redbaron1982

Thanks, y'all for the responses and ideas. I think the higest priority is the flying couple approaches with vertical guidance. Also, reading at another post, I think it would be really cool to add GPSS, as it sounds like a great bang for the buck, specially to fly holding patterns. Any recommendation of a good shop in the houston area? I'm based in KSGR.

No changes afterwards, the only thing is that KFC150 altitude hold was not working, but I got that fixed by Bevan and Jake told me that the flight computer passed the bench test after the repair, so everything should be functional from the KC192 point of view. The thing is I have no idea how much to expect for someone to go and work on this small items, is it 5 hours, 20hours, 80 hours? And then, how likely is that they will mess something up and have more issues afterwards.

A full panel upgrade now it's completely out of the question, it would be north of 70k most likely, and is money I rather save for an unexpected big ticket issue. What I have now is old, but is fully functional, so yeah, it would look super cool, reduce workload a bit, but I don't see it worth the investment, even more so if the current avionics is not giving me much headaches.

Hey all, I've been thinking for some time now whether to fix some small avionics issues I have with my airplane. For context, I have a '85 J model, with a KFC 150, GNS 430, KX155, GI275 EIS, and DME. All quite old, except for the EIS. Everything works fine, except it looks like when some of the avionics were installed they were not integrated with the request of the equipment. To be more specific, this is the list of issues I'm referring to: The autopilot (KFC 150) is not picking up the glide slope. Either when doing an ILS or LPV approach. The HSI shows the GS indicator, but the GS mode in the KFC doesnt engage. The KFC 150 was bench tested by Bevan Aviation and it's ok. The GI 275 is not getting info from the GNS 430, so I don't get fuel to destination, etc. does not have an OAT probe, so no % power. no fuel sender information, still using the old analogue gauges. no batt info, neither volts or amps. The DME works only on NAV2, it looks like it is not hooked up to NAV1 (GNS430) The items are sort from highest to lowest priority. My question is, is it worth having a shop open up the panel and making all the required fixes or small modifications? How much should I expect an avionics shop to charge for this? Is this something I could do under an AP supervision, I'm an electronic egineer, so I know the stuff, but I have no experience openning up an airplane panel, and I'm afraid it could be a complete wiring mess, really hard to work on.

I know this reads like sad news, but there is a bright side here that's worth celebrating. You made it to 87, healthy enough to fly, with a lifetime of aviation behind you. Even more impressive, all those years and all that experience haven't dulled your judgment: you recognize that flying less often, especially in IFR, can put you in a place where "just one more push" with weather could end badly. That level of self-awareness is rare and admirable. I hope someday I'm in your position: able to look back on decades of flying and savor every moment, knowing I did it on my own terms and with a clear head. One more positive side to it: now you will be “flying for free” with fellow mooniacs who would gladly cover the gas just to spend a few hours in the cockpit with someone who carries even a fraction of your wisdom.

Oh, now I see, the wheel fwd/aft movement is directly linked to the pucs, so reducing the load on the wheel make it move fwd and allows the pucs to expand. Thanks!

Maybe a stupid question, but how this helps the pucs? The airplane weight is still on the pucs. If any, the only thing you are helping is the tire itself.

I think George already stated that if your tank leak is because your aircraft has an inferior design or was not maintained correctly. Also, if you have any issue with your fuel system is because you have neglected your airplane for many many years. Finally, if your paint gets damaged it's because you don't exercise standard refueling hygiene. Any issue that you have in your airplane after you start using G100UL is due to correlation, not causation. Fancy words to say: it was just coincidence that your tanks started leaking after you switched to G100UL, it would have happened exactly the same if you would've continue with 100LL. I'm not saying that I agree with Mr Braly, I'm just summarizing what he has repeated everywhere, in some cases, as a expert witness in the CEH California trial.

This is George Braly declation, defending the motion to ban 100LL in California. https://drive.google.com/file/d/14JkPLQIAVY-hA24TZQWy0i3UhMost47B/view DECLARATION OF GEORGE W.BRALY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH’S REPLY TO SETTLING DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO ENFORCE CONSENT JUDGMENT AND MOTION TO MODIFY CONSENT JUDGMENT Which includes a passage specific about the defective Mooney design (quote from Mr Braly declaration): "Mooney aircraft have a unique and inadequate type of fuel tank construction, as compared to the standards for the certified aircraft industry."

It is important to remember that good old George was advocating for banning 100LL state wide in California. Such a nice guy and advocate of General Aviation he is.

Didn't he go as far as saying that the fuel selector o-ring size defined by the manufacturer is wrong and a smaller one should be used? Like, anything but saying that G100UL has material compatibility issues.

True. Up to this point my thinking was "Hey, Mike Busch doesn't want to get involved in this drama, I respect that". Now I am not so sure. Interviewing Braly without bringing up all the issues with G100UL is almost the same as endorsing G100UL.

What about the Cessna 421 that was totalled by the insurance company after all the damages caused by G100UL? I'm really curious about it. I'm baffled about the ongoing denial by GAMI on all the issues people are having after using G100UL. If GAMI would be more transparent I would be open to using it, but their denial is a safety of flight issue.

Who deemed it un-airworthy? Lycoming? If Lycoming replied "hey, yeah, that was us when doing hardness test back in the day" and it ended up inside your engine, they at that point it was airworthy, so why would Lycoming now, without any additional data, say that's not airworthy?

This behavior sounds so much like how people would behave in the country I was born. That's why back there return policies are non existent, or super strict + they charge a restocking fee. People abusing the system like this will make the "no questions asked" returns go away. In fact, is already happening: starting last year home depot reduce the return window on gas generators and other products to just 7 days, and the product must be unused and in its original, sealed, package. I'm going to stop here, otherwise this will become a politics post.

I don't get the question... you're supposed to do whatever makes sense to you. If you feel better paying Lasar 2x, the go for it. If not, you can get the parts from Aircraft Spruce. Or, as mentioned above, get the alternative and pay 1/4 of Lasar price: https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/appages/safairflush_05-01503.php

I don't know if it is normal, my J (and I guess most airplanes) have a white (or kind of white) belly so it is hard to see any deposit. I do know that a graying deposit in the tail pipe is normal. From your pics it looks like there is toooo much white. Did you try cleaning it up and see how long it takes to build up again?

I'm sure oil wouldn't leave a white powder behind. The only thing I can think of that is grayish is lead.

My J is a 1986 model, not sure when the new style cowls flaps become standard. My baffle seals, AFAIK, are in good shape. I have considered using Gee Bees seals.

When I try to lean to takeoff EGT while climbing on my J the CHT go above 400F, with cowl flaps trailing (halfway close). Do you keep you cowl flaps full open? Today at cruise (8500ft) and 22x2500, I was running at 380F with closed cowl flaps and 15F LOP. OAT was 15C. I'm still not sure if I have a cooling issue or not.

I'm too chicken to run the tank dry, not going to happen at least for several years lol

Today I ran my left tank until the low fuel light came on. I immediately switched to my right tank. When landed I filled up the left and it took 30.1g. So I guess in my J model the warning comes when 2 gals of usable fuel remains.

I was wondering that myself a few days ago. Then I thought it's better to keep the evidence around of this guy's being a douchebag. But I'm open to delete it. I guess we can vote. If you guys prefer me to delete the thread, just like this post.

I have my IPad pro with Velcro on top of my steam gauges. Now with GP pilot I have synthetic vision and can fly down to minimum (and a little more) without anything else. My SOP is after being cleared for the approach I stick my iPad on the panel and fly it all the way to land using the syn vision. I don't even need a radar altimeter because I get AGL altitude using the GPS.