testwest

So, for the OP, the suggestion is, keep the power up, keep the speed up, climb reasonably good and “git on down the road”! As far as CHTs in the climb go, Mooney and the FAA are (were) concerned with a point design condition. Us owner operators are more concerned about balancing performance and engine durability over the long term. So even though the airplane may pass the cooling climb condition flight test, we can smartly get most of the performance in climb rate and velocity made good, while being mindful of engine durability, by the suggestions here....cruise climb, maximum power, manage cylinder temps with speed and/or cowl flaps (in that order), target EGT. Hope this helps.

Hi Hank and everyone I wish I had cowling pressure and cooling data! But thanks for thinking of me. My opinion is that the difference between true airspeed and calibrated airspeed can be thought of as a virtual tailwind, going from zero to a pretty decent number the higher you go (all other things being equal). So a cruise climb speed (or quantified cruise climb profile Vz, as many in this thread are using *thanks, it's really cool to see that* ) decently balances the climb rate versus velocity-made-good to the top of climb. The higher speed should help cooling, the Target EGT fuel flows were established to allow the airplane to pass the part 23.1043 requirements. But why is everyone having to work so hard to keep their engines cool in climb, when they are supposed to be able to stay in limits when flown as designed? Here is a stunning master's thesis that might have answers, the premise is that the FAA formulas for correcting flight test ambient conditions to standard may not be correct. https://repository.lib.fit.edu/bitstream/handle/11141/1138/STUTH-THESIS.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y One of the advisors to this paper is my friend (and SETP Fellow) Ralph Kimberlin, with his guidance this thesis is one you can take to the bank. Happy reading!

I was not a Mac guy until this program came out. It was so compelling I had to get a Mac to run it.

Hi Fred Benchmark is a free app on the Mac App store, here: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/sequoia-benchmark/id1244483544?mt=12 And the primary support and information page is here: http://www.seqair.com/benchmark/index.html There is a massive amount of information on the info page, be sure to get the 1.0 Manual at the very bottom of the page, even though the interface has been updated, the basic computations behind the program are explained here: http://www.seqair.com/benchmark/BenchmarkManual.pdf Be forewarned, however! If you are the least bit aerodynamically curious, I just ruined this coming weekend for you.

Haha, thanks Hank! But just for the record, the paper was a Master's thesis, not a PhD dissertation. And I am glad to be back, I also made my donation for this year!

OK! For the OP, Fred2O, here is the drag polar for the M20J, derived from the data in the 1220G POH (which was applicable to our Mooney, a 1977 M20J): Each one of the little "+" symbols is a line in the POH cruise data. For this POH, the best fit to the aggregate data is from the 6000' best power cruise data at 2740 lb GW, and the pink "+"s are from that particular data set. So the zero-lift drag coefficient is .01654, and the best-fit straight line above gives CD = .01654 +.082 CL2 Pretty close to what Skip wrote... that Mooney provided the clean polar as CD = 0.0164 + 0.072CL2 It took a LONG time to enter all that data into Benchmark.....but it could be done for the other models from the POH data. The M20J data are really good though. Curt Lopresti told me during a conversation once about how his dad was so proud of the torque meter they had installed for direct measurement of installed power for the M20J certification, and of course the other two secret weapons were legendary flight test engineers Fen and Dorothy Taylor. So to overcome drag, you need thrust. How much? Using the data set above and about 75% best power cruise, here is what is happening at the prop: Lots of eye candy here. 6000 feet, 75% best power cruise, 150 hp into the prop, 131.2 comes out due to prop efficiency. Even the old McCauley C212 is pretty good at about 87.5% efficiency. To describe this to jet jocks, the M20 goes ~163 knots on ~262 pounds of thrust. This translates to the airplane speed chart for these conditions, here: Cool stuff. Hope you guys like it.

Wow, how did I miss this topic? OK, for the OP, I have a very neat drag polar for you (clean). Stand by........

Here is a movie of KSMooniac flying a back-to-back Vy versus Vz profile. Vy and Vz at KAAO.m4v Using Vz we got to the 19 mile point about 13 knots faster than Vy on about the same gas.

Here is a picture showing the Vz profile. Sorry it's a brand B...... In a nutshell it shows a Vy climb to nominally pattern altitude (assuming there are no obstacles requiring a short duration Vx climb to clear), then acceleration to Vz. That speed is about 1.3 times published gross weight Vy. No need to adjust for weight, temp, etc....when the airplane becomes performance limited you revert to a 500fpm climb until speed is Vy, then Vy. That performance limit is indicated by the change in slope of the Vz line on the right side of the picture.

Byron is correct. I have used MGS L285 epoxy (Aircraft Spruce)...it is the structural epoxy used to build certificated Cirrus and Diamond airplanes. Yep....it is $142 bucks for a gallon of resin and $35 for a quart of hardener. But worth it. MGS L335 is a little cheaper, not as good on the physicals but perfect for fairing and smaller parts.

I would have to drag out my Benchmark models and have a look at the differences....KSMooniac’s prop takes a lot of weight off the nose, meaning less trim drag. Jetdriven has done a huge aerodynamic cleanup includes 80+ hours of wing profiling on his and I think the standard prop...Byron? So there are many trade offs and the answer is not perfectly obvious. What would be nice is a 2 blade composite prop for our airplanes like the Hartzell ASC II used on the Diamond DA-40 XL. 46.8 lbs. By contrast the Hartzell BA prop we have on our J weighs 64 lb. The cost for the STC, well......I wonder if Hartzell made their forward-loss money back on the BA Top Prop program. There were certainly a lot of spinner problems early on. The tip profile starts to make a difference when it is really cold, as the tip Mach number goes up the drag advantage on the very narrow-chord thin tip profiles of the modern blades starts to be significant.

Hi Simpson Congratulations on receiving your STCs, that is a big deal! One of your FAA pilots may be K. Lund, he was a classmate at the AF Academy and also in my TPS class at Edwards. Back to topic, sorry for the dumb question, but are the Aspen PFD flight mode annunciators driven by the 3100? I do know the altitude preselect, GPSS and FD all work with it, but have not seen this specific question answered.....

Like this: http://tinypic.com/r/os6746/9

Was that fuse the issue? Can't leave us hanging! (and I need to Get the Knack on itunes soon)

Mooney POH 1220 G, here ya go! BTW there is at least one totally bogus data point in the cruise data (8000' Best Econ 2600 rpm 15.2"....7.6 gph?) M20J_1220G.pdf

Glad to be back. Got pulled into KC-46 land, we are kinda busy!! Flightaware BOE462 or 464, I did a lot of those. Back to topic, after letting the Goof Off soften the old Pliobond, I use a plastic scraper or plastic mold knife to get the stuff off. Wipe with a little fresh Goof Off on a rag, then when the surface is pristine, a little Metal Prep for a slight acid etch, and then, Dupli-Color self etching green metal primer (rattle can, from Napa Auto Parts and others. Accept no substitute on this.) It is a pretty decent drab green, and it grabs aluminum prepped like this like there is no tomorrow. When I can't get or don't want to fuss with PPG BMS 10-11....

Hi everyone, yep I am still here. For cleaning old adhesive off, I found that Goof Off (from the big box home improvement stores) works even better than MEK and does not smell as bad. It really zaps old Pliobond. Give it a shot (ha!).

I will check and see if I have a 10A Klixon still left over. It might be your lucky day Thor!

OK, officially asked for a Mooney M20J for Trutrak.

Thanks so much for posting the problem, the solution and the picture. That can really help someone else later, even to the extent of saving a life!

+1 for MGS epoxy. Jetdriven has it right. Probably too late, but I found the remover product "Goof Off" (available at the big box home improvement stores) to be the best thing to remove old rubber cement/pliobond. Not as smelly as MEK and seems to works a little faster.

Yes, we do have the Lopresti cowling on ours. We have some pictures in the gallery as well. The groundspeed on Flightaware is interesting, but the true airspeed is more relevant. We also have low profile main gear doors, the Hartzell blended airfoil prop, and have no antennas on the fuselage forward of the baggage compartment, and more. It was a boatload of work, but the airplane is now a ~163ish TAS airplane at reasonable cruise, instead of the ~155ish TAS airplane that most 201s are, on the same fuel flow. Jetdriven on this forum has a 201 that have really been loved on lately, but without the Lopresti cowl. He and wife Rebecca will be in the Airventure cup race Sunday, should be a hoot to see their performance. Go Jet!

So the labor for this is maybe 30-40 hours. Hope this helps!

Hi everyone Wanted to get the word out on this, Lopresti Aviation has one available STC'ed cowl kit for the M20J (also E and F, if the oil cooler is relocated to be similar to the J) for 25% off list, or $12,000. It was manufactured for a customer who, unfortunately, had a mishap with his airplane before he could take delivery of the upgrade kit. So Curt (Lopresti) has this STC kit on a special price. The kit is very extensive and includes new low profile nose gear doors and an all new induction box, with a ram air system that actually works very well (unlike the stock 201 ram air). We can easily get about an inch of manifold pressure from the ram recovery at WOT, 8000' and 2500 rpm on the one we installed on 201JX. And the cowl itself looks pretty cool and is less drag. When we did this upgrade we were able to offset a lot of the cost by selling our old cowl and nose gear doors, they went pretty quickly! Here is a web link for a video on the cowl: http://www.loprestiaviation.com/#!lopresti-super-201-cowl/cj7h And if you are interested, just shoot an email to Curt Lopresti directly at curt@loprestiaviation.com or call 772-562-4757.

SOLD!!