A64Pilot

Failure to get flight following in a busy environment is about as common as being told to remain outside of the Class B. From a safety perspective you should always file IFR, I rarely do anymore myself, but should.

A friend had an engine failure in a Kit Fox and put it in a Soy Bean field. Pretty much as soon as the mains touched the beans grabbed them and put it on its back. ‘I went with him to the FSDO. He went to show the inspector that Rotax (two stroke) in its operating manual said something to the effect that engine seizure is to be expected, which sort of makes engine failure a normal operating condition

He apparently has the skill set and tooling, I and every other A&P I know, do not. Not to say some don’t of course, but I’d be careful letting an A&P do it. While I won’t do a single mag either as I don’t have the knowledge, many A&P’s do, but it’s my understanding that the single mag is a whole different thing.

Stress relieving, best done in an oven at if memory serves around 800F, but it can be done via an acetylene torch. it’s done to relax the stresses that welding build in from uneven heating and cooling, it’s to help prevent cracking. But it’s pretty common and well known for 4130 as that’s a very common steel. ‘We used to stress relieve our engine mounts, landing gear, shock mount attach points and a couple of other highly stressed items. Some will call it normalizing, which it’s not really, but if the steel were heat treated, it will normalize it. Googling stress relieving 4130 tubing or similar ought to get some good links. Its not hard to do or ought not be expensive to have done.

Can the tubes not just be replaced by a good welder?

A landing light etc will suffice, it’s not rocket science, close is good enough. Just err to the conservative side, if it’s close, buy a new battery, if your alt fails IFR you’ll be glad you did. If you decide to try to be accurate, remember it’s the amp draw that your trying to keep constant, and unfortunately as voltage changes, amps change so that your going to need a variable load to maintain constant amps, and make constant adjustments to the load, or buy an expensive one that is automatic Battery cap check is a required annual inspection, one that is almost never done, but if you fly IFR, it’s important. A batteries capacity and it’s ability to start an engine often aren’t related surprisingly, only way to be sure your battery has enough power to get you down IFR is to perform a cap check. Interesting to me is only one battery comes from the factory not legally requiring a capacity check and that’s a Concorde, every Concorde battery is capacity checked prior to being shipped, all others legally are required a capacity check prior to being placed into service. Anyone ever seen that done? Load banks don’t have to be complicated or expensive, this is one I used for Aircraft Certification test flights, it’s eight 600W landing lights that we put in the hopper of an Ag plane to load the Starter / generator to max output. Put out so much heat, had to have the hopper filled with water.

Your certain that no plug wire is crossed on the new mag? It sure sounds like it.

The GE H series engine is the one I Certified in an aircraft and have a lot of experience with, it’s really just a Walter with a good compressor, the rest of the engine is the same, but it greatly improved the hot and high performance of a Walter. ‘GE has been for a few years building it’s big brother, it will still be manufactured in Czech, but it’s a pretty clean sheet design, it’s meant for the Cessna Denali. ‘One neat thing about the new GE engine is that quite a lot of it is 3D printed. ‘New engine is the Catalyst. I retired four years ago and expected it by now, so I don’t know where it is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_Catalyst

Most engines bleed valve close on the ground at well less than 100%, usually mid 80’s Ng to maybe low 90’s Ng ‘I know of no engine this isn’t true, especially a PT-6, the bleed valve exists for acceleration from low RPM, but is fully closed way before takeoff power at seal level Google PT-6 coke bottle test. it’s the ground test where you determine RPM that the bleed valve is fully closed. http://blog.covingtonaircraft.com/2015/08/11/pt6a-engine-maintenance-basic-stuff-compressor-bleed-off-valve/

The Iranian F-14’s were disabled by outgoing contractors as the left, but the Afghanistan aircraft were left for the Afghan government, or actually just left ‘I’d wager that the Taliban are among the best equipped military in the region, they won BIG

Yes, but it’s not a 500 HP engine at those altitudes, and it’s actually more of an airframe loss of drag that makes the aircraft efficient more than any increase in engine efficiency ‘For example the TBM 850 or whatever with its -66 Pratt is an 850 HP engine, gearbox limited ‘But the -67F meant for large crop dusters has the same engine “core” but it’s a 1700 HP engine, the difference is of course altitude, the -F model engine at altitude due to its larger gearbox meant to hold 1700 HP won’t make quite as much power as the -66 in the TBM at altitude. So that’s largely the point, size an engines “core” to operate at the altitude the aircraft is meant to and your will gain a lot of efficiency that way. P&W Canada for example has a line of Ag engines meant specifically for the Crop Dusters, so they have relatively large gearboxes and small cores, so they actually follow HP production pretty close to what a NA piston does, meaning they do well at seal level, but are dogs in the flight levels. The “altitude” turbines are not much more than simply derating an engine, if for example you fly the TBM low, it’s eats fuel like it was free, because the core is at about 50% output. Or said another way, the closer to full output you operate a turbine. the more efficient the engine becomes, largely due to the hotter its running. Raising the ITT limit with improved cooling, single growth crystal blades and ceramic coating is so that you can run them hotter, hotter means both more power and less fuel consumption. Add in multiple stage compressor turbines ($$$) and variable inlet guide vanes (more $$$) and you get quite efficient, probably way more than GA could possibly justify, so unless the taxpayer funds it through the DOD, it’s not likely to happen This explains a lot of it https://www.americanscientist.org/article/each-blade-a-single-crystal

Obviously be darn sure no kind of petroleum gets anywhere near any fittings etc. I’m so paranoid I’d only use O2 leak detection fluid as I’ve heard that some soaps may even have a little oil in them. Probably not, but why chance it? I even clean off any tool I use with alcohol first.

I’m retired military and used to go to the Jax naval hospital, they did my first and last basic med for me, since I’ve moved not sure who I will use next, but basic med seems, well pretty basic to me, which I agree with as I see no more danger to the public with me in a truck at highway speeds than an aluminum can at altitude. Just the CPAP nonsense was a PIA for my class 2, I can’t imagine what a real special issuance would be like, I have a friend that was a Pancreatic cancer survivor, apparently no one survives that, so every year when he finishes a medical. he starts on the next one, gathering whatever the FAA wants that I guess differs from year to year, add to that he’s old so I’m sure that doesn’t help.

It’s not really, turbines are relatively inefficient at part power, so if sized and designed for the mission they do relatively well. But you can’t expect a 500 HP turbine to develop 250 HP efficiently, it won’t. The difference in fuel cost also negates a lot of the increased burn It’s entirely possible to design an efficient turbine that will operate a Mooney at lower then the flight levels and do so efficiently. The materials exist now to do it, even the lowly PT-6 now uses single growth crystal compressor turbine blades, the secret to efficiency is an efficient compressor and very high operating temps, we can do both now, it just takes $$$, and the GA market simply doesn't support that kind of expense

The Allison 250 was actually a Detroit Diesel built engine circa 1959 or so for the US Army to power a light observation aircraft. ‘It’s a simple ancient design that wasn’t overly concerned with fuel consumption, and of course ended up primarily powering mostly light helicopters like the OH-6 and OH-58. We have come a long way since then with turbine design and especially materials The VLJ market exists in my opinion because the DOD funded development of a small turbine to power a cruise missile, it took tax payer money to get there, but that’s always been the case. I don’t believe anyone will spend the $$ to develop a modern small turbo shaft engine, unless hopefully the DOD decides it needs or wants one for a small drone or something. If that happens, then maybe we will get a small, modern, efficient turbo shaft for little airplanes. The capability of greatly decreasing fuel consumption via a modern design exists. When I worked at the Army test activity, they had put a T-800 engine in a Huey just to put time on the engine I guess, but the thing we pilots never thought about was that when they did the old Hubert went from a 2 plus hour endurance to an almost 6 hour endurance, the decrease in fuel consumption from the old Lycoming 1950’s T-53 to the modern T-800 was amazing. The T-800 was meant for the Comanche. which was never built as after the fall of the Soviet Union, it was determined that we had no need for a super expensive aircraft to operate in an environment that no longer existed. that was a very efficient air defense which the Soviet’s had. I don’t know what happened to the T-800.

I no longer fly for a living, so I just do basic med. Unless rules change, I plan on staying that way

That’s the way it used to be, the AME who was a friend and who you have gone for years would look at you and tell you not to take your Medical now or advise you maybe to not take one period. Now there is paperwork filled out and submitted before hand and the AME can’t take your application and throw it in the trash like they used to could have, or so I have been told. A good friend who used to be my AME also advised to never have your regular Dr be your AME, he wasn’t telling me to hide things, but I got the impression that only answering questions asked might be a good idea. So fast forward a few years, new AME told me one flight physical that he was going to write an order to have me take a sleep study as my age combined with my body mass may mean I need a CPAP. I laughed and told him I had been using a CPAP for a couple of years, he got upset and asked me why I hadn’t informed him. I answered that I assumed if the FAA had considered it important then it would have been one of those couple of dozen questions you have to answer. ‘I don’t think he was pleased, from then on I had to go through a bunch of crap every year ref the CPAP to keep my Class2. But honestly, if they wanted to know, why didn’t they ask?

Be careful if you choose to try beta in flight, I have had a prop inadvertently go into Beta when I went I went to idle on downwind, what happened was it began to Autorotate, overspeed, prop governor suddenly caught it with a bang, then let go of course as RPM dropped within limits and prop began to autorotate again, I added throttle and it stopped. Prop min pitch was set too fine, you can adjust a turbines prop min pitch to fine tune descent and this one was set too fine.

Depends on the aircraft, the Pilates Porter is Certified for Beta use inflight, normal pilot won’t carry Beta to short final, this guy doesn’t for example, but I have seen it done one by the French Military at an Airshow in Dax France, it’s incredibly impressive. There are many Videos of a Porter descending pretty much vertical with sky divers, of course they have to be in Beta to descend as slow as a skydiver. It’s not uncommon for the Porter to beat them to the ground. Its not uncommon for Crop Dusters to use Beta on short final. but they shouldn’t, they have not been yet flown and Certified to do so. It’s very possible for Beta to block airflow over the tail, and if that happens of course the result is an immediate dive, if your close to the ground, we’ll, that’s bad.

Fuel wise, I log fuel burned from each tank on my knee board when I switch tanks, I usually burn 2/3 from a tank and switch, I plan to switch once in a flight. Do not rely on those gauges and or low fuel lights, I promise you if you do one day they will let you down. In cave diving we have a rule of thirds, it means you breathe no more then 1/3 of your gas on the way in, leaving 1/3 for the way out and 1/3 reserve. I follow the rule of thirds flying too, meaning I don’t plan on burning more than 2/3’s of my fuel, not saying I never do, unforcasted winds, ATC reroutes etc happen, but if you follow the rule of thirds, gas won’t be a stressor.

The catch with a class medical is of course if you ever fail one, which obviously becomes more and more likely with age. If rules don’t change, I intend to fly with basic med until insurence will no longer accept that, then self insure.

Mine is a “performance motor” It was done by the PO and years ago, but other than maybe porting and polishing I’m not sure there is much else that can be done. I believe he balances all motors to less than one gram. Best to call and ask. ‘Depending on the engine design, there is a whole lot that porting especially the intake can add power wise, but usually your just cleaning up casting flashing etc. on a stock motor

Once you get slow, the additional drag from gear has much less of an effect, my over the fence speed as I’m often landing on shorter field s is 65 to 70 kts, and I don’t think gear makes much difference when your that slow. I make gear the first thing I do, it’s my opinion if you delay it to where your doing other things it could get lost in the mess so to speak. I don’t bother with fuel to the fullest tank as I think it silly. Ones at 1/2 the other 3/4, you really think it matters? I’m too old to push fuel anymore, I just don’t do it, less stress. We have all or will all do stupid things, it’s called SLOG, or sudden loss of judgement. It’s the only explanation why for example someone always takes the same route to work for the last ten years and always stops at the stop sign, but for some reason today they run it. How else can you explain that? But it happens. Best defense against SLOG is a second person backing you up, and if that’s not available, rigid adherence to a checklist

I’m 5’10” and fat, and sit all the way forward, it’s not easy, but not real difficult either, primarily I’m looking for green. I’d velcro a small mirror to the center console if I had to, coming from a high wing that you could see the gear, I want some kind of visual confirmation, velcro just to hold it, I assume you would have to pull it off to use it. That and right after buying mine, the gear would not come down 1 out of 10 tries, ended up being the gear switch, but sometimes it’s possible for you to put that switch down and the gear don’t move.

Ferry wise, for the crop duster we made the 500 gl chemical hopper a ferry tank, you always ran off of the hopper prior to going feet wet to make sure it and the selector worked, then transferred to wing tanks after confirming the hopper tank worked, flew for four hours and leaving an hour or so of fuel in the wings selected the hopper tank. and prior to letting down out of altitude, after arriving at destination, you switched back to the wings. So only one switch over water, but most ferry tank fuel systems have a transfer pump to transfer fuel into the factory fuel tanks, so no selecting is done, just have to remember to turn the transfer pump off, of your pumping fuel out of the vent when the wing tanks get full.