kortopates

On the topic of steep idle descents, shock cooling is a myth but ring flutter is not! This is why both engine manufacturers talk about never doing a closed throttle descents but maintain a minimum amount of power of at least 15” to prevent the air from turning the prop rather than the engine turning the prop. Having the prop turn the engine reverses the stress on the rings and can damage them on a prolonged descent. The immediate symptom right after such damage will be much elevated oil consumption. Recall one pilot that did an emergency descent from flight levels to an airport below him with closed throttle and opted to overhaul soon thereafter. Of course depending on the nature of the emergency, the engine may be the least of your concerns. Above though @Will.iam talks about the proper safe way to do an emergency descent without risking damage to the engine above. But the other concern for engine management is don’t go to full power immediately if you go around, just use enough power to maintain level flight as oil temp and CHT comes back as you fly over the runway and by the departure end temps will be good off to go to high power. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

there is no need to change timing for G100UL nor would it be legal to change timing. The STC doesn't allow for any timing change and nor would there be any reason to want to do so. And the G100UL can be mixed with 100LL - there is no need to commit to one fuel. Unless you were referring to running Swift 94UL on your E model which isn't approved. In the video, Braley was just demonstrating that detonation on that engine went away with the timing retarded approx 5 degrees (simulated with only 1 mag firing) - which was really to show that 94 should never have been approved for that engine by Lycoming. Besides there is more to it that just backing off the mag timing due to the starting circuit; and with the Surefly its a dip switch setting.

Only the first stage is rebuild able, the 2nd stage, which is the altitude compensating stage, is limited to a passing a functional test. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As he said, Just “believe the data!” WRT to UND issue with Swift, Mike B predicted exactly what George’s data showed right after we heard about the issue based on the engines CR and timing. It really isn’t all that surprising. What is surprising is that the oil analysis data is showing very significant reduction in wear metals. I am really looking forward to its availability with STC in hand ready to fill up with it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Call https://www.c-l-aero.com/ they specialize in this stuff. But i doubt you can get one sourced for under $2K Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The 406 isn't just for remote traveling over the US. My Mooney likes to travel and if you want to leave either of our borders you have to have one for Canada, Bahamas and Mexico for over a decade now. But since they're not 100% reliable I also fly with a Garmin InReach. Before that I had a ACR 406 PELB that I still carry as well. But I don't intend to camp out long if we go down in the middle of no where plus first responders will know what we need medical wise thanks to the InReach. As an early adopter I got the ACK-04, with never any problems with it. ACR is great company for this technology and if I was doing it over again I would likely go with their unit.

Carl, if you fly an M20E you don’t have a carb but have an IO-36O. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The pilot and owner is one of my clients in Germany. To my knowledge he isn't on Mooneyspace so I don't think we'll see him respond here .

Personally I think its much worse that that. The pilot displays at least 3 of the 5 hazardous attitudes (Anti-authority, Invulnerability and Macho) and demonstrated he also lacks the skill and knowledge to properly fly an instrument approach with his avionics even into his home airport! How could the FAA not find him a danger to people on the ground and in the airspace and respond accordingly?

indeed and i haven’t forgotten that and sure the FAA hasn’t either as it’s part of the reason i expect the FAA to take action. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It would be great to know what actions the FAA took with the the pilot as well. Probably remedial training at the minimum and perhaps a checkride before further instrument privileges? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I came across a video that provided some closure on this incident, although it didn't clarify the owner or pilot flying at the time. But the video blogger said he followed up with the controller, and learned that the tower and approach controller treated it as an emergency without declaring it so, and that the FAA did get involved and required the pilot to get remedial training before flying the plane again.

Be sure to tell your smart wife that you could never sleep in the Ovation so she doesn’t have to worry Enjoy traveling with your wife in it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am instructing in a Toga twice a week and don’t think there is another 300HP bird that goes as slow as the Toga It’s not the most stable IFR platform either. For anyone that really needs a HP 6 six seater, IMO you can’t beet the Bonanza A36; especially with the cargo doors and the IO-550 300HP engine that loves LOP. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t recall the part # for the -MB but Ram sells the v-band clamp and has the best price for it when i last purchased one 6-7 months ago. As far as i know it’s still a wait to get one due to the AD which has created an artificial need because every Savvy owner wants to get one on their shelf so they don’t find them selves grounded for 3-4 months without one. Last year was about a 6 month wait! The part number is different between the -MB and -LB so suggest looking up the correct part # before calling to order one. But get on somebody’s list asap. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://continental.aero/continental-services/ Fairhope is a good choice but there is nothing complicated about setting up your fuel system; especially on an NA engine. Often the real challenge is getting them to set the Max FF a full GPH or higher above the high TCM number for your engine; some tech’s are afraid to do that. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s much harder to tail strike a mid body than a long body. But avoidance is guaranteed in any model by not raising the nose so high as to lose sight of the end of the the runway. But as we continue to pull the yoke full aft we’re doing this when the aircraft no longer has excess energy to balloon. What we’re really doing, or how i prefer to explain it, is we’re trying to prevent first the mains from settling and then after prevent the nose wheel from settling till we have no further back pressure to add. But to maximize short field technique, i am sure from your past writings you’re coming in at 1.2 Vso, rather than 1.3 for a normal landing, with very little excess energy to bleed off likely resulting in a firmer landing for a very short runway. As such we’re not likely carrying power into the round out but coming down steeper with no power or very little and doing a faster than normal round out and using the ground effect to cushion a steeper descent angle and absorb the remaining energy. The steeper approach angle, little to no power and slower approach speed all lead to requiring a perfectly timed and faster continuous flare to bring the yoke back. I don’t mean for the explanation to make it sound scary but it’s amazing how little runway the proficient pilot needs to land their Mooney with good short field technique. it’s not difficult at all to beat the POH landing distances which are based on a normal 1.3 Vso approach speed and a normal 3 deg approach angle using proper short field techniques as you have written about here in the past. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As far as i know the hotel hasn’t been finalized yet but it will be very shortly. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To add on to Ross’ post, i would add one of the most fundamental steps in learning how to land any airplane is the round out or what we use to call flare. Never do we land strictly level, but we continue to raise the nose in ground effect while keeping the cowling just below the end of the runway looking straight ahead, while allowing the mains to settle on the runway. The really proficient pilot doesn’t relax the back pressure till the yoke is fully back to take advantage of aerodynamic braking (with exceptions for crosswinds) before letting the nose wheel contact the runway. Over rotating, and losing sight of the runway straight ahead, risks a tail strike; more so in long body. We have all learned what happens when we fail to execute the round out or flare before impacting the runway; hopefully well enough in trainers so as not to be reminded in a mooney. So the pitch attitude on the ground really has nothing to do with how to land a Mooney or any aircraft. And lastly every formation pilot learns how to land their Mooney as fast as 90 kts on the runway killing the myth that you can only land at the “proper speed”. But of course a formation landing is very different from a normal landing. Aircraft need positive pitch on the ground for stability else, we’d be wheel barreling down the runway. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Excellent points and especially #4 but nothing wrong with pitching down till the you feel light in the seat. This is after all what the upset recovery schools teach these days and the ACS no longer makes any statements about minimizing altitude loss. Instead the emphasis is on "immediately recovering from the stall by reducing the angle of attack". No matter how bad a wing might be dropping off in the stall, an immediate push down that makes you light in the seat will very promptly recover back to flying speed with wings leveled and the pilot can transition back to climb attitude to return to the starting altitude. So personally I think its a big confidence booster for those fearful of power on stalls - which is required to the full break these day for private students and whichever the DPE calls for on the Commercial. The other reason for pushing till light in the seat is that folks where focusing on preserving altitude to only get into a secondary stall; usually more violent than the first.

It’s a very amateurish installation to do that. See the JPI installation instructions prohibiting this. Why? The thermocouples produce a very low current with only few millivolts. That makes the wires very sensitive to interference from high voltage ignition wires and high current wires like alternator output cables. The thermocouple wire harness needs to be routed independently without being bundled with other electrical wires else the result is very noisy EGTs and CHTs. Very frustrating to say the least after spending a lot of $ on labor and an engine monitor and get noisy signals because the installer couldn’t follow directions. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here is the website for the guy that does the prop balancing and he is really good. wrote the book on it. He’s retiring though so good luck. Also he work out out Cable airport in SOCAL and Arizona, does travel too, came down to San Diego for a couple of us. www.jfdynamics.com Cell(626) 818-3029 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Three of the 4 EGT wires are being moved, just let the mechanic undo the mess forward of the firewall and re-route them properly. After a job like that i’d half expect to see them bundled with ignition needs too which would need to be corrected as well. But consider if going to this trouble, it could be a good time to upgrade the display head to a modern color 830 through their upgrade program where you return your 730 display. It was costing about $1200 after exchange. It’s a good deal if you have the panel room since it’s bigger. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably has more to do with how your plugs and lemo switch are wired. i’ve seen many configurations including a switch to allow switching between them which i think is unnecessary. But my set up allows having both my Bose plugged into the Lemo plug and then my mike mask plugged into the mike jack which apparently opens the mike connection on the Bose because i’ve never had any issue communicating with ATC. Certainly don’t need the extra accessory to block the Bose mike. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You do have to adjust the squelch because the mask mike won’t break squelch as easily as a regular headset - did you do that? But that’s all i need to do and then it works normally. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk