kortopates

I get that as well, but just on the load meter, which shows the amperage draw when they fire. The regulated voltage is quite stable but the amps go up and down. Turning them off amperage is steady. Shielding should only affect noise, which I have none. I have nothing in the panel though that is effected other than the amp fluctuations shown on the load meter. In my case, I re-used the original shielded wing wire for the wing lights but had to pull a new unshielded sync wire. For the tail I pulled new shielded wires since that was a strobe only before and I would have had to pull more than 1 wire.

That's strictly a personal choice. Obviously if your crystal ball tells you won't have any claims your first year you could take the one hundred savings now, or possibly be out a $1K more if that terrible gear up happens or even hitting a pot hole hole dip with the prop. Roll the dice and decide what you think is best for you. But I wouldn't put that much emphasis on the dual requirements since you intend to work on your instrument rating asap.

Common problem. It's stainless. Send your broken one to the above shop for duplication. Install it as a owner produced part. Probably cost you a third of the new cost and will be identical. But obviously send them some pictures first for an estimate. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Only way is to sell your 231 and buy a 252 or 262 - it's no longer possible to go from a 231 to a 262. that ship sailed many years ago. If you can loose the vacuum pump, you might be able to mount a backup or standby alternator on the vacuum pad. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could it be no to little time in the last 90 days or more. Low time and no recency could trigger the max. But since your starting your IR soonest, it seems it will hardly matter. Good luck with the purchase and training! BTW, I was cracking up thinking of you "dueling" for 10 hrs waiting to read the insurance made the typo on your policy. It's Dual [emoji846] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mooney has them - or did a few years ago when I got my cowl flap motor overhauled. You can order one through your favorite MSC or LASAR. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Call LASAR. They repair them - either yours or if they have one available for exchange. Much less expensive than new! Plus comes tagged with paperwork. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I resemble that remark but although far from a youngster, I was taught to use the right tool for the job and never take destructive tools like a chisel and a hammer, or even vice grips, to an airplane. Here is how I torque the vacuum pump back on using a snap-on vacuum pump crow foot. They make one for TCM fuel pump nuts which is also helpful. But of course you old timers could teach me plenty! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, good lesson. Textual winds are always true north whereas over the ATIS they will be corrected to magnetic. But 320 true = (320 - 13 east variation) = 307 magnetic winds vs runway 311 heading magnetic —> yielding 4 degrees from the left. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I didn't invent it, but it has helped with many hard to reach installation issues. A little piece of tape on the brass makes it able to hold the nut on upside down too. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Somebody mentioned the challenge of getting the nuts started in the hard to reach areas - this time saver tool, a screw driver with a brazed on dowel, makes it easy to hold it in place over the stud and spin it with a finger. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That loss of lift would cause your #1 & #2 to become rich outliers and drive up your gami spread, thus making LOP challenging at best. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not at all. Don't confuse between injectors being tuned to each other with similar flow to suggesting this will result in better tuned cylinders that peak at the same fuel flow because it does NOT mean that. The point of the injectors is to provide different flow rates to different cylinders that otherwise run leaner or richer to one another so that with the different flow rates they peak closer together. But your current limitation is monitoring of one cyl only. Which limits you to running ROP. But say for example you want to avoid the harmful red box by running 100 ROP - is it safe to just to find 100 ROP on the one cyl? No - not really, you want all 4 to be 100 ROP, so you add more mixture for good measure but really never know when all 4 are 100 ROP. Adding gami's won't change that. But the engine monitor will allow you to set mixture accurately to keep all 4 of those cyl's to your target amount ROP (or LOP) without having to run extra rich just as insurance to keep other cylinders out of the red box. (it wouldn't even work on to go extra lean on the LOP side because running LOP requires setting mixture very accurately unlike ROP) Get the engine monitor - that's what will provide you with real leaning effeciency right now. 80-90% of the lyc io-360's do NOT benefit from gami's - you most likely will not need them. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The fact is that most lyc io-360 engines do not need gami's. But every engine needs a good engine analyzer! Learning how to use one could give you plenty of warning to avoid a catastrophic engine falure as well as pay for itself in diagnosing engine anomalies. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here is the magic tool in place. I have to remove mine to be able to pull off my starter. The above is after removing the intercooler and some other miscellaneous items. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Download and review your engine data. A sticking vernatherm will be pretty easy to see. Just look for where the slope of rising oil temp line at takeoff and climb begin to flatten - that will be when the vernatherm is opening up. See what temp that is. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The TCM calls for max of 31.7 GPH, but the Rocket Engineering STC raises it to 33 GPH despite de-rating the engine to 305HP with a max 2650 RPM. So 37 GPH is about 4 GPH high, which should translate to plenty of fuel in cruise. That would be a normal aspirated engine that has altitude compensating fuel pumps, which include some the IO-360's and most of the IO-550. But the turbos do have aneroid in them but its referenced to upper deck pressure, not ambient, and its adjustment is what regulates max fuel flow. So getting the desired FF at max MAP would suggest its working fine. But .... FF should match the same takeoff FF you reported at takeoff with 38" and you should be able to maintain that 37 GPH and 38" all the way to the engines critical altitude. Since you report FF has dropped off by nearly 10 GPH in the upper teens perhaps you have a UDP pressure leak somewhere between the upper deck and the fuel pump which could include the aneroid on the fuel pump and the line to pump. I am betting the pump aneroid metered fuel flow adjustment on the ground is set to compensate for any leakage now but the leak would grow with altitude causing resulting in FF dropping if the pump senses less than actual upper deck pressure - assuming a leak is responsible rather than the servo. Let us know what you and your IA find.

During this last week, the FAA incidents and accidents stats show 4 Mooney involved in 3 gear up landings, (one reported as a gear collapse) and a Mooney Mite involved in an off field landing. None of these involved injuries thankfully. One involved a recently registered 252 with 3 souls on-board reporting what may be the ultimate distraction. The report says the "DURING APPROACH, AIRCRAFT EXPERIENCED ELECTRICAL FAILURE AND SMOKE IN COCKPIT. AIRCRAFT LANDED GEAR UP. " Perhaps it was the ultimate distraction in missing the gear or maybe smoke in the cockpit caused the pilot to intentionally just plant the Mooney on the field gear up. But the following news article suggest that it wasn't intentional. More of the story could be an interesting lesson for us. Did the pilot realize the gear was up? Did the pilot move the gear switch, but was too distracted by the electrical failure to realize it wasn't coming down? Of course the pilot would have no gear light to see, only the floor board position ..... Some details on the 252 incident: http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2018/07/mooney-m20k-n39252-incident-occurred.html I can only relay that my experiences of electrical system induced smoke in the cockpit were limited to a brief puff as a CB popped and much more smell than smoke that quickly dissipated before landing. Others may have experienced worse.

Exactly, the 345 isn't functional without the WAAS so I'd move it with the GNS430W. I wouldn't be too worried about resale value of the C. You'll save more money by not having to re-purchase and re-install your avioincs. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Most of the commenters have a good understanding of the impacts of an induction leak. To clarify some the discussion above, we publish the above test because it works for all engines, carbureted and fuel injected (FI), but its actually a pretty poor test for FI engines. I have a much better test based on gami spreads for FI engines that I pass on to clients whenever we suspect an induction leak since the 10" MAP test isn't always conclusive at all - its just so-so but has the advantage of being doable for any engine. An induction leak will most certainly alter the mixture, but the degree is entirely dependent on MAP versus ambient pressure. as Bob @Bob - S50, Rich @N201MKTurbo and Hector @Hector were pointing out so well above. Operating a FI engine at WOT, will mask any effects of an induction leak, pretty much entirely. Why? Its basic physics since their is no differential pressure gradient across the intake system and ambient atmospheric pressure - they are equal and air will follow the path of least resistance. But the symptoms present themselves whenever ambient atmospheric pressure is very different from MAP. This is most apparent in a normally aspirated engine operating at idle when MAP is about 15+" less than ambient making the symptoms much worse. In the NA example operating at idle, the leak allows a greater amount of air to enter the cylinder causing an overly lean mixture. In a turbo, though we can see an overly rich mixture at altitude since a much higher MAP than ambient atmospheric pressure is leaking out the air resulting in a overly rich mixture. Furthermore, a leak near the cylinder intake will effect just that cylinder. A leak earlier in the intake system could effect one entire side and a leak in a cross over pipe could effect a couple cylinders (the latter mostly apply to carbureted induction systems). We can also see leaks from leaky sniffle valves/cylinder drains. Leaks can be very troublesome to find/detect since they may only leak with a large pressure differential and only when a vacuum is applied. The latter can make them very hard to find given one of the most popular test is to pressurize (rather than apply a vacuum) to the induction system and the spray it with soapy water to look for bubbles. The above is only entirely true for FI engines. Carbureted engine induction leaks are even more complicated in a sense because a carbureted engine isn't just leaking air, its leaking a mixture of air and fuel which is in different states of fuel atomization depending on how close the leak is to the carburetor vs the cylinder. But unlike with the FI engine, the notion that a leak at WOT doesn't present symptoms doesn't apply to carbureted engines - it sure can.

