PTK

Thank you Paul. I understand that sticking can occur in a cold started engine when the valve guide to stem clearance is restricted due to coked oil. But I have another question: are there more than one type of valve guide that can be utilized in terms the material of which it’s manufactured? I remember reading somewhere that there is more than one kind of valve guide in terms of material and the OH facility can provide info as to which type they utilized. Is this true? And if so is one type more prone to sticking than another? It just seems odd that at 80 SMOH it sticks valves.

Paul, the op states he runs lop and CHT’s in the 330-360 range. Is that considered low temp ops? It has been my impression that temps in that range are considered good. No?

I don’t undetstand BK. It’s so freaking frustating. They have a freaking habit of announcing freaking products that never freaking make it to freakng production. What’s their freaking problem??!! Ok I’m freakng done thinking out freaking loud!

Read on... “AeroVue Touch is available now for preorder at a list price of $12,590, and the company expects to submit STC documentation to the FAA in July.”

This is interesting at half of what G wants for the G500 txi. Includes standard features G sells as options, e.g. sv... https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/general-aviation/2018-04-19/bendixking-unveils-aerovue-touch-pfd-aero-2018%3famp

Here's some good info... https://youtu.be/CEI3UfkFWX8

Yes Seth. I was up there last August and landed at IAG. From IAG I flew direct to Navy Island and then enter the RH pattern as published. Buffalo will help you and then 122.05 and 3500 or above.There will be helicopters below you. It's very nice provided you have CAVU conditions when you can see the falls and take pics. It was hazy when we went up.

I’d sell you my 201 but my copilot will not allow it!

Well, seems like that’s all you’re able to get out of this and you have formulated your opinion based on the extent of your capabilities. I’m perfectly ok with that!

My definition of flare is a pitch increase for the purpose of slowing down. That imo is not the goal in our small planes. What needs to happen is a deliberate smooth transition from approach phase to slow flight in the landing configuration followed by touch down on the mains while controlling airspeed, height above the runway and descent rate. This is the goal.

Notice in that video there's hardly any floating and you never lose sight of the runway. That's excellent airspeed control and a very well executed transition from approach attitude to slow flight!

That's not a flare! That’s transitioning!! Very nicely done!

When wad the last time you practiced slow flight at MCA in landmg configuration? What’s your pitch attitude? Certsinly not as high as when clean. If you lose sight of the runway you’re too fast.

No it's not. And no I don’t flare! May I humbly suggest that if you find yourself needing to flare in order to slow down your airspeed control is slightly off!

Do you perform a de-orbiting maneuver to go with your flaring!

We differ in opinion. “Flare” doesn’t accurately describe or teach much about what’s happening. The skills that take good judgement and practice to perfect are: a deliberate transition from approach attitude to landing attitude followed by slow flight in ground effect followed by the mains touching down. (in a tailwheel touching down level.) One of the most valuable exercises during primary training, and my primary instructor long ago had me do lots of these, is to practice slow flight a foot or so above the runway. Isn’t this the main reason why we teach slow flight and the MCA maneuver in the landing configuration? In my mind this transition to slow flight is a separate phase which happens prior to the round out with the airplane gently stalling and mains touching down.

Not sure what you mean by “transition to flare.” It gives the connotation that you can come in fast and flare to slow down. That’s not how it works and it’s the wrong connotation. The space shuttle flares but it has a parachute to slow it down. In my Mooney I transition to ground effect. Ground effect comes into play when within one wingspan off the ground. Low wings have less induced drag (i.e. more reduction off their normal induced drag) in ground effect than high wings. It will cause our slick low wing to float if too fast. Incidentally It is this ground effect that folks try to beat by pushing the nose down and striking the prop.

The only way to strike the prop on landing is to allow the nose gear to touch down first and hard. This happens when coming in too fast and getting anxious of diminishing runway and forcing the airplane to land by pushing it down. Depending on a few things including airspeed one of two things will happen: the prop will strike on first contact of nose gear with the runway or it will bounce if not too fast to strike the prop. If it bounces the bounce will be encouraged by the gear pucks because they don’t absorb much energy. If you have too much airspeed the cycle repeats itself and may strike the prop on the second bounce. Certainly if you insist on bouncing it will strike on the third bounce. If lucky enough to touch down on the mains first it will still bounce if too fast. Then if forced down it will strike the prop just the same. I see a spectrum in pilots transitioning to the Mooney from more forgiving airplanes. Some will land on the nose gear first and bend the prop. Some will do a little better and be at the proper attitude to touch down on the mains but being too fast will bounce a couple of times before they force it down and strike the prop. Some will do sttill better than that and will recognize a bad transition to landing. This group will go around. Eventually it sinks in: proper airspeed and attitude control. And if the approach just does not look good go around. The Mooney needs to touch down on the mains first when it’s ready holding the nose off until it's ready. All it asks of the pilot is to have it in the proper attitude and airspeed during the transition to do so.

The airplane going for a test flight is still "in the shop." You should absolutely pay your mechanic in full before the airplane is released to you. Why would you even question it?

Considering your mission I’d buy a nice J and put a good chunk of that in the bank.

A "conversion" does not hold its value as well as a factory Mooney. Also it has to be an exceptional airplane to even consider it over a factory airplane. I'm not certain that the Rocket is that exceptional for reasons already mentioned. Considering your mission, have you considered an Ovation2?

Well, Jose’ states he hasn’t had an issue in 33 years and it’s the same valve used in the lr tanks. And he knows a thing or two about wet tanks! Can his data points be considered valuable? Although empirically derived do they offer discrete information? I’m not an expert, just curious. In any case I can see water may accumulate over time if tanks aren’t sampled or gascolator isn’t cleared but I certainly don’t think there should be any other “debris” in the tanks. I’m ready for a lesson: how do we clean these vlaves? I’ve never done it. I do carry a spare in the plane just in case one decides to get stuck open somewhere!

I think this is true at higher than taci speeds. Cruise speeds maybe. I don’t see how at next to idle power in taxi uncowled can be bad for cooling. On the contrary I think having the cylinders exposed to unrestricted ambient air would enhance cooling.

Flysamo, have you looked at the pitch servo? Alt capture and hold is primarily a pitch servo function. The pitch servo is located aft of the pitch trim servo. I'd urge you to give a call and speak with Alan or Steve at Autopilots Central. (918) 836-6418.

Actually in my J I aim for 80 KIAS on final. I fly downwind at 100 or so. Slow to 65 or so over the threshold, (~60 with full flaps and closer to 70 w/o flaps.) When heavier I add a few knots to these numbers.