PTK

My Lycoming loves 15W50. I have heard about Continental starter adapters. Is it an absolute with most or all or is it random?

I think this has been addressed. Aeroshell 15W50 contains TCP and/or TPP anti-wear and anti scuffing additives as does Lycoming's LW16702 oil additive. Anti-wear additives are effective at relatively low temperatures and anti-scuff additives at relatively high temperatures and remain on loaded surfaces until they are rubbed off or melt.

Every speed is an AOA! Every time we use a certain airspeed to glean maximum performance it’s always at one correct AOA. That AOA never changes, but the airspeed that achieved it does. The airspeeds we are accustomed to are almost always incorrect. They are only correct at gross weight and 1G! How many times are we satisfying those conditions? Sitting on the ramp maybe!

The engine maker will refer you to the airframe manufacturer. The Mooney SI is the official document. If you ask Lycoming, as I have, they will direct you to Mooney.

Mooney as the airframe manufacturer is the authority and has published the SI on how to jack up the airplane. That’s what I’d follow.

SI M20-114 describes the proper procedure to follow. It specifically states: “It is not recommended to use tail-tie down fitting during jacking process to lift nose wheel off ground.” and warns strongly: “DO NOT USE PROPELLER JACKS OR PROPELLER STANDS”

If he owned the airplane he’d be more careful. He didn’t own it and having paid no money for it he didn’t value it. He only paid to rent it. The place he rented from is down one perfectly good airplane and we are all saddled with increased premiums. I feel sorry for the ones left behind and the owner of the airplane. I feel very saddened for the fate of that beautiful Mooney. It deserved better than that jackass. A lot better. He inconvenienced a lot of innocent people with his selfishness, his sheer incompetence and stupidity. He was an idiot in my book.

What I find very interesting is that they were able to get into a locked hangar and into a covered and locked aircraft without any difficulty. Then put everything back and locked it all up again! You’d think they had the keys and time. They also weren’t concerned about arousing suspicion. “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark!”

No. That POH table assumes holding level flight. You can't speak of bank angles without also speaking of g load. Not all 60 degree banks are 2 g for example. G load is responsible for stall speed increase, not bank angle. Stall speed increases in relation to the square root of load factor. In order to have an increase in stall speed you must have an increase in load factor.

Yes. In a bank the vertical lift component (that was acting straight up when at 1 g or level flight) splits to horizontal and vertical components. Assuming you don't change the amount of lift the wing is producing some of the lift that was acting to hold altitude is now acting to turn the airplane. The result of this is that now we have less of vertical component to maintain altitude. Now hold that thought and fast forward to a low agl, low airspeed, overshot base to final turn where instead of going around the pilot wants to desperately maintain altitude and get back on final. To maintain altitude lift needs to increase and to do that pulls back on the yoke which increases the aoa. To get back on final rudders the nose around which produces yaw with unwanted roll. These are all incorrect inputs hopelessly trying to correct a pattern gone bad much earlier than the overshot base to final. We need to think of the pattern from downwind to touchdown as one continuous descending turn flown according to what the wind is doing.

“One of the reasons is sometimes one needs larger bank angles than is prudent, and stall speeds rise accordingly. The tighter the pattern the larger the bank angle, the higher the stall speed.” This statement indicates a gross lack of understanding of the concepts. It is statements like these that are at the root of spins from cross control stalls. As in the infamous base to final turn for example. Pilots reading such statements are afraid to bank and set themselves up for a cross control situation of the bad kind, i.e. a skid. Banking is not the problem and it doesn’t increase stall speeds. Stall speeds only increase when g load increases when pilot tries to hold level flight. This is very important and needs to be understood.

Cabin side of firewall deep under the glare-shield above pax feet. It’s a pain to get to it.

What bank angle is not prudent? It’s ok to bank the airplane! In fact being afraid to bank and instead rudder the nose around trying to hold level flight is what kills pilots in the infamous base to final turn. It’s about time we put away these myths and teach pilots how to fly. Bank the airplane all you want and unload the wings with your elevator into a descending turn. Stall speed will not increase. It will only increase if trying to hold level flight.

The information you had was that you knew there was traffic in the pattern you were going to join. You did not see nor identify that traffic. But you barged in anyway. “Barged” in the sense that you ignored the existing traffic. Forget what the warrior did or did not do. What did you do? Do you still feel that you did the best you could with the info you had?

You had better be careful of accusations you post on a public forum. It can be a very sharp double edge sword. Especially because based on your description you are not innocent. You barged into the pattern without having identified the position of traffic you knew full well was there before you entered.