PTK

You've got metal! Before moving forward I would send the filter and metal samples to Aviation Laboratories for an analysis. You will know exactly what it is you're looking at and where it comes from. Costs about 100$ but you'll be informed instead of guessing. http://www.avlab.com/SearchResults.asp?Cat=1871

I don't think that's fair. I don't think it rises to blatant misrepresentation. The buyer had a ppi and annual that he paid for. It is his responsibility, since he is paying for it, to hire the most knowledgeable and experienced. The seller offered 100% refund of deposit if buyer didn't want the airplane aftef the ppi.

He bought a used as is airplane. He had a ppi and an annual performed at the local shop when he could've taken it to an MSC. He accepted the airplane. He didn't have to accept it and would've received 100% of his deposit back. But he accepted it and completed the sale. He is irritated to be fixing things when he could be flying. He can still take it to an MSC and pay them to bring it up to top shape. But he made certain choices and he needs to also accept the responsibility. Is there any sense of personal responsibility left anymore? Or is that expectation not politically correct?!

I went back and checked previous archived traces and it's consistent. Historically cyl 3 has been cooler during lean mag checks. I don't feel anything is out of line. Thank you all! Here's another one: https://savvyanalysis.com/flight/1659931/365d5f00-b89b-4f12-9144-e3b1c5fb0e98 and here is a representative gami spread:

Gami spread <0.1 gph. Is it conceivable that cyl3 is closer to flaming out first? In other words it's the leanest? That's my feeling. My reasoning is that it does so on either mag. I think the plug is fine.

No vibration beyond the normal roughness due to being lean and on one mag. Never any vibration any other time.

Ok Matt, I follow. You're saying "a" plug on cyl3 is not firing. The question now becomes which plug? The CHT3 starts to drop when I switch to rt mag and continues to drop right through both and when on left mag. It doesn't recover until I go back to both after having cycled both mags. It doesn't hont to recover when I go to both in between rt and left. Do you find it puzzling that both plugs would stop firing during rt-both-left and then start firing after finished cycling and back on both?

Yes, but doesn't the corresponding EGT trace appear to register EGT?

How do you arrive at that conclusion cyl3?

Any comments on this lean mag check?

I have to question the relevance. When I hit a golf ball into the bunker, as I do often, I walk over and hit it again. The worst that can happen is my golf buddies get a good laugh. It's all in good fun. When an airplane gets shoved into a "bunker" innocent and trusting pax die. No one laughs and it's not good fun. Got it?!

In addition to positioning as Paul mentioned, another thing that doesn't sound right to me is your official backup driving the autopilot. I don't know if that is allowed.

He attempted to land in a 2900 foot runway coming in about 20 knots too fast bouncing on the nose at about midlength of the rw. And that was his second attempt. Would it not have been better for him to have developed structure and discipline by practicing and becoming proficient in full stop landings and aborted landings? Good chance he and his pax would be alive today if he had. Full stop landings would teach him proper airspeed control touching down on the midline and proper point down the rw predictably. It would also teach him proper application of brakes and proper use of pre and post landing checklist. Practicing aborted landings would teach him to recognize a bad approach in time to go around. Not after bouncing twice and on the nose. Unfortunately this poor guy didn't know what he didn't know. Maybe he never learned how to land properly because he had bad habits from TGL's like poor airspeed control, poor short field technique, and poor touch down point selection. Do you think that maybe that's what happened?

https://www.aopa.org/training-and-safety/air-safety-institute/accident-analysis/featured-accidents/touch-and-go-leads-to-tragic-spin-for-cfi-student This was especially sad because I had rented this airplane on several occasions.

As long as my insurance premium doesn't go up because they bent an airplane or worse doing wheelies, useless touch and goes or buzzing their girlfriend's house!

It never ceases to amaze me when I see seasoned airline pilots being lectured by weekend VFR only pilots!

Question to the proponents of TGL as it pertains to the Mooney or to any airplane for that matter: I'm having trouble understanding what it is exactly you are trying to accomplish by doing a tgl? Are you trying to perfect your landings or your go arounds? Reason I ask is because it seems to me you are doing neither! The landing, be it full or aborted, is a normal procedure. The tgl is not. If your goal is to perfect the landing then do landings to a full stop clear of the rw. If it's to perfect go arounds then practice aborted landings from various phases of the approach. On the approach or on short final or just before touch down, or after touch down or on the roll out. Your intent was to land but have to abort for some unexpected reason. What exactly is your intent in a tgl?

If out of trim is the concern, and it is a big one, you are much more out of trim in a TGL than in a go around.

How so? The extra speed and addition of power on the go around, in contrast to a TGL, helps you by making the energy management easier. Simply clean up and climb.

I haven't done touch and goes since my private days in the Cherokee 180. As a matter of preference I will not do them in my Mooney. I find it more valuable to practice full landings and takeoffs or aborted landings. I regularly attend the MAPA proficiency seminars and they don't recommend them either. I had an examiner once request that I show him a touch and go in the Mooney. I politely refused and explained my reasoning to him. I also told him that I'd gladly demonstrate full landings taxi and full take offs. He concurred with my reasoning and thanked me for the explanation!

Of course! Flaps increase wing surface area and curvature thereby increasing lift, and consequently drag. When you increase lift at a given airspeed you also increase drag. There comes a point where drag increase is greater than lift increase. That point for us is take off flaps and anything beyond that is results in too much drag. Lift is still being produced because the airplane is accelerating but drag is just too great to climb. Great for landing when we want to sustain lift at lower airspeeds but for take off not so much. On landing the increased drag from full flaps can be overcome by thrust and by trading altitude for airspeed. Potential energy to kinetic.

Now that you mention it when I went into the terminal I did see someone there. He was going through some papers and seemed like he was waiting for someone. I wonder if that was him and he showed up after you left!

If rw length is not a factor, i.e. >4000 ft or so, I prefer no flaps. I like the smooth liftoff and climb w/o flaps.

Yes you did! Where were you? I landed and pulled up in front of the Ocean Aire hangar. About an hour later I went into the terminal building to pay. Then I left. So sorry I missed you!

Good point on oil temp. Personally I wait for oil temp to reach 130°F or so before run up.