kortopates

GP is super fast for me. i have both north america and south america jepp and the regular garmin downloads. I download the full 8GB in under 10 min at home with latest mini ipad. its only a bear with public wifi on a trip. Never at home and my service is with Spectrum. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is nothing automatic about the Merlyn wastegate- which i assume you are referring too. it’s still 100% manual. You can still easily overboost the engine. To be automatic you need the -MB engine as in a “262” conversion. The picture shows a 231 engine. What you describe though sounds like detonation and your max FF is likely insufficient. Watch out for TIT exceeding 1450F on takeoff indicating insufficient fuel flow. Lastly with the intercooler, max or redline boost should be about 37.5”. It’s up to the pilot to add throttle slowly above 30” to avoid over boosting. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, Vs1 is clean, (Vso is landing configuration) Sport pilot is limited to Vs1 59 CAS Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There isn’t really a gasket, just thread and sealant. The TCM sealant isn’t the best either. Many use an aftermarket sealant. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I totally understand your point about modifying an aircraft that originally did not meet MOSAIC requirements as manufactured. But we’re talking about earlier J’s that the TCDS did meet requirements at time of manufacture with a 2740 MGW but later modified to a higher MGW. in the case of the Mooney SB, once undone by a log book entry, (including restoring the original AFMS and airspeed markings) there isn’t even a need by the FAA to keep those maintenance records for more than a year. (the original performing of the SB though would be required to be retained till superseded - such as undoing it.) STC 337’s must be retained for the life of the aircraft. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are 2 ways the J’s where modified to increase MGW: 1) only on some eligible J by serial number, Mooney provided a SB to increase it from 2740 to 2900 lbs. 2) Rocket Engineering STC to replace the IO-360 with a TCM IO-550-A with a much larger increase in MGW. Of course both increased the J’s Vs1 above the MOSAIC threshold of 59 CAS since the J was barely compliant at 2740 lbs. The J SB mod to 2900 lbs can be undone without too much effort as mentioned above but couldn’t imagine returning a Missile to original j status but still possible to do at great $. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As a mechanic and IA, there is nothing unusual about undoing a SB or even backing out a STC (which does require filling another 337). But once done, the plane is legally returned to the unmodified state WRT to that mod. Hard to imagine it being different in the eyes of MOSAIC rules. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but i think your confidence in your Century AP is overblown. The old analog AP are very expensive to maintain. Even if it’s working fine now it won’t be that long till you’ll need to replace or overhaul a very expensive item whether it be a magnetometer, attitude indicator, servo etc. At several thousand each is why most of us ditched the older analog AP’s. But as far as modern GPS Navigators the Garmin GTN’s must have over 90% of the market share from what i see as an instructor. Your initial challenge will be in selecting equipment that will interface with the Century AP if you want to go to a modern digital attitude indicator and HSI, but on the Garmin side i believe the GI-275’s will work with your century AP, there are more expensive options as well. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seems if you want the original 2740 MGW to apply, you would have to undo the mods done in accordance with the Mooney SB including going back to the earlier Vspeeds on the IAS and backing out the AFMS changes. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yep at the thread seal for 42. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fair enough. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Far from a “phantom scenario” when you consider how much in common it has with a go-around. Mark already mentioned the key element that i didn’t mention is rudder control. The need for the pilot to build the reflex that right rudder must be matched by throttle; especially in your missile. Similarly you may feel the same way about doing soft field takeoff’s. But they are an excellent maneuver in improving rudder control proficiency. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If one seriously practices engine out glides to an airport followed by the spiraling down to a landing understands the Best glide is only a priority to get to the airport. Once above the airport the priority is to do a series of spirals abeam the intended landing point, which should be the IFR landing zone or about 1000’ past the threshold. At this point it can be very helpful to slow down to near minimum sink speed which is very close to stall speed. Not just to give you more time aloft but to help guarantee you finish your last spiral near pattern altitude and then just have to do your well practiced power off 180 to a landing. Anyone that isn’t practiced at being able to slow down to better position the aircraft where it needs to be for the final 180 is very likely to either go off the end or come up short. The spirals while positioning the aircraft are much harder to do than the glide to airport and will use all of your skills in dealing with the winds and being able vary your speed in the spirals to keep you where you need to be. It’s something i do with all my transition training students and frequently on flight reviews. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just putting your finger at the bottom of the seal should be adequate to verify. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree pointing the nose to the sun to do a power on stall isn’t that useful. But it’s the wrong way to simulate a power on stall. Most accidents involving power on stalls are departure stalls with the nose below or near about 15 degrees. This is happening because the pilot is pulling with too much back pressure well below Vg after take off and is often compounded by being at a higher density altitude than their normal departure. The more realistic way to practice this is to greatly reduce the power with nose only at about a normal departure climb and allow IAS to continue dropping till about 10 kts above stall speed and then add 65% power and continue pulling back the nose till stall and you should get it to stall between 15-20deg pitch. This is much more realistic and can be done straight ahead or with some bank to practice recovery and see how the plane behaves. Think of it more like a high density altitude departure stalls although the accident records show it doesn’t need the high density altitude to happen. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is it dripping at the bottom below the pulley for the 2nd Alternator? If so, very common after an overhaul. The seal on that plate is very hard to seal. It’s a threaded seal. The good news is an expert TCM guy can can reseal it without removing the stater adapter. Still a number of hours to do it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

According to the factory, the definitive full mark is the base of the filler anti-siphon valve. I can not get rated capacity in my tanks though. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Depending on your model, you probably have low and high voltage light, maybe starter and alternate air door, and maybe vacuum if not removed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, The CIES senders are not compatible with the Mooney gauges and only connected to what ever display you have for them. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The prelim is out Both on board were seriously injured. The pilot had flown this route multiple times and often used this airport as an intermediate stop. The AWOS was out of service at the time of landing and pilot didn’t see a wind sock so chose rwy 6. Nearest reporting weather was Reno 23 nm away reporting 270@23G38. Pilot report a near midway touch down and starts a go around but found the engine response lacking with everything full forward. Mixture full forward? Density altitude and winds likely played a role. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Report_CEN26LA063_202172_1_10_2026 12_25_01 PM.pdf

Not sure but those both sound like single port pressure gauges for NA aircraft. you are looking for a differential pressure gauge (2 ports) for Turbo engines. i am out of the country with limited wifi or i would google it for you. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The main difference with the double puck brakes is longevity of brake pads - not stopping performance. You can pull up performance data from the POH’s and my recollection is no difference for the same weight - which was surprising for me. But you can certainly lock them up much more easily. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would think most knowledgeable buyers would much prefer to buy the airplane with the runout engine, fly it for awhile assuming it’s still airworthy and then get the overhaul of their choice so that they can go through everything as the owner. A seller can’t really afford to do it right and re-coop all their cost, and will have to continue paying other fixed cost while it’s going through OH. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually the idle FF is entirely independent of the max FF we get at WOT. They do influence each other though, but that just means when a mechanic sets either the low pressure for idle he/she needs to check the high pressure setting at WOT and a large adjustment to either can have you iterating to get them both exactly where we want. But the high max FF isn’t what results in a rich idle. Idle circuit is separate and idle FF rates and mixture are all about cold engine starts. It requires a lot more fuel to get a cold engine started which is why the 252 had a fuel diverter on top of the engine to help with cold temperatures starts. But as it warms up it will run more smoothly on a leaner mixture. Because idle is extra rich for cold starts is why we’ll get some surging on a final approach going full rich. Plus a great many engines are just set up incorrectly with an overly rich idle mixture. We should only see a 20-50 rpm rise while we slowly lean it out at minimal idle rpm (690-700) till it dies. If you’re seeing 80 or 100 or more RPM rise while slowly leaning at min idle rpm to idle cutoff it is set to rich and either idle pressure or idle mixture adjustment or both are out of adjustment. But this should explain why it’s best for the engine not to go full rich on final; especially at a high DA field. But the practice of not going full rich can get a pilot into trouble if they have to go missed and don’t get the mixture full rich right away; it can leads to a partial power loss of sky high CHTs so one has to be extra careful and remember power should be added going right to left starting with mixture or immediately there after. What does this have to with going around managing throttle and mixture? Really nothing. The key here is to realize you can’t jam the throttle in quickly like we can on an IO-360. Not because idle mixture is overly rich but because we are creating a massively over rich condition by jamming the throttle in too quickly. The important thing to understand is that as you push in the throttle with TCM fuel injection you are actually simultaneously increasing FF before the engine still has been able to come up in MAP/RPM to use all the fuel we’re feeding it. So we need push it in only part way and more slowly than the NA engine allows to wait for the turbo to come up and increase MAP and then continue adding throttle to keep FF more closely matched to the engine’s needs. If the setup isn’t right you can actually kill the engine advancing the throttle too quickly but we should only feel it hesitate from putting it in too quickly if properly set up. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No it’s a differential pressure sensor that has two ports, one plumbed to UDP like your pressurized mags and the other the fuel pressure off a fuel divider port. They are just expensive relative to a normal single port pressure transducer. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk