a lot and don’t want to eat down time, I think removing cylinders as a problem for several years may be a better bet.