Out of curiosity I checked the FARs and was surprised that part 23 only requires an outlet for every person, but the requirement for a pilot O2 gauge and control doesn't begin till Part 25 for Transport aircraft. However, the last sentence leaves it in a gray area ripe for difference in FSDO opinion. Part 23.2320 (e) If an oxygen system is installed in the airplane, it must— (1) Effectively provide oxygen to each user to prevent the effects of hypoxia; and (2) Be free from hazards in itself, in its method of operation, and its effect upon other components. But we know it's not possible to read a gauge in the back of the hat rack while piloting. I sure can't bend my neck anywhere near that far; especially while buckled into the front seat. I keep some small emergency backup O2 cylinders in the seat pocket for flying in the flight levels using the system below. Seems especially appropriate for a system that you can't monitor the supply in flight. http://www.mhoxygen.com/portable-constant-flow/emergency-systems Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It definitely goes both ways, higher or lower. But I don’t think we can say conclusively one way or the other depending if top or bottom. The moral is the same though, we can't rely on gasket/washer CHT sensors. Anyone stuck with an advisory installation is much better off installing an adapter sensor that piggybacks off the OEM sensor - they are much more accurate and the best you can do till going to TSO'd primary monitor. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Like Lance says above, it doesn't sounds like the Mooney OEM system, in fact with the gauge in the hat rack where it can't be read really sounds like a hangar fairy system. Makes me wonder if you'll find any paper work for approval given the setup? If they used the same O2 port used by Mooney it will be a Scott port fitting, same for the outlets in the cabin which may not be OEM either. The O2 ports use a high pressure needle valve - which is probably what is leaking. If I was in your position, not being sure what you have, I'd pull the port and send it to these folks for repair. https://www.c-l-aero.com/ They are a repair station for O2 systems. Its a very inexpensive repair and Jeff will return it to you very quickly. But if you're serious about flying high with that, I'd run the 1/8 copper line for the gauge and cable up to the pilot sidewall for a proper install so you'll be able to monitor your O2 supply. Imagine how the accident report would read if you ran out of O2 up high and became hypoxic or worse. There is a bracket you'll need by the regulator and a little hardware at the sidewall but I doubt the parts will add up to that much. All of these parts are in your IPC.

You mentioned pitching for Vy on the missed. But consider, what is the min required climb rate to ensure terrain separation and what was your rate? Very possibly you were pitching far steeper than necessary. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Given the above it’s unlikely pressure from the pump removed sealant from in front of the speed brake if it’s not in the immediate vicinity. So its probably not the fault of the line boy - not that that helps you. But still dripping after 90 minutes it can't not be a leak. But this can't be patched from the speed brake closed off area. The tank will have to be opened in front of speed brake and patched. In fact the real source of the leak could be elsewhere and it's just running downhill behind the tank to the speed brake area where it can drain. Good sealant isn't going to come off from the pressure of the gas pump. But of course it's foolish to push older sealant like that and get it to start coming off any sooner that it needs too! Abusive even, considering as David says above, our pride and joy deserves more respect than yours was shown. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk