redbaron1982

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.

The fact that the airport has prohibited the sale of 100LL is, in itself, a strong endorsement pushing pilots toward using G100UL. The argument that “we didn’t force you to buy G100UL” might hold more weight if 100LL were still available for purchase. But as it stands, I can easily see an attorney making the case that the airport effectively forced all its tenants to use G100UL.

That's exactly what I thought as I listened to a lady and a gentleman repeat "100LL is not coming back to the airport". I just popped open flightaware and saw 3 airplanes doing touch and go at the airport and I'm 110% sure they were burning LL. Lol I wonder if they know that not having 100LL is worse, as airplanes have to fly for a top off.

At least, I guess airplanes holding the GAMI STC might be put on a "at risk" list and have higher premiums.

So then why A&P and IA worry much about lawsuits? They could just say "Hey buddy, I did my best, you are the owner and the responsible to determine if your aircraft is safe to fly" My uneducated opionion is that any lawsuit will go after: GAMI, FAA, County, and the FBO.

yeah, I listened to the whole hearing, but that's kind of vague. Like, did it damage the pistons? the cylinder head? I know for sure it didn't, but I can't imaging the damange being worth 600k.

Is there any details on what damaged the fuel caused? $600k on repairs sounds like a lot

Next time I will try to do a "by the book" take off and see what numbers do I get. My last take off was 2500ft the takeoff roll for what I can see in FF. I was a bit over max gross I think and the DA was 2600ft. I never stop when I roll into the runway. Next time I will align, get to a stop, brakes, full throttle, break release, and see how fast I get airbone. I always have the feeling that my engine is not producing full rated power, but everything is fine with the engine (borescope, oil analysis, compression, Savvy's inflight mag check)

Thanks, all, for the tips. I'm planning to fly solo, so I don't feel comfortable with a uncrated dog onboard with me, specially if it is not a dog I know. I guess the chances of the dog becoming aggressive or anxious are low, but the results could be very bad if I'm alone and have to deal with such a situation. I guess I'll try to start with a small dog (or cat), one that I'm confident the create would fit through the door and then as I get more comfortable with all these, maybe I'd do larger dogs uncrated.

Hey guys, I want to get involved in pilot and paws org, so I can fly more (having a mission is a huge motivator for me). I was looking at some of the flights that were requested, and they involved large breeds, like one German Shepherd for instance. My question is, how you manage to get a large crate into a Mooney. I have J model. My plan was to fold the back seats and take the dogs there, but ingress/egress is what sounds challenging. Any tips or ideas?

If you have manual trim with the AP enable, how do you know the airplane is trimmed? I mean, you don't "feel" the force the AP is doing to keep level flight. So how's the process to trim it out? Just curious. If I'm flying with the AP engaged I'd like to have a significant attitude change if for whatever reason the AP decides to disengage, so automatic trim seems like an additional safety feature: in a AP disconnect event the ship should continue (more or less) straight and level flight. Am I wrong here?

GAMI now also wants us to believe that G100UL is not only good for your airplane, but also for your health. Look at G17 at https://g100ul.com/faq This guys are hilarious.

What type of oil pressure indicator do you have? I have a GI 275, and the oil pressure sensor failed a few years ago. Before completely failing it started to read wrong values. I had the original analogue gauge too, so it didn't concerned me much, but it would have been quite a different thing if I would have completely removed the analogue gauges.

They repaired a corroded wing spar cap on my J model, replacing the aft stub wing spar. It was not cheap (20k - 30k), and it took over a year, but the airplane flies great now.

The corrosion looks bad (intergranular with exfoliation) and not "repairable", the second picture does look like a part that can be replaced. I'm sure I know exactly which is the corroded part in number 1, but doesn't look structural to me (like as the spar or spar cap), do you have more pictures?

Nice to see Swift fuel going international already. https://www.travelandtourworld.com/news/article/antwerp-airport-leads-the-bold-charge-toward-eco-friendly-aviation-with-historic-debut-of-swift-100r-unleaded-fuel-marking-a-transformative-step-for-sustainable-flight-new-updates-you-need-to-know/

But a new standard would need to be defined, right? the TCDS calls for 100LL, which in turn have a minimum TEL content. So you cannot have UL meet the 100LL standard.

A very important edge that Swift has in this race is that they are already selling 94UL in many airports, their plan is to phase out 94UL and replace it with 100R. If they manage to get 100R STC´d or somehow approved fleet wide, then they will have a much easier go to market road than GAMI, who is trying to play the role of "shut up, we know what we are doing, you don´t get to ask questions about G100UL, and we are not running our fuel through ASTM or anything similar, because they know nothing about fuels."

I didn't know, I always read about how going from vacuum to electric would mean changing the speed brakes cartridge. This is cool, I guess the cost is much more cheaper than changing the whole system for an electric one.

I'm curious why there isn't a retrofit using a linear actuator, something like: https://www.firgelliauto.com/products/heavy-duty (I'm sure there are better brands, this is just an example). This would remove the dependency on a part that is not longer available, and would also remove the the need for a vacuum system. I'm sure there is a reason why this is not possible, but I don't know what that reason would be.

Meanwhile, Scott Perdue continues lobbying for GAMI. He published a video saying that mluvara oring test is incorrect. In the same video Braly demonstrated that hot 100LL with toluene added on top destroys orings, which is evidence that 100LL (and not the hot temperatures or added toluene) is the problem.

I thought that increase the RPMs would help using the prop to slow down. I know that higher RPM >> more power at same MP. But also higher prop RPM means more aerodynamic breaking, right? What I'm missing here?

I hope the OP doesn't take this bad, I'm not trying to offend anyone. I'm amazed by how "vulnerable" people is to deep fake news, even a very low quality one, like this one, tricks people into thinking that it could be real. Just a few things that stand out on this one: The voice, veeery AI style. At https://youtu.be/lHIpvC1qEXU?t=68 you can see no strut on the right landing gear. https://youtu.be/lHIpvC1qEXU?t=196 the nose landing here is on the tail, lol https://youtu.be/lHIpvC1qEXU?t=270 well, when I started the post I hadn't watched this far, but hey, no one who ever learned anything about airplanes can take this as a real airplane cockpit. So many other details. We need to be more vigilant with the information we receive, from the internet as well as from traditional news papers. Use the best judgment, verify, and look for red flags.