Joshua Blackh4t

That works. Depends if believe in shock cooling or not. Also, then you have the gear warning being annoying and freaking out your passengers

Congrats, you're going to love it. My theory on landing a Mooney is that you have to treat every landing like a difficult landing and then they'll be easy. So, not a formula and numbers and gentle flare like a cessna/piper because that will let you down. First you have an airspeed/descent problem with wanting to descend and not being able to slow down enough for gear and flaps. Also, no one who flies a Mooney wants to spend much time at 105kts for gear. So first descend early, fast and flat, then level out to slow down, wheels down at 2:30 minutes from touchdown, keep slowing, full flap about 1 minute away. Then pretend its a nasty gusty day and fly in with control feel, lots of little adding power and taking it back out, be prepared for the flare to last a comparative looooonnnggg time. Once it settles NO BRAKES until flaps up. Then as much as you want. Have fun. Oh, and practice this phrase "don't slam the door. PLEASE don't slam the door, please don't touch the door....... dammit I TOLD you not to slam the door" Especially when taking Cessna pilots for a fly

I get it. Take off is nose high and max fuel flow so it can benefit from all the help it can get so add the fuel pump especially on a fuel injected engine. Also close to the ground. However, as much as pumps should fail safely, pressure should be regulated all that sort of thing, we are still going from a known working state (no boost) to a new state (boosted) right at a critical stage. I understand that most people and most manuals will work on the principle that needing a fuel boost is more likely than the boost causing an issue, but I'm just pointing out that it could also be the other way around. Also, if you don't use it, you don't forget to turn it off. Mind you, it still needs testing before every flight, and the pilot should be very aware of where the switch is as the slightest hiccup. I have had an efato and did remember to try it but didn't help.

On the note of fuel pumps: I know most handbooks say to use the boost pump on take off and landing, but I used to fly an ultralight that made me challenge that assumption. The ultralight had gravity feed, and a mechanical pump, and also an electric pump. The electric one was good for priming but it could flood the carburetor, especially if taxiing on bumpy ground. So it made me think: we start our engines, warm up and run-ups all without the fuel pump. So that, to me, is a known safe state. So then, just before takeoff we turn it back on? To a state we haven't tested? Even worse on landing. Whats more likely: a plane that ran for 3 hours will continue to do so for 5 minutes, or that the electric fuel pump will have a catastrophic failure when switched on? Its just been vibrating for 3 hours after all. I'm all for people doing what they consider is safe, but personally I use the electric pump very little although I have memorised its switch and can get there very quickly at the first sign of trouble. Have also never needed it when changing tanks. Although I do need it on a hot day 3 seconds after start to clear out vapour in the fuel lines. Anyway, everyone makes their own risk calculation. I've always had a rule that you are allowed one sub-optimal thing at a time. Weather/night/tired/annoying passengers/minor mechanical issue. NEVER fly (or drive, etc) with more than one.

Someone I know was in this exact state a while ago in an M20E. It took a few months to get a new pump so he was flying it around without an issue. To start cold it, it takes a bit more battery. Full rich, cracked throttle and then crank. It takes a few turns to build fuel pressure, then 5 seconds later it should start. You might have to crank to pressure, rest the starter, then start it. While you are at it, make sure you change your post to have it on record that the pump is still working and you are only asking for information. Mechanical pumps rarely fail, and many people have electric backup pumps that are not rated for continuous duty and probably won't get them very far, so I don't see much increased risk. Information for ground starting purposes only :p

If Gami fuel is better for the engine, but harder on the tanks and paint, I think I'd wear that risk. Maybe use better paint around the filler area? It could be a feature, especially not an issue on high wings. If the cost of continuing to fly our planes is new fuel lines, maybe a tank reseal and some industrial paint around the filler, well, then so be it. Better than the alternative.

So far there is nothing to stress too much about, although a professional assessment of the damage to that aileron rod is called for. Tank patching, replacing cables etc are all relatively normal. (Not saying cheap, just a common expense that was likely to happen at some point of your ownership) However, the fact that they weren't picked up earlier is slightly worrying. I would suggest you find whoever is going to be your future mechanic, and pay them for a bit of time to check it out for other things that might have been missed. Not a full PPI but just professional opinion. Ask your avionics shop to recommend someone because they seem to be doing a good job of being professional.

Yeah, I get that would be optimal if I was starting from scratch, but right now I just need a new charging system and want it to work even if I can't draw the full power. Maybe one day everything else gets upgraded so I can add pitot heat and autopilot etc

Thanks, Thats exactly the information I was looking for. It was the flat battery scenario I was scared of. If its a bit low will it pop as soon as I go to take off. But sounds like it shouldn't be an issue. At least, it will be worth fitting it with the old setup and seeing what happens. Cheers, Joshua P.s. when the charging system isn't doing its job properly, its a definite win for the manual gear and flaps.

Just to clarify, its to a plane power upgrade kit, SAL12-70

Hi, I'm looking at upgrading my charging system since the old one is not working safely. The old one is a delco generator with an Electrodelta regulator. The charge circuit has a 50 amp breaker. In the install instructions it says it only needs to be upgraded IF you want to take advantage of the higher current available. I would be fine to keep it at 50 (safer for old wires as well), but how does that work? Can the alternator or regulator be tuned lower??

Personal risks aside, please don't ever be SURE of anything on your plane. Keep monitoring everything from your engine to paint chips to intercom static and make continual judgements on what is safe. If we were ever sure we'd never need to do a pre-flight, or practice forced landings, or have alternates. Back to the landing gear. You've done the test of "we landed on it for many years and there is only a hint of a possible crack", now you could do "we are still landing on it and nothing is getting worse". Both are very good tests for metal stress cracking.

I can't talk for the GA world, but in recreational/ultralights, it would not be uncommon that an undercarriage got a tiny crack during a really bad landing, and the owner decided to continue flying and keep an eye on it. Yes, failed undercarriage CAN be catastrophic, but likely wont be. Add in that its also not likely a crack will fail, and its not even likely it IS a crack. This adds up to a very low risk for continuing to fly and monitoring the suspected crack.

Am I the only one who thinks that its a non-issue due to it only being landing gear? It has 2 potential modes of failure IF it is a crack: Slowly stress cracking which will be noticeable well before it fully fails Or being the weakest point and breaking in a significant hard landing. With such minor cracking it would need to be a very hard landing that would hurt other things anyway. With either failure mode, there is neglegible danger to the people. Since it can only fail on the ground, asses it like you would for a car. Sure, an expensive car, but one that only drives 100km a year.

Australia is lucky that the government is giving a subsidy of 50% of the cost up to $5000 AUD per plane to install ADSB out. It made Sentrys affordable for ultralights and made an AV30/Tailbeaconx about half price. Yes, its annoying getting stalked but the amount of times it has made my life easier and safer makes it worth it. Especially at busy non controlled places and you get 3 people with bad radios in the same area, now instead of trying to work out what the little rag and tube things are doing you can see them on the screen. And with the tailbeaconx, you can always forget to turn on the nav lights. Oh dear, small gap on flight aware. Happened to a friend of mine.