Jeff_S

Give me the details once you get it figured out and I'll post it through the Southeast Mooney mailing list. We've got around a hundred or so folk on the list from the general Southeast area. Many of them follow Mooneyspace but probably not a majority. I look forward to it! Jeff

Hi Robert. I looked at 446PC and flew it with Richard Simile once, but couldn't come to terms with Premier on trading in my J. It was a nice machine. Those speed numbers seem pretty impressive. I was cruising home from Cincinnati in my O3 yesterday at 9,000', running 2500 RPM and WOT and 182 KTAS. I had it at 16GPH though because I'm still doing a bit of engine break-in and didn't want the CHTs too high.

Yeah, Joey Cole has moved to Dalton now so there's not as much reason to have another gathering of Mooneys but it was a fun show to be sure, and will be better this year since the T-Birds are out of sequester. I may try to get up there again.

Michael O'Neal out of PDK is an excellent instructor with lots of Mooney time. I know he routinely ferries one of his client's Ovations from Tennessee and back for maintenance, and he does my BFRs. I don't like putting people's phone numbers on the internet so I'll send you his contact info via PM.

RPM also will factor in, as manifold pressure will go up if you drop RPM. That said, just flew home from Charleston SC to Atlanta last weekend at 6000', OAT was about 16°C as I recall, 2500 RPM, and the MP was 24". It rose from 23" to 24" when I dialed RPM back from climb at 2600 to cruise at 2500.

Here's one thing to consider. I don't know what avionics Joe has in his Acclaim, but it could be that they need a plane with the G1000/S-TEC 55x combo to use for certification testing so they can finally get this configuration WAAS certified. That would be very good news to many of us.

So I'm showing my J to a prospective buyer this week on a clear sunny Atlanta morning. I knew he had just retired from the Air Force, but hadn't thought to ask him what he did in the AF until we got together. Turns out he has 4000 hours in F-16s. Real nice guy, low key, exactly what you want in a fighter pilot I'm guessing. We get out to the practice area at 3000' and I say "your controls." Not 2 seconds after he says "my airplane" we're in a 60 degree bank to left and all of a sudden Lake Lanier is looking mighty close out my window. I do commercial steep turns for practice as well, so this wasn't too alarming, except it takes me a bit longer to get to that degree of bank. But I was fine, right up until he whips that thing right over to another 60 degree bank on the right side, at which point my head and my stomach started to protest. "Whoah Nellie, you gotta' take it easy on us civilians" I told him, and he immediately apologized and edged us back toward level flight. I think if I'd have known it was coming I could have prepared for it and taken it better, but the sudden change got right to me. But that feeling quickly passed and we had a good flight. I flew a GPSS-RNAV approach so he could see how that works in our "modern" cockpits. He said all the American F-16s still have round gauges and he'd never flown a GPS approach before. I guess only our exported planes have all the goodies. Finally we were coming back toward PDK and I just mentioned that I plan on 5 miles per 1000' of descent needed. He quickly calculated "okay, 2 degree angle" faster than I could have pulled out a calculator. These guys know their numbers. He told me that they plan on a 10 degree angle for their descents, and reminded me that since the F-16 has actually a shorter wing span than the J, yet weighs 20-times more, "they don't glide all that well." Talk about a nose-dive! Anyway, he is a great guy and it was fun to get just a hint of a perspective on what it would be to strap into a plane like that. Although if I did it for real, I would want to make sure the plastic bag was ready!

Well, you've left some variables like temperature out of the equation, but the book example in the POH says that 65% power at 6000' and temperature of 20°C is 155 KTAS. So if you think you're getting slightly greater power in your test, and you're a skosh higher, then it would be a bit higher than that. Other factors to consider are what prop you have on it, as the book is based on the standard McCauley 2-blade. Here's a link to an online POH for a J, in case you want to do more research: http://www.deltaaviationllc.com/Nav%20Page/POH/M20J%20POH3203B.pdf

I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things. - Antoine de Saint-Exupery

The POH says that with A/C turned on, airspeed should suffer by about 1.8%. So not the 5 knots noted above, but some slight degradation of airspeed could be expected.

I'm seriously considering it but need a few other pieces of the puzzle to fall into place first. I expect I'll make a final decision about a month before the event.

I use a product called Wash-Wax All that you can get from Spruce and many other places. It's a spray-on, wipe-off product that does a great job cleaning the dirt as well as waxing the plane. For the greasy underside there is a Belly Wash version which is more gel-like so it stays where you spray it and cuts through the grease and oil.

It looks faster than it seems to be, based on the stated performance.

Those West aircraft are manufactured just 120 miles up the road (I-85) from Atlanta in Walhalla, SC. And Maule's are made here in Georgia. Who'd a thought that the Southeast could be a proving ground for some really great backcountry machines?

Thanks Seth. Yes, my A/P did some analysis and he felt the idle mixture was set too rich as well. It's possible I suppose, since it was set in Florida (sea level) during the springtime (cooler months) compared to now being in Atlanta at 1000' elevation in the hot summer. He leaned out the idle mixture and I did notice a difference. I'm more comfortable now knowing what I need to do in these situations so I'm just going to monitor it and tweak as necessary. I did discover that the A/C loads the alternator for an effective 300-400 RPM drop at idle, which when coupled with the too-rich mixture may have increased the problems.

This technique is seemingly not different than the one Mike Busch describes for hot starting the IO-550, with one exception. Busch's article specifically states that when doing the long prime for cooling, the throttle should be wide open. And Deakin's article is a bit hard to interpret, in that he describes a process going from an attempted "cold" start technique right into his cooling technique. He does say to put the mixture at ICO, but he doesn't really mention the throttle setting. Presumably he intends for the throttle to remain in the "cracked" position. So what would be the difference to the engine between leaving the throttle just "cracked" during the cooling prime, or leaving it wide open as Busch suggests? I'm not really clear on what would be different, or anything, since the mixture is at ICO in both cases. Appreciate any insights from the more engine-knowledgeable folks. Thanks!

Hmm...that's interesting. I wonder what the point of that is. And why would it show hotter than the individual probes higher up in the stack? Maybe the combination of all gases reaching that point somehow has an additive effect? But thanks for clarifying that one. I hadn't seen it in the manuals anywhere.

Hi Folks. For those who have a G1000 system in their Mooney, a question about variance between EGT readings. I've been experimenting with different power settings, which is making me focus on the EGT/CHT gauges to see how my engine reacts. Today I noticed an interesting thing: the EGT gauge in the standard Map mode (the small sliders on the left) which shows and denotes the hottest cylinder is reading out exactly 100° hotter than the same cylinder shows when you put it on the Engine page. This is only true for the EGT reading...the CHT reading shows the same in both modes. Anybody ever see this before?

I'm just curious why you can't get your plane over to PDK. I agree with your point about Michael O'Neal because I fly with him a bit. Lately I've also been flying with a guy named Bill Rutkowski...he's a part-time instructor but full CFI-I/ATP and he has his own 231, so he's very familiar with turbo Mooneys. Drop me a PM if you're interested and I'll give you his contact info.

Thanks Paul. I may take you up on that, although it looks like we're back in a storm period this weekend. Heck, with all the weather I've flown through lately that should be no big deal! I'll talk to my A/P though, and get his thoughts about adjustments. The fact is I've flown this plane more in the last three weeks than it has flown in a year, since it was undergoing all its repairs. The engine now has about 10 hours on it since the tear-down/rebuild, so I imagine its natural for it to need some tweaking as it breaks into normal operating mode.

My confidence (hubris?) about hot starts reared up on me this afternoon. On landing I was coming in a bit fast so I had pulled the throttle all the way out to glide in. Perhaps the mixture was too lean, as on rollout the engine quit. Luckily I could roll onto the taxiway, but it took me a few minutes to get it started. Eventually had to use a flooded technique. I went up to the fuel depot and gassed her up, and then had trouble starting again with all the standard techniques, except finally using a flooded start I got it going. But on taxing back down a hill I throttled back and she quit AGAIN! This was right in front of Epps Aviation and a guy came up in a truck and asked if I needed help. I said "I'll let you know." Once more, I could get it to fire a bit and then it would die. Finally I did a flooded technique and got it started to fire, and as it seemed like it was quitting again I gave it a shot of prime and that did the trick. Before shutting down I did a run-up to test all the cylinders and they looked fine on the engine gauge, and after I got it normalized then it ran okay even at idle. My theory is that I was running so lean I got it into some type of vapor lock that took awhile to clear. Feel free to educate me if that's way off base. Oy vey!

Mooney J is your bird. I've got one for you! Check it out: http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/detail.aspx?OHID=1329640&pcid=1300876

Was that the wing of a Mooney I saw in the attached picture? Does it have some type of winglet on the end? Interesting...

It certainly sounds conservative, in that you would probably have lots of money in your repair fund if the engine makes it to TBO. You've said this is your first airplane to own, so what you'll learn is that in the first year of ownership you'll come to know all its little quirks and idiosyncrasies, and after the first annual you'll have a sense for what the standard things cost vs. the extras that always creep up. Then you may be able to lower your hourly contribution with some comfort.

I think all else being equal, some of the Mooneys will be more stable on final approach, especially the heavier ones. The higher wing loading will stabilize some of the bumps. This may not be true of the lighter-weight short body Mooneys. And hey Yetti...if you want a J model, I've got one to sell! Check out my listing in the For Sale section.