jlunseth

When you get the AFSM for the 275 and read it, you find, among other things, that the advertised 60 minutes is actually as little as 30 minutes. I can give you multiple courses where that would not be enough. I can also tell you from actual experience that the aircraft battery, which is supposedly rated for multiple amp hours, may actually give you about a half hour. If you suffer loss of the single alternator you need to drop the gear, because the battery will continue to drain during flight and when you get to your destination, there may not be enough left to lower the gear. You also need to switch the master off, because you may need instruments and radios when you get to your destination, but the single battery will still drain during flight, just not as bad. Now let's say, you are flying from Great Falls over the Rockies to land at KGPI. Or across the route from ABQ to SoCal. Or across the Atlantic from the Bahamas. And you are over a cloud deck, which makes you VFR for now, but you are going to have to shoot some kind of approach in order to safely land. You are going to need time to shoot your approach. Let's say 10 minutes, which is really short for something like an RNAV approach, but maybe you can get vectors and help. That leaves you roughly 20 minutes to get to an airport and the airports are all further than that. Or if you can get to one, you are shooting an approach with no instruments except you manage to get your 275's going. Now what are you going to use for the RNAV or an ILS? Well, that's your GPS that doesn't have a backup battery, so you are glad you remembered to switch off the master and save some power so you can put the approach up and shoot it. Now it is a contest between the life of the remaining batteries and the time it takes you to get through that approach. What would keep you alive is an AI that operates as long as the engine is going, whether the alternator is working or not, and that relies on a technology other than electricity, of which you may not have enough. That would be a vacuum operated AI, which you took out in your last avionics refit because it was "steam" and you wanted the 7 lbs. of useful load. This isn't a hypothetical I am giving you. I have flown all these routes. I have had the alternator fail several times, when we (my A&P and me) were installing an aftermarket coupler out of what must have been a defective lot. I have had the alternator fall off into the running engine because of improper installation. None of this has happened in years now, but having actually had it happen it very much affects my decision making. There must be redundant, non-single point of failure instruments that will continue to operate no matter what, particularly the AI. Sure, electronic tech is nifty, I love my GTN750 and my 275's. But I am not giving up my steam, vacuum operated AI.

Because removing the vacuum in some models results in a single point of failure. All becomes dependent on the single alternator and also the single battery. @PeteMc If you install the correct version of the GI275 it includes a Turn Coordinator function certified as primary, in other words, as a replacement for your original TC. The TC shows up as two small aircraft symbols at the top of the 275, one on each side of center. There is also a slip/skid. I believe this version of the 275 requires an OAT sensor to be installed with the 275 as I recall. It then computes standard rate turn for the conditions and displays as the two symbols. However, you need to think about a backup AI, which is the other function of the TC. Personally, I would not rely on a TC for AI function in IMC with turbulence, you would not stand a chance.

Me too. Different problem. About four or five months ago there was an update to the Aviation Database Manager. When I did the update and then loaded my cards (I have a GTN750 and a GNS430AW) the 430 would not boot up when the cards were installed. I got a text message saying some kind of pre-check was being performed and then just the Garmin screen. It had been awhile since I had flown the aircraft so I thought maybe I had put the cards in the wrong slot. I switched them. When I did that, the 430 would boot up and be usable but no data at all. At least I could change frequencies on the radio. Talked to Garmin, they sent a new nav data card (thank you by the way). When I tried that the unit still would not boot up. Went to my local avionics shop. They said maybe it’s not the nav card, maybe it’s the terrain card. Tried booting it with the nav card in and the terrain card out. That worked, except no terrain data. There have been two updates of the Aviation Database Manager recently, the first of which said it addressed a degraded card issue. Updated the terrain card yet again, no joy. The second said it repaired an issue of communication between the Manager and the GNS card reader. I have reloaded the database with the recent update and will try it in a day or two. Learned along the way that a repair utility was created to fix corrupted terrain cards, but that terminated in about Feb. Apparently there were a bunch of terrain cards corrupted and with more than one version of the Manager. I am guessing the utility made its way into the Database Manager. That did me no good. I hold my breath each time I update the Manager, every update seems to create a new and different problem.

