A64Pilot

When I worked at the test activity, we had a Blackhawk outfitted with a “BAT” seeker. the Blackhawk woud fly the BAT’s profile for testing. As an AH-64 driver I wasn’t part of the test, but I believe they were developing software for the dual mode seeker. https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/atacms-bat.htm ‘I don’t know if the BAT was ever fielded or not, but the BlackHawk guys got to do some fun flying.

Powder coat isn’t any harder to remove than a good quality two part paint, thankfully it is harder to remove than paint from a rattle can. ‘As I said at least two aircraft manufacturers who’s entire airframes are 4130 tube have been powder coated with FAA approval for two decades or so, with no problems. I’ve seen Maules that were on floats in the Bahamas stripped for new fabric, the ones powder coated are fine, the painted ones usually have several severely corroded tubes and many will need replacing. ‘After seeing a few of those, I decided to have the Thrush airframes, engine mounts, landing gear etc powder coated, because Ag aircraft operate in an extremely corrosive environment, and quite frankly paint just isn’t as good as it used to be with all the concerns with VOC’s etc. ‘If the above question about tubes internally coated was asking about Thrush, yes. ‘The process begins by drilling and tapping all four engine mount attachments, plug three and connect shop air to the fourth and pressurize the airframe with shop air (120PSI) then using soapy water look for any leaks at the welds and repair any that there are, then using all four drilled points. fill the entire fuselage with heated boiled linseed oil, and raise it by the tail to the ceiling and drain it overnight. ‘The landing gear used to not be linseed oiled, I started that about the same time as the powder coat. ‘I would hope that Mooney linseed oils it’s tube components, it’s been an industry standard since before WWII. ‘I’ve heard, but do not know that at times Mooney has MIG welded tube assemblies and at other times TIG welded. ‘TIG welding is usually considered to be a superior weld. ‘If any one knows, I’d be interested in knowing what years they used MIG welders, if they ever did.

Trust me, powder coat the mount, there is no reason not to, and a few to. People why say powder coat hides cracks are uninformed, same for those that say it changes the heat treat, it takes about 800F to change the heat treat of 4130, and a powder coat oven isn’t close to that. After seeing the history of Maules airframe powder coating I went through the pain of getting the Thrush airframes powder coated, for the last I’d guess 15 years all Thrush airframes, engine mounts, landing gear etc are powder coated, white

I agree about the composites, there are huge issues with inspection and repair, metal is just so easy in comparison, to say nothing with UV resistance and high cycle fatigue, on and on. You can literally crack an airframe or dimple it if it’s metal, bang it out and rivet a doubler in, composite not so much. Even something as simple as stripping to repaint may take on a whole new meaning

It’s not just Mooney’s, or even aircraft, Boats, RV’s, cars and houses are selling at unusual high prices and rates, so much so that the supply has dried up for houses and everything else. ‘I don’t think it’s economic growth, I wish it was, I think it’s simply just cheap money, I bought a house and hanger because of it, one that if interest rates were normal as in 7ish percent or so, I wouldn’t be able to afford, but I got a loan at 2% and guess what, I bought, many are, I’m not alone, I bought the Mooney for cash, because the boat sold so well. I should have invested the money and waited until prices drop, which they will, but I don’t know when. ‘It’s an artificial thing, it’s houses selling pre 08 thing, it’s not going to last. Already this quarters inflation rate is the highest it’s been in the last 9 years. I’m not saying the bubble will burst, but if your thinking about selling, NOW is the time, for buying you should wait if your a cash customer, if your borrowing, maybe not. 500k at 7.8 is $3600 for 30 years 500K at 2% is $1800 for 30 years I picked 7.8 to show its double the 2% payment, but historically 7.8 isn’t outrageous Interest rates were pushed down to “stimulate” the economy which simply means getting people to go into debt, and it’s working. ‘Question is of course how long can or will that continue?

I still don’t see the advantage of built in, the portable is just too easy to take out to get filled or whatever, plus if there is any issue of leaks etc they are so easy to fix. But then O2 use for me is very infrequent. I fill my own portable, if anything the portable is easier to fill as you carry the bottle to the tanks and don’t require much hose, remember you need to keep that hose and fittings “O2 clean” ‘Another question, for those that go above 18,000, your on a mask aren’t you, and when you are O2 use is horrendous as it’s free flow? I won’t go above 180 for that reason, although I have for test flights, plus my airplanes I’ve had were non turbo and dogs above about 150, so you don’t unless forced up there Built in made more sense to me back when everyone wore masks and there were no magic pulse demand or ways to conserve O2, because such big heavy tanks were needed, but especially with pulse demand even small bottles can go a long time, so no need for a big heavy tank anymore A portable is just as easy to have passengers use, why wouldn’t it be? The major advantage of a portable to me is expense and not having a whole other aircraft system to maintain, there just is never any issue with leak tracing or hydro’s or having to buy expensive composite bottles etc. bottles are inexpensive enough to buy a new one if you want to, buy one and you’ll always have one when the other is out for hydro. I think most have it and like it because it came in the aircraft, I doubt many would pay to have it installed. As I don’t often use it, I’m glad to not be carrying the dead weight around all of the time myself. I do believe that out West fills are much less of a issue, on the east coast, its not so easy and when you do want it, you pay through the nose for it. Some may consider $75 for a fill reasonable, but being a CB, I don’t, costs me I guess a couple of dollars, but I don’t know as I’ve never figured it out, but it’s nearly nothing.

NTSB accident report for the C-210, broke out at 300 AGL. http://aviationdb.net/aviationdb/AccidentDetailPage sorry link doesn’t work, screen shot of the report

it’s not just IFR, one pic is VFR over glaciers in the Rockies in the NWT, there just isn’t a place to land in some situations. ‘Oh, and I found the pic of the C-210 that was across the street when we came home from Church

I’m astonished it rusted through with so little surface rust, are we looking at the bottom of the tube, could it have rusted from inside out? I have a rusted tube in a similar location, but it appears to be just surface rust, it’s not through, I don’t have an ultrasonic thickness gauge though, but it passes the ice pick test, I need to pull the seats and convert the rust and zinc chromate it soon ‘if you look at the pic, I have way more surface rust, which is why I wonder if your rust is from inside?

I can give you several links, but they are easy to look up, the fact is that a twin is less safe than a single in the event of an engine failure, of course any twin owner will vehemently disagree. I do think you have a point on the low ceiling, I have pictures somewhere of a C-210 down across the street from my house, they broke a crankshaft IFR with a low ceiling, so he had seconds to pick a landing spot once they broke out, he found a field but the flaps were still up so you could tell he didn’t have much time, they didn’t walk away, but they weren’t seriously injured I don think, likely would have likely been a different outcome if he broke out with only woods. in sight. My personal minimum is that I won’t leave IFR with weather less then than the approach back into the airport I left from.

Ah, but when they were first introduced they were the cats meow. Just like this, to implement this is going to require a much longer wingspan, which will require a much stronger wing, which will be way more expensive and heavier, lots heavier Stsrship died for many reasons but chief among them was they were their own competition, and they were making more money from the King Air. Starship paved the way for Certified composite airframes, the FAA was of course the biggest hurdle because they didn’t want to deal with it, look at the Lear Fan. Did Beech have ODA then, and or do they now? The funny thing about Starship is way more than normal it brings out way so much emotion in people, even what 40 years later? Canards are in my opinion a lot like flying wings, if you ignore the downsides to the design, they seem to have enormous advantages. That is why I said in the 70’s it seemed that most new designs would be canards, because in the beginning only the advantages were written about. There is a reason why all transport category aircraft have the same design, and it’s not inertia. ‘Although I think we have pushed that design about as far as it can be, there will continue to be advances, but they will be small incremental ones There is a lot that can be done with little airplanes, but the market is dead, and I can’t explain Cirrus because that shows there is still a market

No, the reason to keep the 320 is money, price what it really cost to do the STC, plus the 360 isn’t needed, cuts into range etc. Listen to BKlott If you want a 360 172, go buy one, you will come out better off in the end, but before I put a 360 in a 172, I’d buy a 182 and be way better off, that’s more logical than hopping up a 172. I had a C-210 and briefly considered the 550 STC when it got its new engine, but the cost was very significant with a new prop and instruments etc. Now that you’re engine is off, have your mount and baffling powder coated, way better than spray paint and now is the time, it’s not much money and for the little cost you’ll like the results. I could see changing pistons and going to 160 HP though, I bet the engine shop will ask that.

When I saw TBM, I thought the turboprop

I wonder if he got the gear down after landing?

