N201MKTurbo

It doesn't look like there is anything wrong with the fiberglass on the cowl. It looks like the paint failed. It looks like the Krylon they used to touch it up is doing better.

I rode first class on the Eurostar from Paris to London through the Chunnel. It was WAY more comfortable then any airliner I've ever been on. And we got like two meals in the hour or so it took!

Did you read the attachment? or is it broke?

It seems like a good thing. HQ-16-14R1.pdf

Get in the plane and have someone run a garden hose over it and see where it is leaking from. Im betting on the door seal. Most of the other leaks will drain into the belly and run out the drain holes. Except for the old avionics bays, which are easy to seal.

Cool, maybe I’ll bring it over....

You are welcome to use mine at my hangar. I learned my lesson about loaning them out.

Your engine already makes less than rated power. Even at the low elevation you live at you are still above sea level. The point I’m trying to make is with proper electronic control of spark advance, full power can be restored after the manifold pressure is reduced to where the detonation margins are sufficient. This probably means that your sea level performance would be slightly less, but above say 4000 ft (a wild guess) your performance would be the same as it is now if not better. And it would not affect your gross weight, it would just increase your takeoff distance a little at low elevation airports.

You are correct, we would lose some peak horse power. But we almost never run it at peak horse power. By the time you climb a few thousand feet you are well below peak horse power. After the manifold pressure reduces some, the electronic controls can advance the timeing to the original value or more without worrying about detonation. The loss of power would be insignificant and have no effect on cruise speeds.

No, they just have less advance at full power to get the detonation margins we need. It will reduce takeoff and climb power a bit, but there is no reason to reduce cruise power. If it was a 200 HP engine and you ran it at 150 HP in cruise, you can still run it at 150 HP. The engine is more than capable of making that much power without detonation on 94UL which is 100LL without the TEL.

I predict that electronic engine controls will eventually be available for retrofit. They will become affordable and widely used. They will negate the need for 100LL and it will eventually fade away.

But who wants to pay $19/gal.

How much is a gallon of C20?

How did you grease the guide blocks? I rub grease into the rod and the guide block. Lift the rod off the guide block so you can work the grease into the phenolic. Have someone run the ailerons back and forth while you are looking and listening to see that it is running smoothly.

I wasn’t talking about pilot technique. I’m talking about approaching the stall perfectly coordinated and having the plane roll inverted violently with no warning. That shouldn’t happen. That same plane now gently stalls straight ahead with a pre-stall buffet like it should.

If they are rigged right they will stall straight ahead. If not they can snap roll. Unfortunately I know this for a fact.

What are you using for your air/ground indication? I'm using the output from the Avidyne and it is displayed on the transponder. Do you have any way of displaying its state?

Strangely, I never looked at the tail whale I was spinning it. There is a lot going on to turn around and check out the tail. The last time I flew a Tomahawk was in 2001 when I found the exact plane I used for my check ride and convinced the owner to let me fly it on the anniversary.

When I was getting my private back in ‘81 my instructor wouldn’t let me solo until I could demonstrate a spin recovery in the Tamahawk.

I wouldn’t expect much with regard to oil temp. I always adjust my oil pressure to the bottom of the green while hot. I find the engine uses less oil. I have an adjustable regulator I will sell for $50 + shipping if you are interested. I replaced it to stop an oil leak, but that wasn’t it, so it should be good.

The madness was unstoppable! The governments of the world were in a vast competition to build the most un-landable plane. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tail-sitter

I like these valves. They work good and they are an Arizona company! http://www.curtissuperiorvalve.com/tablet/products.html

There has to be stains somewhere. Or somebody is stealing your gas.

I’m sure all the fuel companies are very familiar with these additives. There must be some reason why they won’t work. I wish the development was more transparent, but these companies are trying to develop something proprietary that they can make money with. I think this is the wrong way to go. They should just develop a standard that any patrolium company can meet. The problem is that almost everything that there is to know about fuel chemistry was known in the 1930s when the Cooperative for Fuels Reasearch Committee set out to develop auto and aviation fuel standards. They tried all the compounds they are trying now. It is like deja vu all over again. The one thing they didn’t have back then were environmental regulations. Unleaded car gas is a much poorer fuel than what was previously available but the car companies redesigned their engines to perform well with it. The same could be done with aircraft engines, but that’s not what they are after. They are after the holy grail that was ruled out 90 years ago.

I would re-check the timing on the retard breaker mag. How is your mag drop?