testwest

Hi everyone Up for sale is a red Whelen position light glass lens (dome) removed from a Twin Commander for upgrade. It has a small chip in the lens base, this is not visible when the lens is installed and resting on its gasket (Whelen p/n W1283, not included). Also needs a bit of scrubbing on the part that would be under the metal holder if you want. If you have ever dropped one of these you know what a significant emotional event it is. They are $89.95 each, new, from Aircraft Spruce. How about $29 for this one plus shipping. USPS Priority Flat Rate small box is $9.45 anywhere in the US. Paypal is good, thanks.

Sold!

SOLD! Hi everyone Up for sale is a pair of MDI F391-53S fuel drain valves, new-old-stock in unopened packaging. These are about $34 each from Chief Aircraft, how about $25 for the pair plus shipping. Will likely use a USPS Priority Flat Rate Small Box, those are $9.45.

+1 for Clarence, I did that on our M20J, a new LED bulb and also fabricated a new little plexiglas window for the indicator. It is now highly visible even in daylight, while not being annoying at night.

I had the same issue with our 1977 M20J and the Dukes 1057 actuator. It is very easy to shatter those old brush holders due to the epoxy on the caps. So folks are not pulling the brushes for inspection and they will eventually wear away completely, causing this: Luckily I was able to crank the gear down and land OK. After a LOT of research I was able to track down the original brush holder and brush manufacturers and had new engineering drawings created for these parts. There are minimum order quantities and so I went ahead and ordered to get N201JX back in the air. Kind of expensive but...... For 1977 M20J owners with serial numbers below 377, this may be interesting. The brushes, bearings, and wire necessary for the rebuild are all "standard parts" and would require no PMA or STC. The brush holders and caps are another story, for me personally they were "owner produced parts" and a "minor modification" (e.g. the method of safetying the brush caps). However, to have some of these parts available for others will require consultation with my local FAA MIDO. The threaded caps can be sealed on with tank sealant as others have suggested, but safety wiring the caps may be a better idea. That is still in work, as I said below. With the safety wire it will be very easy to inspect the brushes as an added part of the normal 200 hour inspection called out in the Mooney M20J Service Manual 5-20-06, Section 3, paragraph L: I would add: Inspect the gear actuator motor by removing the brush caps from the brush holders, remove and inspect the brushes. If the brushes are worn to a length of .25" or less (33% of original), replace the brushes. Now, that .25" (33%) is subject to review, I was balancing remaining wear versus spring tension in suggesting the criterion. Comments and suggestions welcome. Inspection and servicing of the gear motor bearings and commutator for the gear motor is not specifically addressed in the SM, but this level of work is outlined regarding the starter motor. So it should be doable by any A&P. LASAR used to send their Dukes gear motors to George's Electric in Sacramento for rebuild but he is closed down. Our 40:1 Dukes gears are still in great shape (proper maintenance, yay!) but replacing the unit with the $8500+ ITT actuator (if you can get it) versus rebuilding the electric motor and setting it up for continued easy inspection and service is kind of a no brainer.

Got 'em on our plane. Yes it seems like a lot of money. Aerotough material is not delrin or anything else off the shelf. A little research into the history and capability of Marsh Brothers Aviation will provide insight into this material. And the caps operate smoothly and easily like never before and like nothing else. These plus the MS25988/1 flourosilicone o-rings are a great improvement.

I still have my presentation in the hopper for the postponed Summit, I will be happy to present my talk this Fall.

Mike I hope to see you at Sun n Fun this year!

Seems I forgot to report on the results as I said I would earlier. Bottom line is I was able to get the VCC within 4 degrees or less on all 12 headings on the compass correction card. The interesting thing now is to watch it swing during an engine start. That #2 battery cable runs from left to right under the instrument panel to the starter contactor, then thru the firewall and back right to left along the engine mount to the starter. Lots of current, lots of steel, magnetar!!

Nuke I hope this is one of the threads you looked at: https://mooneyspace.com/topic/36590-magnetic-compass-way-off/?tab=comments#comment-628292 It was my mounting bracket that was magnetized! I got my vertical card compass walked in finally, but it was much easier than before without that magnetized bracket. Still, if I get another failure I am going with the SIRS compass. The previous advice you received in this thread regarding that compass is well founded. Hope your PPL went well!

AFAIK all new Lycoming non-roller tappets come this way. See here https://www.lycoming.com/parts/tappets Lycoming spent a fortune developing the roller tappets and wants you to buy them, but roller tappets are 100% replace at overhaul. DLC tappets came later for the older engines, but they are so good it would knock down the market for the rollers. So Lycoming upgrades factory overhauled engines automatically to rollers, and really does not push the DLC at all. The layout of the web page above is testament to that, even with the DLC tappet pictured at the bottom of the page, there is still a roller pictured next to it. Having said that, the rollers do cut down rotational losses in these engines significantly, so much so that the cam grind had to be made a little “lazier” to make sure the engine did not make more than its rated power to a reasonable statistical probability.

OK, the coating you are looking for is called DLC, or diamond-like-carbon. Lycoming already offers this coating on their non-roller tappets, and it stops tappet spalling dead cold in its tracks. CMI, I don't think they do it yet but Ly-Con was working on an STC for the Continental tappets. I am amazed the knowledge of this process has not spread more widely among the GA community. Ly-Con says this problem is completely solved. They have a set of Lycoming DLC tappets now on their third TBO cycle in a traffic watch airplane and they still pass new limits criteria.

Hi Glen I was able to successfully repair my headliner vents following "expert work" by an A&P mechanic who was in a hurry. The before picture is here: I ordered new wemac duct/adapter assemblies from LASAR: I did keep the seats but I would write to Stephanie Bragg at Plane Plastics ( stephanie.bragg@vantageassoc.com ) and see if they can make a set of seats for you if you send in the old ones. They will make all kinds of parts that are not in the catalog, they are not PMA'ed but are classified as "owner produced parts" since you are causing them to be manufactured. I kept the fabricated attachment strips, they allow removal of the assembly without destruction in the future. Disadvantage is one can see six very small screw heads around the wemacs from the cabin side. Here is the finished product before I added just a small amount of RTV on the corners, just the minimum amount to stops any leaks. I cleaned the wemacs with Goof Off and then lubed with a small amount of Boeshield. They are working better than ever before! Hope this helps.

Hi AH64pilot I'm the guy that wrote the Vz thesis that was referenced earlier in this thread. For 120 knots or so you will be about 45-50% power. You did mention that 2350 rpm or less was problematic, so 2400 rpm and about 19" MP will get you 120-125 KIAS or so. That will be about 7 1/2 gph leaned roughly to peak. This information can be gleaned from your POH (1223E, I think), performance pages, Best Economy at 2000 feet. But no one like to interpolate tables, so.... I ran the Benchmark engine model for 2000 feet and 30 deg C for a jaunt around Lake Weir, the temperature was chosen to provide a good opportunity for sightseeing the, uh, personnel likely to be on boats and what they are wearing (or not) under those conditions. I know how you Army rotorheads think. And here is a better performance prediction for those conditions, how about 2500 lb GW on the airplane: There is a massive amount of information in this model, and it touches nearly every aspect of the discussion in this thread thus far. If your airplane is pretty close to the drag of the baseline used to create the POH (where this Benchmark model is derived from), you will be going about 125 knots indicated or so. Hope this helps. LMK if I need to run the model for a higher gross weight airplane, e.g. you are having a squadron reunion and there are 4 retiree Apache vets on a ....reconnaissance mission....in the plane instead of just one. :-)

Hi TCU I used a MaxDim Duo to solve this issue. I know the MaxDims are expensive but their dimming ratios are really good. I have a combination of incandescent and LED lights on the same dimmer and all the lights dim very nicely without flicker or mismatched dimming ratios. I don’t know how they did it, I have a lot of experience in evaluating flight deck lighting (including the 767 tanker NVG), and Seaton Engineering has some really smart cookies working for them.

That is kind of what I expected....thermal management of LEDs is a big issue. I wonder what Aero-Lites uses for an emitter. The latest Cree XHP 35.2 is about 500lm per emitter using about one amp max drive (12 watts), 18 of those would be about 9000lm. Obviously there is a lot of technical information behind these devices, again a 30 minute burn-in test on a taxi way range with the three above mentioned lights side by side would be most....illuminating. * * * Sorry about that, I simply could not resist. And sorry about that, I am not sure watt's wrong with me.

OK, I got that video posted. There are three separate and distinct products being discussed here, all with similar sounding names. Here are the numbers on all of these, from their datasheets: Aeroleds - Boise, ID - Sunspot 46LX - 70 watts - 7700 Lumens - 150000 candela - Certified $650. 110 lumens/watt and calculated beam angle 14 to 15 degrees to get these results. Landing/taxi light combo. Aero-Lites - Thomaston, GA - Fusion 46LR - 51 watts - 5200 lumens - for 10 deg beam angle it's about 170000 candela using 14 of the 18 emitters for the narrow beam. Non certified $159. About 101 lumens/watt. Landing/taxi light combo. Whelen Aviation Technologies - Parmetheus Pro PAR 46 series - 40 watts - calculated 14690 lumens using 240240 candela on a 16 degree beam width. Certified $599. Landing light (with taxi capability, not specified but their max candela graphic depicts wider beam width light out of the main beam, like the others) About 367 lumens/watt....? Aircraft Spruce lists this as 175000 candela on 16 degrees, or 10700 lumens and 267 lumens/watt. The Aero-Lites bulb is clearly a good value assuming one wants to go through any potential certification hassle. My AMT had no issue with it. The WAT bulb is very late technology and very bright, but AFAIK LEDs are still at 100-120 lumens/watt efficacy at present. Perhaps Whelen has made a breakthrough on LED efficacy which would explain the numbers....or I have made some other calculation error. Whelen's data sheet on the 45 minute run indicates these late bulbs do better on thermal management, meaning more consistent output as they are operated and then heat up. Would be fun to run these three side by side. Fusion 46LR.mp4

Oops, video did not upload, will put it up tonight.....

Here is the installation of an Aero-Lites Fusion 46LR in our 1977 Mooney 201. $159 versus $599 for the Whelen Parmetheus Pro PAR46. The latter likely has better performance, though, it appears to have very late emitters and reflector/heat sink design. Here is a video as well: Fusion 46LR.mp4

Hi everyone Here is a play back of an M20J Vz climb profile, starting at the POH initial climb speed with TO flaps of ~72 KIAS. I was a little fast and labeled the segment as 75 KIAS in the video, but the POH number is 72 KIAS. I also said 75 KIAS is the POH speed, it's actually 72. Turn up the sound for narration. [edit: I may re-do the voice over and cut out a couple of flubs with the visual overview display] Then the transition to the Vz profile [113 KCAS (115KIAS) -> 500 fpm -> Vy] is flown and shown in the video. I made another mistake in the voice over, Vz for this airplane is initially 115 KIAS or 113 KCAS. After that is graphs from the Savvy Maintenance analysis tool showing the Target EGT mixture management method during this same climb. Mooney M20J Vz Profile Video.mp4 The graph below shows the data after the first Target EGT mixture pull, from a little over 17 gph (the blue line) to 16 gph or so, EGTs pop back up nicely to near takeoff values, note the altitude and CHTs at the same time in the lower plot. A little later in the Vz climb, this is the third mixture pull, note the EGTs climb back to near the takeoff full rich values, CHTs stay nearly constant and we are at ~7600 feet now. About 115 KIAS or so most of the way up, cowl flaps in trail, CHTs tracking nicely.

How magnetic? This magnetic: Magnetic Bracket.mp4

We had this issue. The center post is non magnetic stainless steel, but our compass mounting bracket was regular carbon steel and highly magnetized! Replaced it with an aluminum bracket and non magnetic fasteners and the problem was solved.

Bump, how is that upgrade to the 730/830, @mkrakoff?

And @y2kiah I like how you present your data! I am going to copy that shamelessly.....

Correct, -a-. I see my Cloudahoy data was from the iPad internal GPS even though I was BT'ed to a GDL 52. Hmm.