A64Pilot

Issue as I see it for any Mooney if insured for less than $100K give or take is that if God forbid you gear up, you may well lose the aircraft. Now I’m not sure about the 100K number it’s a guess, but say if you’re insured for 75, I bet you’re getting a check for 75 and them hauling your airplane away on a truck.. Reason is say they could fix it for 65, they will be out less money if they give you 75 and sell the airplane at Auction than if they fixed it for 65. Those are made up numbers because I don’t have real ones, but you get the point. I’m currently 100 but most likely will go to 125 myself just for that reason, it’s simply that things cost more than even a few years ago.

This has me wondering why the FAA hasn’t pulled the STC? I’m not saying the fuel has caused anything, but it would seem that there is enough data to support an investigation, and the most conservative response safety wise would be to halt the sale until an investigation clears it?

What’s your background to make that statement? Mine is being responsible for the care and feeding of 24 AH-64A aircraft in Korea, 3-6 Cav. Our mission was overwater as in repelling a possible seaborne attack from N Korea, as such we often flew over the Yellow Sea which is of course salt water at low level, so we were covered in salt spray, yes we washed the aircraft and flushed engines immediately on return. You won’t I believe ever see a Naval Apache, one was tested decades ago back as far as 1984, reason isn’t it’s capability, it’s because in its design that Hughes Helicopter put zero emphasis on corrosion prevention, they just had no experience in sea borne aircraft, the Magnesium gear boxes were the worst. We spent millions a year due to corrosion on the 3-6 Cav ones and to a lesser extent on the 1/3 Aviation ones stationed at Savannah Ga. Anyway several different preventative compounds were tested and Corrosion-X was easiest to apply, had the least negative effects and worked the best. As much as I believe my Army experience was good, it’s the Navy that literally wrote the book on Corrosion prevention, they have an advantage as their aircraft from the design phase are heavily influenced by corrosion prevention, but having fleets of aircraft tied down on Carriers and regularly soaked by sea water has to be the worst possible case. I believe the US Navy knows more about Corrosion in aircraft materials than anyone, by a large margin. They use Corrosion -X heavily and I’m sure are an important test bed, Corrosion-X is the only product readily available to us Civilians that meets the Navy spec. https://www.corrosionx.com/pages/aviation

I was speaking about its anti corrosive performance.

It really isn’t that the Women can’t keep up, it’s their effect on the men. Put 17 men in a GP Medium tent and one Woman, how does she get dressed, how can any of us clean ourselves? Just even not being to lay there sweating in the desert heat in your skivvies is a total pain, it is literally like 130F in the heat of the day. Do we put her in her own tent, a GP small? Who carry’s it, who puts it up and takes it down, what equipment is left behind so we can carry it? In the first Gulf war a UH-60 was shot down, Rhonda Cornam jumped into a UH-60 to go assist (she was a flight surgeon) of course it too was shot down by the same ADA that got the first 60. Now she was very well liked and she was as tough as nails, but being that a female was shot down she had to be rescued, it’s just the male mentality, it wasn’t her fault, but several died in the rescue attempt, one that it’s unlikely that would have been launched if she was a he. Everyone knew how a US Woman would be treated by the Iraqi’s and yes it happened, but knowing that the men in her unit launched a rescue attempt that shouldn’t have been tried.

CVR question I believe is more of how old was it than the forces at impact, old ones often don’t work and the old tape and or wire recorders aren’t as robust as the newer solid state ones. ‘If there is still paint on it, it didn’t get that hot. Lear 55 is an old aircraft?

I believe that there was a CG shift, but what was more of the cause of the crash was the MRAP vehicle took out the elevator jack screw taking I think the stabalitor into full or near full up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Airlines_Flight_102

Easy, search aircraft values with an XA registration vs ones with an N registration. IF it was a maintenance induced crash, mechanic competence comes into question more than pilot.

Aerospace Defense Coatings in Ga. I think maybe Macon did our Cad Plating. They are good and decently quick too, we used to Cad plate but stopped when we bought Thrush due to concerns of being fined. They also do small jobs, I sent all my common hardware from my IO-540 when I overhauled it and they cad plated the nuts, bolts, washers etc. Aircraft oil is low in TBN I believe because of being ashless, ZDDP would be excellent for our oils cam wise, TBN etc. it was forever THE additive in Auto’s, unfortunately it’s not ashless so it can’t be used in aircraft, and cars dropped it because it ruins O2 sensors and Cats, which is I believe the real reason we went to unleaded fuel years ago, because the lead made emissions controls not possible. Sure lead is bad, but yiu simply can’t have emission controls and leaded fuel so lead had to go. Yes rollers do decrease friction some but not by much, but every little bit helps, even controlling oil flow so only what’s needed is provided helps. CAFE is dead, it died long ago when SUV’s and PU trucks became exempt. I miss it and think it should come back, because it was why there were so many small inexpensive cars in times past because they bumped CAFE, manufacturers don’t want to build small inexpensive cars. more profit in $100K SUV’s so now that they don’t have to anymore they don’t. Many people can’t afford $100K SUV’s they need small inexpensive cars. The Pentastar is used in everything Chrysler and they eat cams and followers, have been too, there have been several redesigns and they still eat cams. Search Pentastar cam follower problems this is just one of many hits including many Youtube. I don’t think it’s lifter pressure, the Pentastar is weird, it has a two stage oil pump, pressure jumps from about 60 to above 90 PSI at 3500 RPM, something I have never seen before. https://tuningpro.co/fca-pentastar-engine-recalls/ Quote: A chain-driven, vane-type variable displacement oil pump adjusts the flow rate and pressure as commanded by the engine management system, which uses a solenoid to drive the pump into low or high pressure mode. For example, below 3,500 rpm, the pump conserves energy by using low pressure; at speeds over 3,500 rpm, the pump switches to high pressure. A force balance mechanism inside the oil pump adjusts the size of the pumping chambers to alter oil flow. If the oil is cold, the pump reduces the size of the internal chambers. When the oil is hot and thinner, more oil is needed, and a spring increases the size of the pump chambers. This also saves energy. The pump is driven at a 1:1 drive ratio; its location under the block is more efficient than an on-crankshaft location. An internal, mechanical ball-and-spring relief valve dumps oil into the sump when needed, for conditions such as a cold start with high engine speed. Both pump and pressure regulation solenoid are non-serviceable.

In a case like this where it’s not a complex mod using the abandoned STC it shouldn’t be difficult to get a field approval.

Also look for Corrosion-X, my opinion is it’s better and I think more widely done

Probably not so much with aircraft, but modern Auto oil is very different now, lots of high pressure lube additives and acid neutralizing additives missing as it poisons sensors and Cats etc For that reason decades ago I switched to Diesel oil in every non aircraft engine I own, but in the last few years Diesel oil is also losing its additives as they now run exhaust particulate filters etc. My Jeep engine, the V6 Pentastar is infamous for cam follower spalling for instance. Next oil change I think I’m going with 5W-40 Rotella T6 in it. Auto manufacturers went to roller cams etc years ago primarily due to cam spalling etc., I mean decades ago. My Wife inherited a 1923 Model-T recently, it had sat in a non running state missing ignition coils etc since I think the 60’s. I did have to pop the head and clean out the cooling passages and replaced the valves when I was there, but there was no rust in the cylinders or anywhere other than the water jackets, it even has the original cast iron pistons. Carb was a mess with incorrect parts etc. but it runs like a sewing machine now, leaks but burns no oil etc. I personally believe some of it is because many of the old processes like Cadmium plating for instance or Alodine, zinc chromate , is no longer available due to environmental concerns. We used to Cad plate our spar caps at Thrush, before I left they had gone to pre-coat, which can’t be as good.

Think if the thing had fallen off, taking out a family in a car or something, or the bad press even if it didn’t hit anything, this was I think the best outcome

The whole Diesel thing just doesn’t make sense to me, it’s actually pretty easy to build a gasoline engine burning auto fuel that makes WAY more power than 200 HP. The secret is in a Modern four valve head and combustion chamber, sure that takes liquid cooled heads, but even Rotax can do that, it’s not hard. Dodge has an engine that makes over 1,000 HP on E-85, and it even passes emissions. I bet lunch you could easily make our 200 HP Lycomings run just fine on E-85, Lycoming has an IO-540 Certified and running in Brazil on pure Ethanol, has for years. Fuel burn would go up with E-85, how much? Maybe not a whole lot who knows? My guess is the way to go might be build an Experimental engine that once well proven etc then you Certify it.

That is correct, I was speaking if you had a 20 degree coupling and wished to bump timing by 5 degrees for better LOP performance. Then your firing 5 before TDC, is that enough to hurt anything? I don’t know. So why don’t cars have to retard timing for starting? Is it because of the mechanical advance is retarded at starting RPM? Old points type ignition. You do retard our Model T

They also named it, usually it was just called Economy cruise. The P-38 manual has a procedure where you established cruise power, turned off the electric props making them fixed pitch then slowly leaned it out until you got an RPM drop, not sure but I think it might have been 25 RPM, after leaning it out you turned the props back on. Many think that Lindbergh taught 38 drivers in the Pacific how to run LOP but he didn’t, LOP was in the POH. What he taught was low RPM / high manifold pressure to get the same power as higher RPM cruise. Lindbergh flew about 50 Combat Missions and shot down at least 1 Japanese aircraft, as a Civilian, higher echelon wasn’t pleased and the unit Commander was I think maybe relieved of duty maybe? Most aircraft types would just lean it out until it got rough then advance just enough to run well, most Radials will run smoothly WAY LOP because they have identical intakes and the Supercharged ones especially had very evenly atomized fuel mixture after going through the Supercharger. It really wasn’t in most cases until the adoption of fuel injection that flat motors could run LOP, procedure was essentially run them as lean as they would run smooth which often was real close to peak, way I was taught anyway.

When I was a Sgt I had an old E-4 working for me, his story was he was RIFed out of the USMC as a Major, but he had a couple more years to go before he could Retire. I don’t know what they have now, things change. For example when I Retired I had NO GI bill, When I was in it was don’t make 20, get nothing.

I get it when I clink on the saved link, but don’t when I type it in

Thank you

But will it drive a 696? I think it will as I believe basically all that’s needed is a twisted pair as it may be NMEA protocol and I guess that’s the real question, is the output from the 50 what a 696 needs? I was wrong about the plug, it seems the 50 uses a standard 15 pin serial port where I think the 31 is some kind of flat plug, but plugs aren’t difficult as I think only four wires are needed. Thank you for your response by the way. I’m also thinking just buy a sentry mini for $400 to drive the Ipad and the 39 continues to drive the 696

My GDL-39 is dying, It’s hardwired to my panel mounted 696 and Bluetooth to my Ipad running Foreflight. The Bluetooth part is dead, the hardwire still feeds the 696. I think I can buy a GDL-50 and it uses the same wiring as the 39? But can’t find out, if it does then it’s an easy replacement for the 39, but it’s $850. Wing-X is free for me because they give it away to the military, I know it’s nothing compared to Foreflight, but it’s all I need so I’m thinking get a receiver that will work for Wing-X probably save some money over the GDL-50 and save the yearly Foreflight subscription, plus the 39 works with the 696 still, both are obsolete, but work. A problem is the only list I can find for Wing-X receivers is from 2013, Garmin won’t play with Wing-X so I’d need a non Garmin receiver to run Wing-X 1. First question is does anyone have a semi current list of Wing-X compatible receivers? 2. Second question does anyone know if a GDL-50 is a drop in replacement cable wise for the 39? I’m pretty sure the plug is the same but have no idea if the wiring is The cable is sold as a 39 / 50 cable indicating it’s the same

I’ve seen lots of fuel leaks, recently my fuel strainer, it was leaking apparently for quite awhile, very dark blue stains. I’ve seen brown stains from Mogas, but never seen anything but blue from 100LL myself. Cant see it real well but the photo is the wing on my C-140, the two holes in the fuel cap are the only fuel tank vent so of course if the tank is full, fuel is sucked out onto the wing, Auto fuel leaves a brown stain, but even if left for months it cleans off easily. I guess I must have cleaned it off some time ago, it’s not as bad as I remember

Interesting, that’s for the update

Flame front movement is slower LOP than it is ROP, some of the old big radials had a timing switch that would increase timing when you ran the engine LOP when you used the switch, yes even way back then LOP was known and very widely used. So increasing timing when LOP is in effect not increasing timing, but correcting for the slower flame front and putting it back to where it should be. One reason for lower CHT’s when LOP is from essentially reduced timing. This from this link https://enginehistory.org/Operations/R-4360Ops/r-4360ops1.shtml 5. Manual leaning and the use of spark advance enhanced the range capabilities of the aircraft because of improved specific fuel consumption. By carefully maintaining recommended cylinder head and carburetor air temperatures with stable turbo supercharger operations, charge density could be held at an efficient value. Since flame speed is typically reduced at leaner fuel air ratios below approximately 0.077, advancing the magneto/engine timing from 20° to 30° spark advance maintained peak cylinder pressure at the most effective 15° after top dead center position. This combination, manual leaning and spark advance also lowered exhaust gas temperatures, which favored longer valve exhaust, system and turbo supercharger life. Last but not least cowl flap openings could be reduced because the engine ran cooler. The issue with bumping timing isn’t that it causes any issue at LOP, it’s that it runs hotter, engine life is therefore shortened etc when run at high power ROP, like in T/O and climb etc. So you are improving LOP performance slightly, at the expense of engine longevity if Lycoming is to be believed. This is in the SI linked to above. Ideally we need manually adjustable timing like was done in some of the old radials, but while the fuel burn difference was significant when you had over 16,000 cu in of engines I’m not sure it’s that big when you have only 360. But yes as just a general statement advancing timing increase efficiency and power output, way back I think in 1930’s Buick was the first to fit Vacuum advance because at low power an engine could tolerate it and it significantly improved fuel efficiency and of course being vacuum operated it automatically pulled timing at higher MP’s to prevent overheating and detonation. Modern cars of course use knock sensors and run much closer to detonation and of course more efficiently too, but they on average rarely produce full power and when they do it’s for very limited duration

I guess we could argue that. Once you change a data plate usually there has to be a method as in SI, STC, Custom kit etc to change it back. Truthfully as long as you could get a data plate I doubt anyone would care, Data plates are usually closely guarded by manufacturers.