N201MKTurbo

He also said the Cessna was doing touch and gos. So if this is true, it looks like the Lancair is way more at fault here. Who would overtake an airplane doing touch and gos doing a low pass. That is nuts.

So the guy I know who used to work for AeroGuard knows both people in the Cessna. He said they said that the Lancair passed them overhead, their prop hit the tail and flipped the Lancair inverted. He indicated this all happened at about 200 AGL. That would be horrible to watch.

You can get a 1” end wrench at Harbor Freight for like $5.

A 3/8” 1/4 inch drive will disassemble 90% of a Mooney. Next in line is the 7/16. Beyond that, you will need the rest of the sizes.

You don't have ro get it to boiling to drive out the water. The vapor pressure of the water increases with temperature. Boiling is just the temperature where the vapor pressure exceeds the ambient pressure above the liquid. Even if it is 10 degrees below boiling, it is vaporizing the water. And if you are at 10000 feet, the boiling point is at 193.6 F.

Just about every airport has its issues. The local pilots can ponder these things and come up with safe procedures. The problem is transient pilots who are just thinking about how they are going to land.

It's not like this is the first high wing low wing takeoff and landing accident. They seem to happen every few years. They should dust off the safety briefings from the last time it happened and send them out again. This accident required a failure of situational awareness with both planes. They both should have known the other was there. Too bad we don't have the radio recordings. It seems like the LiveATC folks could put receivers at uncontrolled airports, especially busy ones like Avra Valley.

I will be working with someone from the flight school tomorrow. Maybe I can get more details.

It is hard to imagine why someone would delay on the runway. I was taught at an uncontrolled field that you don't take the runway until you are ready to take off. If nothing else you have a much better view of what's going on at the hold short line than you do on the runway.

I’ve tried removing the capacitors, connecting them to the points and then screwing them into the cap. It wasn't any easier just a different PITA.

Putting the cap on is a huge PITA. Getting the bottom P lead on the points is almost impossible with my big hands. Luckily, Dave has a stable of little kids with amazing mechanical skills. “hay, kid, get over here. Put that wire on that little thingy” easy peasy.

I use my 1/2 torque wrench with a 1/2 to 3/8 adapter then a 3/8 to 1/4 adapter a 2 inch extension and a 1/2 inch socket. It slides right in there with mm to spare. You have to do it with the cap off. No room with it on.

I seem to remember that ADI keeps your cylinders and exhaust clean too.

Yes, your numbers would be different.

So, with UL94, MP limited to 25” unless you have ADI, then WOT. that seems reasonable.

Is the fluid just water and alcohol? I know just water works pretty good. Never mind, I read the article.

I sold my 56 172 to the dispatcher at Aero Guard. I should give him a call.

ADI can work fine for takeoff and climb, but it will take a lot of fluid to do it for the whole flight. Do you know what the flow rate is for the fluid?

The main reason ULSD is so expensive isn’t completely because of sulphur. With standard fractional distillation there are more heavy distillates than the lighter fractions. Such as gasoline. At the same time that ULSD was mandated, most refineries installed advanced catalytic crackers and reformers. After doing that, they can turn just about anything into gasoline. After these changes, diesel was no longer a waste product, but just another product. Because it has more carbons in it, it takes more of the feed stocks to make it. Therefore it now costs more.

And a new clean sheet EFI engine will far exceed the value of many of our airplanes. And I’ll bet money there won’t be one available within the next 10 years.

You are comparing a marine engine that is liquid cooled with an unlimited source of cold water? While they both are similar because they run at a constant high power, beyond that they are quite different. The marine engines typically make full power at 4000 - 6000 RPM our engines are limited to 2700 RPM. But that's not what we are talking about. We are talking about how to get our existing engines to run on unleaded fuel that doesn't dissolve our airplanes. I don't think Lycoming or Continental would have any problem making a clean sheet engine that would run on 94UL and make whatever power you wanted. They would be a little bit heaver and a little bit less efficient.

Here is a good paper about it: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/14680874211008703

Eric, our engines are tuned for 100% power. That’s where the problem is. What is an electronic fuel injection system and an electronic ignition system going to do to make more power without detonation? There is nothing they can do that we cannot do with what we have. We can adjust spark timing, we can adjust mixture. What else is there? I guess you could say they can get closer to detonation than we normally get, but how would we get there? Knock sensors have proven ineffective on aircraft engines. Ion current sensing may work. I mentioned it to George Braly once and he called me an idiot. But he was selling pressure sensing spark plugs. Pressure sensing spark plugs would work, but they are very expensive. So, what are the detonation margins for a certified aircraft engine? I don’t know the answer to that, do you? It seems to be in FAR 33 sub part D section 33.47 and AC 33.47.

The warbird guys have a lot of engines designed to run on 145 octane fuel. They are all happily flying along on 100LL with MP limitations.

Aside from the politics, it doesn’t really have to hobble our planes that much. Let’s say the MP was limited to 25” would that be the end of the world? It would affect us turbo folks a bit more than the NA folks. Nobody cruises at 100% power anyway. Our cruise power is usually limited by temperature anyway, and the changes would have no impact on cruise performance. So, you cruise at about 225 HP with 100LL. With 94UL you could still cruise at 225 HP, that is well below the power to get detonation. It would only affect your takeoff and climb performance.