@wombat, et al. The problem with interpreting regs the way the pilot wants to, or even based on what the language of the regulation appears to plainly say, is that it does not work that way. There is a doctrine called "Chevron deference" (named after a Supreme Court case) that says that whatever understanding or interpretation the regulating body (here, the FAA) applies to the regulation is the correct interpretation unless it is arbitrary or capricious. "Arbitrary and capricious" is a very high bar. In short, if a regulatory body such as the FAA issues a regulation, it gets to say what the regulation means, not you and me, or other pilots who may have to operate under the regulation, or even the Federal courts. The result has been some really crazy interpretations of regulations as regulatory bodies seek to expand their authority and jurisdiction, and the Courts have felt bound not to interfere. There has been speculation that Chevron deference will be limited by the Supreme Court and that perhaps Chevron itself will be overturned, but today that is not the case. In other words, if you were in an accident because you failed to use a mask above 18k it would not matter much what neat arguments you could come up with about the language and structure of the regulations, or how a reasonable pilots would understand them, the FAA's understanding of them would apply. Thus, for example, if the agency said that, to be airworthy under 23.1441 et seq,, the aircraft must have a functioning O2 mask for the pilot, and therefore to fly such an aircraft above 18k the pilot must use the approved equipment, then that interpretation would be the governing interpretation. The FAA brochure pretty much says that is the case. And the FAA could reasonably conclude that 1441 is not limited to aircraft "certified" under part 23 because 1441 is broader than that, it covers an "airplane [that is] is approved for operations at or above altitudes where oxygen is required to be used by the operating rules... ." Don't get mad at me, I am just the messenger. When I first looked at those regs I had the same thought, that nothing in the regs requires the pilot to use a mask above 18k, the regs simply require that one be on board. But it is likely that the FAA would not see it that way. If you have a concern you could write a letter to the FAA's Office of General Counsel and request a formal interpretation.

I was interested in this. How many hours on the new engine? Asking because during break-in the temps will come down eventually, and won't always do so evenly. If the engine is still breaking in, then give it some time. Temps don't look bad to me.

Happened to me when I purchased the aircraft and my CFI and I took off from Scottsdale. Turned out the door was out of adjustment and would open readily. It is a nothing. More noise, but the door opens only about an inch and then won't open further because of the slipstream around the aircraft. Unfortunately won't close in the air either, the slipstream holds it very securely partially ajar. Just cold if you are at higher altitudes. Requires keeping focus if you want to land, but nothing about it requires effort by the pilot to secure the door. Mine was fixed more than a decade ago and has not been a problem since. I have it in my checklist to check the passenger door before takeoff. Passengers don't normally know how to close that door. Have to hold it closed with the leather handle while pushing the door handle into the locked position. I always hold it closed and let them push the handle, then give the door a big push to see if it is secure. It is possible for one latch to lock but not the other, usually the one at the top. If it is a baggage door that would be a completely different issue, usually departs the aircraft with damage according to past reports and events.

Here is a current article from Mike Busch (just a few days ago) and the link to a Wings seminar he is putting on. https://www.savvyaviation.com/ending-the-war-on-jugs/ Here is the FAASafety Seminar: "Ending the War on Jugs" Topic: Safety information to determine cylinder condition and tips to remedy issues prior to removal. On Wednesday, April 3, 2024 at 19:00 Central Daylight Time (17:00 PDT; 18:00 MDT; 20:00 EDT; 14:00 HST; 16:00 AKDT; 17:00 Arizona; Thursday, April 4, 2024 00:00 GMT) Select Number: GL13127672 Description: Historically, the rule A&Ps were taught about cylinders was simple: If the compression reading was less than 60/80, the cylinder had to come off for repair or replacement, period. This works well for mechanics, who are always happiest when they have clear-cut guidance to follow. But it was bad news for aircraft owners, who have to shell out several thousand dollars each time a jug gets yanked, and occasionally suffer catastrophic engine failure when the cylinder installation isn't done precisely right. In recent years, we've developed far more effective methods of assessing cylinder condition, catching problems early, and remediating them without the need for costly and risky cylinder removal. In this webinar, Mike Busch discusses these modern methods, techniques, and practices. To view further details and registration information for this webinar, click here: http://www.faasafety.gov/SPANS/event_details.aspx?eid=127672 The sponsor for this seminar is: FAASTeam

Mine has worked really well. The valve leaked years ago but that was fixed and it can sit for months without losing pressure. Understand that there is a change of the pressure reading by the gauge as OAT changes. Pressure goes up on a hot day and down when it is cold. Here in MN the difference can be substantial. But it does not mean there is a problem with the system.

Mine is a 430AW, it’s a WAAS unit. Haven’t had the problem you mentioned Fritz, but can tell you that the cards have changed since those original non-WAAS units came out. The label color on the nav data cards has changed, each change made for a larger storage capacity. You should check, your terrain card may just not be large enough for the current database and a new card (not cheap) might fix it.

Take Pinecone’s advice. Get TCM’s instructions on compression testing and make sure your mechanic, or preferably another mechanic, actually follows them. I am not an A&P, I am an owner of a K, so I track this whole issue just enough to understand what my A&P is telling me. As I understand it, TCM issued SB03-3 about 20 years ago. To my knowledge, it is still TCM’s current advice. Paul Kortopates or another A&P could tell you. TCM’s methodology is different from other engine manufacturers and places less reliance on straight-up compression testing to determine whether a cylinder needs to be replaced. Among other things, the SB says that a borescope should be performed. It also says that compression testing should not be done on a cold engine, the engine must be operated first, preferably flown at 65-75 percent power for about an hour before testing, so the compression test is done on an engine with full lubrication. If compressions are low, the SB says to recheck. There have been many instances where the first compression test is low, the engine is then flown and retested, and the readings are completely different. Last but not least, TCM’s minimum compressions for the K engines are much lower than other manufacturers’. Compression in the low to mid 40’s are acceptable. Testing has born this out, engines with intentionally low compressions (rings filed) put out the same horsepower as those with higher compressions. TCM’s advice on compression testing in the early 2000’s was controversial, you will actually find many articles online about it, and Mike Busch requested and got a legal opinion from the FAA about it. Lot’s of mechanics still don’t follow it. I have a new engine (TSIO360-LB). I replaced my old one when it approached 2300 hrs, which is nearly 500 over TBO. LOP operations were very good for that engine, and most of the time I was at 71% LOP, not 65 or in the 50’s. I replaced the engine because it was 22 years old and I thought getting a factory engine would result in the least down time for the aircraft. That did not turn out, but that is another story. In the last five years of the engine’s life (about 500 or 600 hrs) my number 2 was down in the 50s and eventually in the 40s. Borescoping made clear, however, that there was nothing fundamentally wrong with the cylinder. I never had any trouble with that cylinder. Bear in mind that at that point the engine was a few hundred hours past TBO. At about 1200 hrs on the engine, I had the engine IRAN’d because it had obviously been run very hot by the prior owner, and because I had to make an emergency descent to landing that caused some ring slap in the cylinders. I never got a statement that said what was done, whether cylinders were replaced or just rebuilt. It was quite awhile ago. So I can’t tell you if cylinders were replaced now 14 years ago on that engine. I can tell you that the shop did a great job, the engine was far better than before the IRAN. Before the IRAN the engine would use as much as a quart every two hours. After the IRAN, and until the engine was replaced, I could generally go from one oil change to another at 25 hrs and not have to put in oil. If I went to 35 or more hours between changes then I would need to add a quart. I sometimes went as much as 40 or 50 because I was flying frequently and there was no point in changing oil every two weeks in my view. Oil use increased only very slightly toward the end, sometimes I would need to put in one quart between 25 hr. oil changes on an engine way past TBO. Also, I have to say that from my own experience I do not agree with mechanics that try to fault LOP operations for problems in an engine. Just was not my experience at all. Honestly, I wouldn’t worry about the compressions unless borescoping says there is something wrong with the cylinder. Just my opinion.

Posting again in case anyone with the 430/530 is having a card problem. The history is that I updated my Garmin Aviation Database Manager a month or two ago, loaded the db on my navdata and terrain card, and the 430 would not work. I would get the Garmin screen with “No Copyright Info” underneath and that is as far as the unit would go in booting up. Talked to Garmin, got a replacement navdata card, saw that Garmin had created a new version of the Database Manager, installed that, and then reloaded the new card. Same result, the 430 would not boot past the Garmin screen, the only difference was that the small print showed copyright information existed. In fiddling around to test the unit, I pulled the navdata card and switched the terrain card into its place. The unit then booted normally except had no navdata. At least I could use the radios. I went to my avionics shop and they suggested that there had been problems like this in the past, and that they were caused by a corrupted terrain card, not the navdata card I was chasing. So I took the navdata card to the plane, inserted it, pulled the terrain card, and voila! the unit booted except now no terrain or obstacle data. Not a big deal because my main GPS is a 750 that works fine and the 430 is just backup. But at least I know what the source of the problem is. The first step was to reload the terrain card, so I have done that and now need to test it to see if the reload will work. If not, it will be back to Garmin.

I know I have carried the pump type hairspray in my aircraft because it is just always in my travel toiletry kit, but I can't say I have ever noticed a problem with hairspray. Never thought about it. I get the small sample sized bottles for travel. I would put them in a plastic bag just in case, I do that with all my liquids and tubes of stuff even when I am going by commercial airline. Most of them won't leak but it only takes one....

TCM wants the CHT to be between 300 and 380 and to limit cold and low power operations. Heat and pressure to prevent deposits and to seat the rings hard against the walls.

I am also breaking in my engine. I don't hesitate to keep the speed brakes out to slow the airframe. They are rated for the Vne speed of the aircraft. I would not want to exceed the gear speed though, with the gear deployed. Mine is 132 kts. The leading edges of the gear doors are unsupported sheet metal, I have had pieces of the leading edges of the gear doors, especially the starboard one, sheer off several times, to the point where I don't even try to repair them anymore. Wasn't exceeding gear speed, they are just vulnerable. TCM recommends dialing the RPMs way down in order to keep the cylinders warm. For engine break-in, I routinely dial the RPMs down to 1800 on final in order to be able to keep the power up. Don't know that I would go that low for a sustained cruise though, but maybe look at your POH tables and use the lowest cruise RPM in the tables. Probably 2200. You might try the kitchen sink, i.e. leave the gear deployed, speed brakes out, and full flaps. Obviously, if the airframe starts to exceed the V speed for one of them you would need to slow and take that appendage in, probably the flaps first. But it might keep the airframe from exceeding any of the V speeds to begin with. I am nearing 50 hours and the engine is probably pretty much broken in at this point.

Just reset your altimeter.

I’ll bet nearly everyone has the problem of loose visor screws. I have always wondered whether a tiny amount of blue loctite wouldn’t take care of that. I should talk, I tell myself every time I get in the aircraft that I need to go through the visors and do that, but keep forgetting to take out sample screws so I can go to the hardware store and try to replace them. Good reminder. I am going to do that today.

A few years ago a Warthog came to KFCM in preparation for the annual airshow. He got permission from the tower to do a low pass over the runway. The pilot was grinning, I know he was, I saw it.

PS there is a normal operating range table in my POH, may be one in yours. Above 250 is in the normal operating range for my engine. Because of the cold here in MN I have looked into the consequences of operating one or more cylinders cold. The only consequence I have been able to find is that some think that lead scavenging degrades, so the spark plugs gunk up. I can’t say I have ever experienced that. Happens for a short time during every single landing in the winter here in MN when the engine is powered down on final or even in the pattern. Can’t say that it has ever caused an issue with my engine. @ Pinecone. As it happens, I have been reading through Basic Theory of Operation of Turbo Compound Engine, copyrighted in 1957, which the GAMI people distributed at the Ada seminar I attended. It’s by the Field Engineering Department of Curtiss-Wright. Pretty interesting.

I pull off an inch of MP, make no other changes, and tip the nose over into a 500 fpm descent. In a turbo, if you are coming down from the flight levels it can be a long descent. If you were at 21k and need to get to 1k, that’s 40 minutes of descending, and making that kind of a descent exactly on the numbers is more art than science. The winds aloft that had you screaming along at 21k may stop quickly as you descend or they may not. Hard to predict. I pull the inch off because as soon as I tip the nose over the plane is going to pick up speed and the ram air effect is going to bring the MP right back up to around where I had it at cruise. Maintaining cruise power will keep the engine nice and toasty. Every time I say this someone jumps in and say, oh horror!, what if you hit a bump on the way down. Obviously, if it starts to get bumpy or you are going to descend into cloud tops where it could be turbulent you change what you are doing. Shock cooling is an OWT unless you are in arctic cold conditions. We do get that on occasion here in MN and when it starts to get difficult to keep the engine warm, remember, if you are at 65% power you can run the engine dead on peak, which helps keeps the temps up. You can also reduce RPMs way down, which allows you to keep percent of power higher in order to keep the engine warm. I am currently breaking in a new engine and TCM recommends pulling the RPMs way back during descents and approaches in order to keep the power up, so I am pulling it back to 1900 or even 1800 and guess what, nothing bad happens except I can keep the engine a little warmer.

Yup, the 231 POH has the same warning. It also states, "Except for takeoff, fuel in the selected tank can be safely used until the quantity indicator reads empty (top of red line) for all other coordinated flight conditions." [Emphasis added.] Level or nose down and coordinated you are ok. ZW said it right, there is so much range with full tanks there is really no reason to get down to 0 in one and 10 in the other wing in the very efficient 231. I did it once on a trip from KFCM to Asheville, NC back in the day when I was flying ROP all the time, but if you fly LOP at cruise there is no good reason. Even if you get up into the flight levels and have to fly ROP, now your range per gallon is around 175 nm plus the tailwind that caused you to go up there in the first place.

Could also be magneto related. Generating good spark gets to be a little more of an issue in the high atmosphere levels. The turbos went to a pressurized mag decades ago to prevent one of the symptoms, called cross-cap tracking. Air acts as an insulator and prevents the spark from tracking across the magneto cap to the wrong electrode, firing a cylinder at the wrong time. You can't do much about that, but when the mixture starts to get hard to ignite the condition of the mags and the type of spark plug are usually the issue. Those of us who fly LOP quite a bit generally go to fine wire plugs, which perform better, and the spark in my aircraft is always better right after annual when the magnetoes get maintenance work done.

I have a guess. They closed all the freeway gates in ND and that stopped the weather at the border. The freeway gates are there to prevent Darwinian applicants from “givin’ ‘er a try don’t ja know.” And I am not pickin on em, I am one of them, ja u betcha fer sur. We refer to that weather condition as “uffda” weather.

My plane was in the shop for a new engine for a few months last year, and I was not attempting to update my Navdata, so this may be an old issue for those who were. The first time I updated the nav (and terrain) card I purposely did not update the Garmin Aviation Database Manager, although there was an update available. I know those updates can cause a problem (like forgetting my password) so avoided it. This last time I updated Database Manager, then loaded the navdata, and Database Manager reported that the card loaded successfully. But when I put the cards in my 430AW I got a message on start-up that some verification process would be run, and at the end of that process I got a screen that said no copyright information was available, and from that point I could not access any of the functions of the 430. Thinking I had forgotten, after months out of the plane, which card goes in which slot, I switched them, and with the terrain card in the nav card slot the 430 booted normally but reported that it had no nav data. I could at least use the radios. I found some posts on Mooneyspace about the same kind of issue with the Garmin terrain card, and it said that there was a utility that Garmin was sending out that would allow the card to be repaired, so I called Garmin and got that utility. I could not get it to work on the navdata card, and when I called Garmin was told that the utility is only for the terrain card. However, they were nice enough to issue an exchange so I can mail in my navdata card and they are sending out a new one. No hurry for me, my main GPS is a GTN 750 which is working fine. Just thought I would let everyone know about the issue and that Garmin is helping.

Yeah, I am in Minneapolis and my brother lives in GFK. I have been trying to get up there because he wants to start flying lessons, but I have been watching that block of weather over ND for about a week now. Still there, although it is not confined to ND now, it has crept into western MN. But those who hate the MN weather, we have been in the 50s and sunny for about the last week now, it is only those poor Nodaks who have not gotten the message yet.

That’s really great. I tried with Lasar a couple of years ago but couldn’t get it done. I gave up on the whole idea and went with a vacuum AI so I have two different power sources driving my AIs. I also have installed a new engine and I have to say the alternator, so far, has been really great. The major problem with the original alternator was not enough charging capacity at low idle, so it was necessary to taxi at 1150 or higher to keep from getting a buss voltage warning. The new one will let me idle in the high 900’s.