danb35

Here's one for sale on Ebay: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/King-KX170-175-KNB-Hash-Knob-7-16-PN-073-00085-0000-NS-_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQhashZitem27bbe698aaQQitemZ170656176298QQptZMotorsQ5fAviationQ5fPartsQ5fGear#ht_965wt_936

If you're filing a 337, you're saying that you've performed a major alteration to the aircraft. In that case, you must have some source of approved data for that change. An STC is the most common source of approved data; a field approval is another. A 337 sent in without any "approved data" to support the change should be rejected.

Allsmiles, by most accounts, you're lucky to see half of your avionics upgrade dollars back in resale value. To look at a very common (until a few months ago) upgrade, consider the Garmin 430W. Vref indicates that it adds $5k to the value of a '67 F; Jimmy Garrison's article in last month's MAPA Log suggests $7500. I may well have overpaid to have mine installed, but I paid just under twice Jimmy's estimate, and I suspect he's being optimistic. Sure, you're going to get something back for your upgrades, but I don't think it's reasonable at all to expect you'll get 75+% of your cost back in resale. Of course, you're (presumably) getting those upgrades because you want to use them for whatever reason, not just for the sake of bumping up the value of the plane...

Not being privy to the details of the collective bargaining agreement, I'd be willing to bet that there are provisions in there for what constitutes acceptable grounds for termination. As to whether they'll can him, seems highly unlikely--they've already suspended him (without pay) and subsequently reinstated him. Sounds like their punishment is done.

I'd use (and am using) fully-insulated push-on terminals--see the bottom of this page: http://terminaltown.com/Pages/Page10.html Never have understood the popularity of the knife terminals in aviation.

First, I don't "pay" anything for airframe and engine time, per se. Second, my EI tach doesn't start counting until 1300 RPM, which it's very rare to exceed in taxiing.

So, if you're really wanting to see a "pointer", you can go for the EI tach which has an LED "pointer" arc around the edge of the instrument. Why go for an electronic tach? Accuracy and reliability--no moving parts to break. Why was this thread revived after being dead for over 3 months? There was no follow-up question, nor was there additional information...

Lycoming recommends 50 hours or 4 months, whichever comes first, for engines with a filter; I believe Continental is the same. Do your oil analysis results indicate a need to change more frequently?

How hard is it to fix the forum software so this doesn't happen? Of several web forums I frequent, none but MooneySpace randomly logs me in as the wrong user. Or crash consistently when trying to quote another post, for that matter. You're right, it isn't hard at all to do, but it's only an artifact of a very flaky forum that we should need to do so in the first place.

The "step" is a myth.

I'm doing LOP without GAMIs, FWIW.

To your question, if you're cruising level at some MP/RPM combination leaned to peak EGT, and then enrich to 100 ROP, you will be making more power. If you trim to stay level, your airspeed will increase. If you're really concerned that you cruise at exactly 75.0% power, yes, you'll need to adjust throttle, prop, and/or mixture to retain that setting. Or, you can be a bit more practical, and pretty much ignore the concept of setting a specific amount of power. For example, I usually cruise at 7-9k MSL, WOT (with ram air open), 2500 rpm (for noise and smoothness), leaned to ~ 9 gph LOP. I might adjust these a bit; if I want to go faster I might run at 2600 and/or enrich the mixture a bit; if things are getting too warm I'll lean a bit more. I don't really consider (or see any reason to consider) what percentage of power I'm using, though I know that 9 gph is 67%.

A given amount of power at a given density altitude will always give you the same airspeed--however, 24/24 at best power is not the same amount of power as 24/24 at "best economy" (which is likely not true best economy, that being found LOP, which is also likely to be cooler than the "best power" setting). I'd wager that the "best power" setting is actually more than 75%, and would give you more speed. According to the POH for a '74 F, best economy is 25 ROP and best power is 100 ROP. I understand some other models recommend peak EGT for best economy; if yours does so, the "best economy" you list will be close to 75% power. In general, though, I'm a little skeptical of the power charts in the POH--maybe it's because they're quite different from an F to a J, despite having nearly-identical engines. Maybe it's because they show the engine being able to make over 70% power at 12.5k.

The Horizon tach counts time 1:1 when the engine is over 800 RPM. The EI tach is also 1:1, but starts when the engine is over 1300 RPM. Either one is around $500 and an easy install (I did mine myself, with a friendly IA's approval).

Lycoming thinks pilots are too stupid to be able to run LOP safely/efficiently. Lots of other people disagree. Check out John Deakin's articles at AvWeb at http://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/182146-1.html for a good start.

Glad to see I'm not the only one who doesn't go full rich on approach. Usually I don't touch the mixture from its cruise setting until shutdown.

If you're pretty good with cars, there's a good chance you'd be able to work on planes too. Some things are done a bit differently (you'll rarely use 3/8 drive sockets on a plane, for example, as the fasteners tend to be smaller), but you shouldn't have a problem. You may have difficulty finding an understanding mechanic (who is the only "appropriate authority" that would need to sign off on your work) who understands Mooneys, though.

I notice the grin, but just to be clear--there's no requirement that the mechanic be physically present at all times, only that he be available for in-person supervision to the degree he believes is necessary--he/you have a huge amount of leeway.

Like Jose, I add when my level drops below 6 qt. I fill with 7 when I change the oil and usually run 10-15 hours before I add 1, but after that it's more frequent.

Though I'm very happy with my M20F, your description of what you're looking for (particularly coupled autopilot and HSI) is moving you more toward a J. Particularly if you want the autopilot to follow a glideslope, there are few Fs with such an autopilot installed, and it'd be a $20k+ upgrade. Similarly, you don't see HSIs too often in an F. Getting the A/P, HSI, and an IFR GPS in a J for under $80k may be a bit tricky, but I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility. The J is 10-15 knots faster than the F on the same power, which is a pretty good trick and entirely a result of aerodynamic cleanup. If I'd had the budget for a J when I bought my F, I'd have a J instead. The Mooney landing gear is pretty simple and reliable. Pre-1969 models could be had with manual landing gear, which is even more so, but even the electric gear is pretty straightforward. You'll swing the gear and lube all the grease fittings and Heim bearings at annual, but that's about it as far as regular maintenance. This 201 looks like it would fit your criteria. The asking price is slightly over your budget, but there may be room to negotiate in there. The total time is high, but Mooneys are tough, and if not abused shouldn't be a problem at all. The IO-360 can run for a good long time if properly cared for (specifically, if flown regularly to avoid corrosion). I'd want to add an engine monitor, but it otherwise looks to be well-equipped.

It'd sure be nice if the Quote function worked again... Anyway, in response to "1390, 1328, 1395, 1377. Peak was 1440. Should I be concerned about #2 running a lot leaner if engine isn't running rough?" Absolute values of EGT are virtually meaningless, as is the difference in EGT from one cylinder to another. The fact that #2 is 60 deg cooler than #1 means nothing at all, certainly not that #2 is at all leaner. At what fuel flow did #2 peak? What about #1, #3, and #4? If #2 peaked first, at 1.5 GPH higher than the others, that would indicate that it's running leaner (though if it's running smoothly LOP, there's no way that there's that much difference between the cylinders).

See http://hangartoolbox.com/Tools/135.aspx.

Yes, a given fuel flow (in a normally-aspirated engine) will be less LOP at higher altitudes, but fuel flow is nonetheless the only way to determine power when LOP--MP and RPM are (nearly) meaningless. I also find that I cruise at 7-8k 90% of the time. At those altitudes, burning 9 gph (67% power), I'm comfortably LOP, as determined by having previously leaned to peak and seeing how far the temperatures drop. Once you've done that, and figured out the fuel flow that corresponds to (say) 30 LOP at 8k, you can just lean by fuel flow. Of course, if you cruise at widely varying altitudes, you may need to do more dialing-in of the process.

I know LASAR has an STC for the pre-J models; it goes along with their oil cooler relocation--on those models, the oil cooler was located opposite the landing light, and the STC moves it to behind cylinder #4. Once you do that, there's a hole in the cowl, so you can either plug it or instal a plug that has a hole for a second landing light (IIRC, both plugs are provided with the STC kit). To put a second landing light in a J cowl, I think you'd need to cut another hole in it--probably a much more involved operation. Replacing the existing landing light with a 50-watt HID would be one way to get a lot more light, though...

To maybe add a little to what Ross said, LOP does require a new way of thinking for most pilots, so you probably would need to read that material a few (or several) times for it to sink in. However, the question on power settings is easy--once you're LOP, any setting that burns 10 GPH is giving you 75%; 8.7 GPH is 65%. For any other fuel flow, multiply by 14.9 to determine horsepower, and then if you're really worried about percentage, divide that number by 200. I normally fly WOT, 2500-2600 RPM, leaned to ~ 9 GPH.