I was over water exporting an Aircraft to Costa Rica and had my Garmin 396 do that, Took me awhile to figure it out. I couldn’t even turn it off, so I took out my 296 backup and it worked. ‘I had to remove and reinstall the battery in the 396 to get it to work again. ‘I used it for years and it never did that again

Ground is through the engine block, but as the starter is the highest amp load there is, there is logic to ground the block through the starter. Have to connect the ground somewhere, why not there? Grounds are most often the biggest electrical issue. ‘Funny story, when the Chrysler K car first came out, a great many of them were experiencing CV joint failure, and no cause could be determined, however after a good bit of research a common thing was found with all of them, they were all produced on the same work shift. ‘Chrysler spent millions on warranty work and determining cause of failure. Anyway the same worker wasn’t torquing the engine ground, so when the engine was started, ground was through the CV joint, this was arcing the balls in the joint which of course caused them to wear fast, and the wear was eradicating the arc spots so cause wasn’t apparent. So, grounding the starter may be a pretty good thing.

One wonders if that would work for a case or two of oil. I like Spruce, Lord knows they serve a need, but $12 shipping for a position light bulb is tough to swallow, I guess I need to try the $250 thing, just build up the wish list first

I’m not disbelieving you guys, but two questions, first carb heat is the simplest thing to rig, nothings easier how could you possibly mess that up? Secondly, why would anyone intentionally disable carb heat? Then how do you stay in business doing that, surely the first off airport landing has you being sued, and there is no way you could defend that, I’m not believing Mooney published anything saying carb heat is optional. ‘Then why disable it? there is absolutely nothing to be gained from doing so, and a whole lot to lose. Back in the day when airplanes with C-85’s etc were used for training and rental, there were a great many mixture controls disabled and I can understand that, but carb heat?

No, that’s water emulsified in the oil. Can only come from moisture of fuel being burnt, so it’s not as much water as it may look like. ‘But I’ve never seen it in an airplane

I was based out of KABY so I would fly up to KFFC myself. ‘I guess what I need to do ideally is develop a list of common hardware required and just make a one time $500 buy

You could do it, first it’s not a spray bottle. it’s a squeeze bottle, I assume like a plastic ketchup bottle but I’d want a glove on, and would it shed ice? People that have ferried Maules to Australia via Hawaii have duct taped a couple bags of lead shot onto the engine cowling to stay within CG with the back full of fuel. ‘Once fuel is transferred from the back, you open the window and cut the bags of lead with a knife to let the shot drain out. So sticking your arm out of a window is not unheard of, but it is unusual I guess. However if you really do keep this as a back up plan, I think it ought to be practiced with just water, maybe start with an empty bottle to make sure you could hold on to it. Maybe even put a dummy cord on it so it’s still attached to your wrist if the air pulls it out of your hand? Army Rangers attach every thing to them with parachute cord, call it dummy cords, that way they can’t lose anything running through the woods and crawling under wire etc. First start with just your hand to see how well that works? ‘I’ll just stay out if icing myself

They are bad, but there are different conditions of “bad”, as an opinion. Meaning that if you had no issues I wouldn’t ground the airplane and change them, but would order them and put them on the shelf for the next scheduled maintenance. Mounts go bad in different ways, some soften up, and a lot of times that’s due to a oil leak, oil will eat rubber pretty quick. But often they sag and sometimes get hard as a rock and even split. My experience with elastomerics is that they don’t cause vibrations, but may allow them to be felt. ‘In other words I’d replace them, and have the prop balanced, because I believe that constant flexing from vibrations will prematurely wear them

There are times we all do that, but the book answer is that there isn’t a fastener on the aircraft that doesn’t have a torque value, if the manual doesn’t call it out specifically, then you use a general torque chart to determine value. I ran an aircraft assembly line for awhile and the only things that were torqued were those specifically called out on the drawings, and there was only a very few items that were. We were FAA inspected of course and they knew it, so I finally gave up.

I don’t understand what your showing me? All I’m saying is that the aircraft manufacturers manual if there is a discrepancy between it and the engine manufacturers manual, the aircraft manufacturers manual takes precedence. Go to the engine manual if the subject isn’t covered in the Airframe manual. ‘Sometimes a manual is wrong too, if so we are supposed to go through the procedure to correct it, it happens. I’ve seen foot lbs called out where inch lbs was correct. ‘A tire manual may for instance call out 30 to 40 PSI, but if the airframe manual says 50, you should run 50. Some think the components manual would be the best data, and you would think so, but using the tire example, maybe the airframe manufacturer determined that 50 PSI reduced the number of prop strikes

Honest question so don’t be offended, but why have it? It seems so many do, and want it. ‘Is is just me or is getting O2 filled a PIA? I seems you have to fly to and from major cities and frequent the fancy FBO’s to get fills, and then pay their price, then the maintenance issue. A portable, even if you use it a lot seems to be so much easier.