kortopates

1 hour ago, jetdriven said:

Sorry guys, I'm data driven here, and airplanes have true airspeed right there in the cockpit, but I have to see this to believe it.  Otherwise, it's science or data by consensus and there's too much of that going on.  Yes, air spilling out the front is drag and drag through the cooling fins and out the bottom is drag also.. Now whichever is more or less than the other can be verified and flown out.

Our plane right now is flying the  air race classic.. There was quite a show when we handicapped at 190.5 mph at 6000 feet which is about 8 miles an hour faster than any other 4cyl Mooney in the history of the ARC.  This goes back to 1965 and there is 97 airplane handicaps on that list. And about 14 MPH faster than the MSE thats in the race with it as well. And it does 196 or 197 at sea level. The book levels are bullshit, but actually if you correct for nonstandard temperature, this plane will make those numbers. But we didn't get there by believing hangar stories.. For example, thanks to a good friend of mine @bluehighwayflyer, he noticed the Acclaim type S has no flap hinge covers, and neither does ours. Its faster. Spent 200 bucks to find that out.  Spent a lot more to find out that a lot of the stuff doesn't work at all and that stuff you think works works in the opposite. Its still got metal belly plates and square wingtips, too.

Unless you're Jesus Christ or George Strait, bring data please.

First apologies to @PeteMc for miss remembering that the service manual was not corrected. 

But here's the scoop, this was figured out by the Continental engineer that worked the 231 Engine installation for Mooney on site at Mooney. I learned about it when I was taking Continental's A&P maintenance class at Fairhope nearly 2 decades ago so I've forgotten exactly if he said 1" or 1.5" but I've posted this multiple times here over the years and these days enough people have heard this now that I'll just let someone reply - but its being questioned....

After the initial installation was done they were trying to address some reported cooling complaints so they were testing various things. So they learned closing the cowl flaps all the way was really reducing cooling. But they were surprised to discover why, which was because it was causing enough back pressure at the air inlets preventing air from flowing through. The bigger surprise is that it was also disrupting airflow over the prop enough that when eliminated they got something like a 10 kt increase in airspeed (which is probably a bit of an exaggeration). But the point is they weren't expecting the back pressure and resulting turbulence at the air inlets was as disruptive to air flow as they found. There just wasn't enough outflow at the bottom of the cowling to with cowl flaps closed to create the low pressure area below engine to allow the air to move freely through the inlets and down the engine cyl fins into the low pressure area without the cowl flaps open some amount. The 252 doesn't have this issue since even with the large single cowl flap closed both sides of the lower cowling have enough open area to allow air to flow freely through from the top high pressure area and down to the low pressure exit. 

Much as been written here about the importance of K cowl flaps, particularly the 231, need to be about an inch open when fully closed else it causes a significant loss in cruise speed as well as cooling. See your service manual. You can use google to find older threads with more info on this. 

So sorry to hear about this, just came across the sad news. But glad to hear your getting some help with the treatments. Your upcoming camping trip sounds great but hope it’s more glamping than camping! The Calanques will be beautiful this time of year if that’s where you’re headed.
thanks for the update and keep us posted when able.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FWIW in 1969, Vno went from 150 to 175mph and Vne went from 189 to 200mph for the short bodies without any structural change to justify it.  

I don’t really know for a fact but my understanding is that cowling improvements were made to allow the Vne increase.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do any M20's have an STC for mogas?

No


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The whole thread makes zero sense since any A&P knows how to R&R a fuel sender.
I doubt there will be any sealant on it either but that too won’t be an issue.
More likely the arm will need bending if it’s hanging up. Sometimes removing a sealed inspection panel is helpful to ensure the sender isn’t hanging anywhere along its full arc of travel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

8 hours ago, natdm said:

Here's the returned engine, installed. You'll notice that apparently the previous owners didn't comply with SB CSB19-01A, and James installed the old parts. If you have the old primer system, it might be a good time to get that fixed. 

Also James painted the oil cap. He said he's done this on hundreds of engines. He sandblasted and painted over "OIL 8 QTS" which is illegal, so we had to put a little label on it. Would be nicer if it said it on the paint, and was painted yellow. 

