redbaron1982

I wonder how many "active" consumers are vs one or two times consumers. I haven't heard anyone using it on a regular basis.

Aren't all airliners wet wing designs? Are those flawed designs as well?

Not a Mooney, but quite concerning. I hope there is a formal investigation and probable cause.

So by your logic, if I sell you a permit to build on land I don't actually own, and you later discover you can't build anything there, there's no damage? Nothing broke, yet you still paid for something you can't use. That's the same situation here. Damage isn't limited to something physically breaking. Financial harm, like paying for a right you can't meaningfully exercise, is also damage. In this case, the issue isn't whether the STC exists. It's that GAMI sold approval for a product that isn't available at scale, leaving buyers unable to use what they paid for. That is, by definition, financial damage.

That make sense. I always had a great experience with Mike as well as his team at Savvy. But it was kind of puzzling to me why he (or Savvy) had said anything. We know GAMI does not allow anyone involved in the process to disclose any information publicly.

If the engine is not producing power, but the prop is spinning, a prop strike calls for a teardown too? I guess so because of the transversal forces and sudden stop (high acceleration = high forces)

In my case, I've let the small leak from the sump drain build up a stain for several months, you could even feel a bump due to the heavy accumulation of blue pigments. WD40 removed all. I don't know what your specific case is and if this method would work.

Be careful with MEK, is very agressive. I heard people also use 100LL, yeah, kind of fight fire with fire. The logic behind using 100LL is that the stain comes from the fuel evaporating and leaving behind the dye. So with fuel you could remove the dye and as long as you remove the 100LL with a rag, it should be good.

I guess it depends whether you're referring to 100LL or G100UL. Assuming that you use 100LL, then in my experience, stains are super easy to remove. I only got stains in a very small leak I have on one of my sump drain, it get heavily stained in blue. Usually I take it out with some WD40, not sure if it is the best, but it works for me. As it is on the lower part of the wing, it is not easy to see if there is a very faint staining left behind, for what I can tell, there is not.

So, I think, although there is not consensus on the why, that having the prop full back gives better glide distance. Now, what about the throttle? Technically full forward would reduce the energy required for the cylinders to pull air in, and should extend the glide slope.

I guess a way of seeing this is that each rotation of the prop either produces energies (when there is combustion in the cylinders) or consumes it (when there is no combustion are you are using your engine as a sophisticated air compressor). Now to convert to power, you need to factor the speed at which this exchange occurs: here enters the RPM into the equation. As when the engine is producing power, higher RPM means higher power output (all other conditions the same), then when the engine is not producing power (i.e. is an air compressor), the higher the RPM, the higher the power consumption, hence the higher break effect and loss of potential energy.

I wonder why Mike Busch hasn't make any comments around G100UL after all the material compatibility issues arose. In this article (https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2024/february/pilot/savvy-maintenance-unleaded-avgas-cure-or-curse) he mentioned that Savvy would be doing all the data analysis and maintenance on AOPA's Baron running G100UL. I can imagine that he has information from other sources as well too. Has anyone using Savvy's services asked them if they recommend switching to G100UL? I haven't, although I might to see what their answer is on this subject.

I've never tried running a tank dry, and I'm kind of reluctant to do it. One time, I was messing with the mixture while at 8kft WOT, and I pull it to far out, too quickly, and the engine kind of shutdown, and the RPMs surged, almost to the point that I would have to get the prop inspected. I imagine that the effect would be similar between running out of fuel or pulling the mixture out too quickly. I don't know if my governor has issues or what. I asked here in the forum and they say it was normal. Do you guys experience any RPM surge when the engine dies off after running a tank dry?

Did he save the prop? Looks like a perfect landing giving the circumstances

Your analogy overlooks several critical distinctions. A “home gas station” for cars or motorcycles does not exist in the same legal or operational sense that a based airport does for an aircraft. For ground vehicles, fueling options are abundant and geographically dispersed, and traveling to a different station to purchase the required fuel typically carries no additional operational risk. In contrast, an aircraft based at KRHV is subject to the airport’s exclusive fuel availability. If 100LL is unavailable on the field, the operator must either: Use G100UL, or Conduct an additional flight solely for refueling elsewhere. The latter option is not equivalent to driving to a different gas station, it imposes additional cost, scheduling complexity, and operational risk, including extra takeoffs and landings, which statistically carry higher accident risk. From a legal perspective, when a governing body or facility owner removes the only on-site source of an essential, approved fuel, while continuing to permit operations of equipment that requires it, it could be argued that they are effectively compelling the use of the substitute fuel. This is a materially different situation from retail fuel market dynamics for cars or motorcycles.