Nice. James is also fellow colleague of mine at Savvy Aviation. It would be good time to at least replace the old flexible baffling if not also re-work the aluminum baffling. Glad you caught removing the fuel diverter!

It has to be anhydrous. Anhydrous simply means no water in. Rubbing alcohol is 70% isopropyl and 30% water. You're looking for 99% Isopropyl - there is no such thing as 100%. 90% isn't anhydrous either with 10% water. You can buy the 99% in the gallon from industrial supply outlets or you can buy it from many drug store outlets in  pint quantities.

Hello Pete,
I don't have one yet, I thought I'd train before taking the plunge. Ideally some generous soul CFI would take pity and train me in their plane ;-), but I know this is a lot to ask. But it can't hurt to ask. I think the flight school at ABE has an M20C, but they don't have the best reputation. So I'm trying other avenues first. I thought I'd reach out to the community first.

Without being an owner yet, training would be restricted to a Mooney rental if you can find one. Insurance doesn’t allow us Mooney CFI owners to provide instruction in our Mooneys without a very expensive commercial insurance policy which would only make sense if it was renting out all the time.
If you find a rental, they’ll provide an instructor on their policy to provide you instruction.
You may need to get your own renters insurance as well.
The vast majority of new Mooney owners wait till they purchase their Mooney to get training in their new Mooney. Besides a couple hours in type will not reduce your first year insurance premium’s one bit; it typically takes 100+ hours in type.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This isn't an excuse for it, but decades ago the Dukes electric pump had a bad enough reputation that I saw pilots minimizing their use of the pump. Originally it wasn't rated for continuous use and It was expensive and didn't last that long. But these days the rebuild kits have seen significant improvement in parts, and are now rated for continuous use. 

3 hours ago, Schllc said:

You cannot assure me of this, because Savvy has already provided the data to the buyer, in the middle of a transaction, and I was never contacted for permission.  
I do not agree that there is a distinction between providing files or commenting on the data.  The analysis was not shallow, and it even suggested an escrow for the engine since it was less than 200 hours from a top overhaul. This easily could easily affect the outcome of a purchase with just speculation. 
Savvy is using the data to provide an opinion to the buyer without my knowledge. They are in this instance one and the same. 
I’m also not sure it’s a “concern”, because I have nothing to hide and it’s already done. 
I was just not aware that this would happen and wanted to let everyone else know that their data is not confidential. 
 

The service is free, and I uploaded of my own volition, so I’m responsible.  I just wish I would have known that this is how it would be handled prior to posting my info.
I am not angry or upset, just surprised, and a little disappointed. 

I'll try to respond but much this is speculation since I don't know which aircraft this. I get a lot of pre-buy question/reviews. They come in all different ways. Its not our intent to comment on your data without your permission. Most often a buyer gets the data from an owner and loads it up for us to review. Its very common for a buyer to share their data just like sharing their logs. But from your comments, saying this wasn't done with your permission has believing this fell through the cracks so I would like to better understand so this doesn't happen again by ensuring proper checks are done.

 

"I do not agree that there is a distinction between providing files or commenting on the data."

Fair enough. But the prospective buyer was never granted access to pull up your data - only you as the data owner can do this.

"The analysis was not shallow, and it even suggested an escrow for the engine since it was less than 200 hours from a top overhaul. This easily could easily affect the outcome of a purchase with just speculation. "

This would have come from the Mx Pre-buy advisor - it has nothing to do with your upload engine data, but must of come from either log book review or statements from the prospective buyer. The Pre-buy advisor doesn't even look at data. That's most often me. 

"This easily could easily affect the outcome of a purchase with just speculation." Agreed, but this is coming from log book review.

So speculating here as I would like to really know, but I suspect what happened here is the Pre-buy manager asked me to answer the pre-buy clients request to review the owners data. I got a request as follows:

"The last few flights from Nxxxxx were uploaded the other day by the owner. Would you mind quickly reviewing them?
Thank you!"

I am out of town right now at NASA full time this week with a limited schedule and I didn't verify the source of the data. I assumed, incorrectly that the owner loaded the data specifically so we could look at it to comment to help sell the plane. Why else would the owner tell the prospective buyer they had uploaded more data.... But maybe the owner hadn't. I don't really know and am speculating here but really would like to better understand the details to avoid this happening again. This has never been an issue before, but as mentioned, its more often the case that the owner has provided the data to the buyer. What this case is teaching me is that we shouldn't be commenting on data not physically owned by the client or data that the owner has not physically given the client permissions to review. i.e. if the buyer can directly review the data then we shouldn't either. I think that would be clear and simple. But understand I can't speak for Savvy officially, I am one person on the team, but I will pursue making this case based on this experience if I am getting this right.

My apologies for this going the way it did. I should have looked closer before responding to this request - again assuming I know the case.

@PT20J As to questions about once the data is deleted is it really gone. I can tell you its no longer accessible to us. You guys are considered the owner.  To the best of my knowledge its permanently gone but I don't work on the IT side and not the best person to answer this.  

@exM20K privacy@savvymx.com is an old domain, the correct one should be privacy@savvyaviation.com. If you tell me where, I can get it fixed.

I assure you that only you can give access to your data.

But that wouldn’t preclude access to an analyst commenting on your data to a prospective buyer - is that your concern?

Feel free to DM me with specifics.
Since it’s a Mooney i am most likely involved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The previous guidance was 7700 to let them know something was going on, then 7600 to tell them what.
I did get to do that one time.

I teach this stuff at the college and my Lost Comm lecture is my only FAA Approved lecture by the TRACON and they would really like you know that they treat all emergency codes exactly all alike as Emergencies. If you’re lost comm they want us to squawk 7600 only and not switch to 7700 or alternate.
And then realize it is an emergency and don’t hesitate to deviate from 91.185 and AIM 6-4-1 as you deem necessary to get down soonest. After all, in a radar environment they’ll be watching you closely and keep other instrument traffic away from you and the sooner you are down the happier everyone will be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have the perfect folding seats that allow folding one down at a time if I wanted too but never considered that. I've had two different labs, 75-80 lbs, that I was always more worried about shifting the CG back further in flight that I've always secured my dogs harness to the seat belt to ensure the dog stayed on the back seat. These days I fly with a Terrier that is small enough I don't think I would be any issue but just the same I am more comfortable if I don't have a distraction from the dog moving in the back seat. 

Personally I think its more comfortable for the dogs on the rear seat cushion than it would be on the carpet on top of the folded seat or further back. I'd think less vibration. Regardless I'd am more comfortable up front if I don't have a bigger dog moving around affecting trim in flight. I'd have to start blaming my furry family member for deviating from my assigned altitude by 20'  But that might be just me.

@RoundTwo replace the missing plastic cover on the baggage door. Some day if you travel with lots of gear back there piled up with the mechanism exposed it could allow the door to open in flight. That's one of the theories of what happened to the Mooney that had the baggage door open in cruise that tore off and got stuck in on the elevator. The part is only about $10 from plane plastics and will keep it protected from any interference with cargo back there. 

A bomb threat experience-
My wife and I experienced a bomb threat on a flight a couple years ago. It was a terrible experience that went on all night. But in the end was merely an inconvenience as no one was hurt.
Not long into the flight, the Capt informed us of a bomb threat that was called in and that they had to take seriously. The lights were dimmed and we were all instructed to stay in our seats for the duration; including all crew members.
we landed around midnight and then taxied far away from the rest of the airport traffic while we waited for stairs and other personnel to start the evacuation. Probably most of an hour. We were finally guided off the aircraft to an area by the plane where we all stood for the next several hours. baggage was also removed and placed on the tarmac not far away from us. It seemed their focus was to contain the threat - not really our safety. eventually dogs made the rounds sniffing for explosives. Eventually some transport vehicles without seats arrived and we were allowed to board with our carry-on’s. But the vehicles stayed parked as they continued to inspect the checked luggage and plane. Clearly they didn’t want to loose people till they were certain there was no threat. Meanwhile we’re still standing, just in the vehicles without seats. Many begin to sit on their carry-ons while some of the woman become vocal about the need to visit a restroom. It’s been 5-6 hrs since we landed. As tempers begin to flare they finally agree to escort one of the vehicles to a restroom. Most of the women get on, it wasn’t full so i told my wife i am joining them. She didn’t join me. The vehicle took us to an industrial area on the field with restrooms; still far away from the terminal.

When i got back to the plane, they had finally started sending remaining pax to the terminal. My wife was already on her way when i got back. i looked for my bag but couldn’t find it so gave up and boarded a vehicle to the terminal where i did find her with both our bags.

By now it’s near 7 am. We had paid for a hotel room on the airport to get some sleep before our next connecting flight in the morning. But now it was time to head for the gate for our next flight - thoroughly exhausted.
But at least we made our connecting flight and no one was hurt. But standing all night while they searched was brutal enough. But it seems they could have driven us a safe distance away from the possible bomb threat while they continued their 6 hour search explosives.

Although i am critical of the airport authorities for how they treated us during the search, I would much prefer to see the person responsible brought to justice - but i assume that is very rare.
Hope it never happens to any of you!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for sharing the story and details about the rebuild - very cool to see! 

it’s very common that i have to advise a new Bravo owner that they need to replace their TIT probe. TIT probes last on average 500-1000 hrs before they will begin to under indicate temp since they suffer from tip erosion. The continuous hot exhaust gases literally burn off the tip over time. Not problem with EGT probes because they only get exposed to a puff of exhaust when the exhaust valve opens unlike the TIT. The problem though is the owner may never know they’re operating outside of normal TIT guidance wrongly thinking their TIT is very low, but TIT is more commonly 50-100F above your EGTs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wonder if you (we pilots) check more frequently than it does if left to it's own programing.  That could cause the battery to run down a lot quicker.
 

Really not a concern, most wearable options. including the Wellue, were developed for sleep apnea folks that need to wear them all night and be woken by their alarm if O2 falls below a threshold. They are continuously monitoring with enough battery power to outlast a long day of flying if not more than one. Really a good match for a solo turbo pilot and could have saved a number of pilot’s lives if they were available and used.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They tried an MT 3-blade, but it may be a different model than the one you have.
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/1997/august/pilot/mooney-encore

I was actually thinking 252, makes more sense they tested one on the Encore. Got me curious about the model now!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I also had the Nonnin units and liked them very much but both of mine ended up dying without any known trauma to the device.  They were kept in the former ashtray in the pilot side arm rest and each one died after about 18 months where they just would not turn on any more.  Both times the company apologized but said they were out of warranty and couldn't help.  I now just use my watch though I'm not sure if it is as accurate.  I figure since I always wear O2 when above 8K (and 5K at night) the accuracy doesn't matter much as I just need a ballpark reading to make sure I'm not getting low.

Hope that’s not an omen for what may come, but my first Nonnin lasted at least 8 years and i am on my second one now at over 5 years and its still going strong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I use the ring when flying solo, it goes on my thumb where it’s the least obtrusive to flying. you can program the alarm to what ever you want. Mine’s at 88% to alert me of an unconnected O2 supply. But with 2 pilots, >95% of the time i just use a regular one periodically.

For the regular finger unit i use a Nonnin unit from the same company that manufactures medical ones. It uses a lookup table to notice accuracy. i am not worried about accuracy though but being rugged enough that a drop won’t break it. Some of the cheap ones will fail if dropped, whereas my Nonnin has suffered many drops over many years and is doing fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am on my third dog flying high and none have had any issue whatsoever, even with near a couple hours at 16.5K but mostly around 14K. If you have a breed that has a challenging time breathing, like a pug, go see your vet for proper advice.
But 2 labs and now a terrier it’s been a non issue.
Cabin noise is the greater concern imo. Mutt muffs have worked there; especially for my smarter terrier, the labs not as much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It could only be ignition or mixture. Got any engine monitor data?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Especially love the turbine smooth operation!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t think Mooney had the option to evaluate the MTV-12 Scimitar on my Mooney back then. I remember reading they tried both McCauley and Hartzell (3 bladed?) and went with the 2 bladed McCauley. But as you say, the MT is a an improvement, at least in climb.
According to them i could get a few more knots in cruise if i was wiling to go without the prop-deice; but I am not.
Very happy with the performance but i can no longer re-install the cowling without a helper - which is a pain compared to before.
Maybe i’ll learn more tricks with more experience, but it’s still very new to me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk