kortopates

Sorry Teejayevans, after re-reading my post I may have sounded like a jerk - but not my intention. I thought you were thinking along physiological lines. Jeff nailed it - which was what I thought would be the case. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What would be the relevance of density altitude to us physiologically breathing in the cockpit? Seems that all that really matters is the decreased partial pressure of O2 reducing our ability to assimilate oxygen. Our alveoli are pretty much at constant temperature to begin with which helps to equalize the air temp to our temperature anyway. Just wondering why it would matter? Incidentally, I think you meant pressure altitude. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, I am on the Savvy team doing analysis for Maintenance and AnalysisPro clients.

of course that's only part of the story Mike is saying in the video. Byron is absolutely right and Mike B says this in his more modern literature. The above article M20F cites is current with Mike's current recommendations. If you currently are or were to become a SavvyMaintenance client you would receive his specific oil recommendations in a write-up along with all the other services that includes. For most aircraft, Mike favors Aeroshell W100 monograde oil with one pint of ASL Camguard added at each oil change. But Mike is all about choices, so if your aircraft warrants use of multi-grade oil, he recommends Phillips X/C 20W-5 also with one pint of ASL Camguard added at each oil change. Exxon Elite 20W-50 is an acceptable alternative and much better than Aeroshell 20W-50. In fact, the one oil that he actively discourages use of with our clients is semi-synthetic multi-grade oil Aeroshell 20W-50 because of its 50% PAO that causes a number of problems including: poor anti-corrosion properties, history of producing high copper readings in oil analysis, history or aggravating TCM starter adapter slippage and history of aggravating oil leaks. His two page article for maintenance clients goes into these recommendation in much more detail to explain these issues and why he prefers a 100% mineral base oil and a mono-grade oil over multi-weight when possible but since its not published publicly I won't either. (Those of you that are SavvyMaintenance clients (and we have a few Mooney's) can ask your Account Manager for a copy of Savvy Oil Recommendations if you haven't already seen it.)

I believe Don and M016576 covered this and Joe as a long time turbo operator validates it. Bottom line is that majority of people that buy a new or late model Acclaim buy them because they are the fastest single engine piston plane available. They didn't spend all that money to go slow. Secondly recognize maximum performance cruise tables in the POH are based on maximum performance and fuel economy to a certain extent for range. But it should be obvious that maximum performance and engine longevity are very much at odds with one another; especially obvious when you look at your POH engine limitations that allow CHTs up at 450 and TITs 1650+. If you want to operate for maximum engine longevity you will need to give up seeking the speed records you know your aircraft is capable of and reduce power levels below max cruise to more conservative levels closer to 70% or less and then further enrichening the mixture beyond the POH tables for ROP settings (which are typically saying lean to peak - about the worst place to operate your engine at high power cruise if you care about longevity) or running more LOP at high power settings. Bottom line is to operate it in such a fashion your engine never experiences thermal stress. Note that Mike B more than doubled his TBO time on his Continental TSIO-520's before he topped his engines just recently with two thirds of his cylinders being original. Still think its just crappy cylinders?

Note 24 was not to give you authority to replace your vacuum based AI with an electric AI of some type - you always had the authority to do that as along as the AI was approved or STC'd etc such as Aspen or just a TSO'd Electric AI. The problem was, and the reason for Note 24, was that you still had to keep your vacuum system installed because the TCDS listed it - even though you had nothing connected to it! Note 24 now gives you the authority to pull it when its no longer used for anything. It was early adopters of glass that got the factory to add that note. I have the same issue in that I have only one vacuum instrument, my King AI, which I intend to replace with glass soon. But I'll still have to keep my vacuum system unless I am willing to replace my vacuum speed brakes with electric. Its tempting but another $4k (without labor) for new electric speed brakes when my vacuum ones work fine? I don't think so.

Don, you must be right just given how often we see it repeated. Hypoxia is very insidious and one of its key symptoms of making us feel more elated just makes it worse. But its not really that hard to recognize if you know how you respond to lack of O2 and that's why I am so personally surprised by the frequency of these events. Especially the recent episode of a pressurized plane that apparently knew he had a pressurization problem and asked ATC for lower and then just waited for 10 minutes till it was to late. That had to be almost entirely because of the insidious nature of the symptoms that the pilot didn't feel it was an emergency. Perhaps only because my life experiences including at lot of activities in the teens from rock climbing in the Sierra's and skiing that I personally didn't need a high altitude chamber course to learn the symptoms (and I am not referring to altitude sickness but symptoms from trying function with O2 Sats in the 80s). They're pretty obvious to any one that has spent time at altitude doing anything aerobic while not acclimated. I enjoyed the chamber course as I do any learning experience but except for getting to get some idea of what my own TUC would be at 25K I didn't learn anything new - I was already very familiar with the symptoms. Plus I am not at all someone that does well at altitude till after days of acclimation aided by Diamox. I need the mask above 16.5K unlike my wife whom does far better and easily maintains a O2 saturation well into the mid 90's upto 23K with just a cannula alone. But she also has done a lot of high altitude mountaineering without O2 including Mt Aconcaqua at almost 23K' - so she seems to have the genes for it. while I do not. And that is one of the other big issues - our individual tolerances seem to vary so much.

Referring only to built-in O2 systems in our turbo Mooneys: There are two possible kinds of leaks. High pressure leak or low pressure leak. The high pressure fill line from the filling portal to the tank is also tee'd to the cockpit gauge. There is a valve spring, like in a tire, that seals the portal and numerous connectors that seals small 1/8" copper line that is used from the portal to the gauge in the cockpit. Almost always a leak in the high pressure line will be at the valve spring or a connector that will take days for the tank to empty. I flew with one from west coast to east coast on one full tank of air over a couple days and then back on a fresh tank with a leak in the valve spring till I could get it fixed and never had less than ~900psi (but I also stayed out of the flight levels and have a backup supply). The key thing though is a high pressure leak is always leaking, whether O2 is on or off. Low pressure leaks occur through the O2 regulator and almost always are limited to when the regulator is on. There is one significant exception to this and that is when your tanks get hydro'd. When being re-installed the cable operating the regulator valve has to adjusted precisely such that the regulator is entirely off when the cockpit control in turned fully to the off position. I don't consider this MILF a leak myself but it's sure going to seem just like a leak to the pilot that is unfamiliar with their 02 system and rigging adjustments and probably much more common than a truly leaking regulator. Regulators should last the life of the composite tank. Our regulators are a two stage regulator. The first stage brings the pressure down from ambient tank pressure to somewhere well in the 2 digit psi range. Then a second stage regulator adjusts it down further for altitude. These were originally intended to work without flowmeters, but these days given the expense of O2 and the pilots desire to make their O2 tanks last as long as possible, virtually everyone that uses their O2 system with any regularity will be using a A4 or A5 flowmeter to precisely control the flow rate of 02 for either a cannula on one scale or mask on another scale. The flowmeters are added safety too since they give you a good visual on the O2 flow rate. The most probable causes of a malfunction is on the pilot side as Don mentions in his post. Its not likely the Scott connector we use will ever slip off once its been properly twisted on and locked in place with a positive catch. But occasionally it doesn't get pushed in properly during pre-flight and there is no flow after the cockpit control is used to turn it on. But that's obvious even before you test yourself with a pulse oximeter. You can smell the O2 and you can pretty much feel it and if you can't feel it, then you can see the ball on the flowmeter showing the level. In the absence of a flow meter the FARs require a little device that shows the 02 is flowing (kinda like a check valve that shows when it opens for flowing O2 - I haven't used one in years because I use flowmeters). This always sorts itself out right after you turn on your O2, but someone not using a flowmeter would be more likely to miss such an issue at the start. Once positively connected the Scott connector is really not going to disconnect on its own. It requires it to be pushed in against pressure and then twisted. But I have been flying high a long time and personally experienced having the hose pop off the connector. For the pilot it should be obvious, since its in sight by the left armrest. For the co-pilot its not so obvious since connector is behind you in the rear left seat. When it happened, just pushing it back on was insufficient since the hose had expanded enough under the light pressure of the O2 that it would pop right off again shortly thereafter; and then quicker the next timer... I had to hold it place (or go down) to keep it attached, but it turned out to be a minor nuisance keeping a hand on it since we were VMC and had the option of going down (with some minor deviation) to lower terrain anytime. I now always carry a pair of surgical scissors accessible to me from the back seat to cut an inch of tubing off to get a fresh end and have since also bought special crimper tool that enable me to place a metal clamp on the hose at the fitting to also prevent this. (The original one that popped off the first time had the metal clamp on it too. However a fresh end of tubing held tight just fine for years before it gets loose but I always now use the metal clamps on all O2 hoses for the added security.) Absolutely not. It should be virtually impossible in this age to get moisture in the O2 supply. The FARs require us to fill the tank with ABO, or aviators breathing oxygen. ABO is tested and logged by the gas dispenser to meet the requirement of essentially being dry air. But in these modern times all the big gas suppliers make their 02 in a manner that is moisture free and the ABO comes from the same manifold as the welding O2 and medical O2. So most DIY pilots stop right there in their reasoning and use welding O2 tanks to fill their systems. But wait there is more. When the gas shops fill tanks used for breathing (ABO and medical O2 tanks are labelled as such) they don't just simply empty it (if they even do that) and fill it with fresh O2, they empty it and then clean the tank. They actually vacuum it multiple times to make sure its as clean as possible and then fill it. If you started the process with new tanks to get welding O2 it probably would never matter, but new tanks are unheard of. Most people that fill their own either buy them from the gas supplier as used tanks labelled for the gas they want (as I did) or find old welder o2 tanks at swap meets or the like. Although odds are if ait ll worked out ok after the first usage, its probablhy going to be fine thereafter too. Nor me on its own - just the hose popping off was the closest to this. Our 02 systems are very simple and reliable. Leaks happen but catastrophic leaks are unheard off and should never be an emergency. Still though there is no need to bet your life on it. Little tiny single use 02 cylinders are available for emergency use. I always keep 2-3 in the seat back for any such emergency, and personally I won't fly above 22-23K without them on hand. But lets say the worst happens, for what ever scenario you want to come up, lets imagine you're find yourself out of O2 in the flight levels and you don't have any back up 02. Are you dead? Unlikely if you react immediately. Its the pilot that doesn't treat it like the emergency that it really is that will succumb from hypoxia. We've all seen those tables that show times of useful consciousness (TUC) at altitude without O2 - they show 3-6 Min at FL25. Almost double that at FL22 with 5-10 min TUC and at FL18 its 20-30min TUC. Do you think you can loose 5+K fast enough from near 25K to survive? I think most of us can. But therein lies perhaps one of the more valuable lessons from the Altitude Chamber ride. From 25K without supplemental 02, all of my peers in the class went at least 5 min and I went 8 1/2 minutes before putting the mask back on. I think most of us can make it down as long as we notice it right away and either reach for backup or descend immediately. Don't just ask for lower as one pilot we all heard about recently did and didn't survive as a result. Instead tell ATC your descending now for O2 issue and ask him for a vector to avoid traffic if you like. But often we fly high to get above weather. Thus we may not always be in a position to be able to safely descend immediately without some amount of deviation first. This is, in my mind, one of the main reasons underlying the importance of carrying some backup O2 to give you some options when you need it or if you are having a really bad day and for some reason fail to recognize your O2 sat has plummeted and you are running out of time. A backup supply enables you to have some 02 immediately before you are able to get lower.

LOL's

It should be there. Make sure you have the proper rev level to your POH for your serial # from the factory web page. Also check the TCDS flap extension speed for your serial number - it should show the faster Flap 15 speed for your serial number. First thing I always do with transition training clients is check for the proper rev level and find out of date POH's frequently. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Call Precision Hose Technology with your hose part numbers and you will know precisely. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The newer J's that have the higher flap speed for 15 degrees also have a detent in the flap switch - similar to Cessna. In other words you just move the switch to flaps 15 and the flap go down to there and stop without you needing to do anything. All the other models require you to put the switch back to neutral to stop them - thus very easy to overshoot 15 if busy in flight. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have my JPI oil temp probe at the front of the engine. That worked well. Technically you are not allowed to move the OEM oil temp probe unless you are replacing it with a approved for primary use system - which you may be doing. If so, you really do want it placed right there since your oil temp limitations in the POH are based on sensing the oil temp starting out of the sump and oil cooler - and not after traveling through the engine to the front where it will be warmest. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Personally I don't believe their is a right or wrong answer since it's a really personal issue for everyone. From my own perspective I am always interested to learn from these events. For me at least personally now is the time when the most learning can take place while the reality of loss of life is so strong. Most of us won't even care to read the final accident report when the NTSB finally publishes it a year from now. I wish it was more like 6 months but that is very rare! So I find healthy speculation about what could have gone wrong insightful reasoning valuable. I think we all learn by considering the what it's even though they turn out to be immaterial to the specific accident that inspired the discussion- as long as we don't forget that. The least valuable commentary IMO though is the judgmental statements like "I would never have allowed getting into that or I wouldn't have taken off. Learning kinda stops as soon as we adopt the It couldn't happen to me. And of course in hindsight the pilot would never have taken off either. I do think though in most of these accidents that they are great opportunities if you will, to sharpen our individual ADM skills. Probably not to this specific case as it is really looking like the accident cause was likely a couple hours before the descent. At least at this stage I am really thinking medical issue or hypoxia. I personally believe that many of us can be blinded by our own conformational biases preventing us from delaying accepting the reality of the changes we are seeing (e..g weather, fuel, etc) that allows us to continue in deeper till we have no outs left. Therefore i try took at accidents more in the light as to how I could better realize the gravity of the changing environment sooner despite the similar external pressures we are faced with. I am always looking for such example pitfalls I can pass onto my CFI clients as well because just telling to not do something is unhelpful. You have to help inspire the necessary reasoning or thought process to continuously stay ahead of the airplane and ask yourself does it continue to look ahead as I had planned for and if not how are the differences going to effect me and what alternatives do I need to start planning for NOW. p> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

+1, my thought exactly Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's really the type of engine installation that calls for use of the boost pump. It's not all money's at all, but all Lycoming Mooneys that use the Boost pump on takeoff, landing and changing tanks. Many of you say older 60's POH's don't mention using the boosts pump for changing tanks but it sure does in later years when the the POH's became much more thorough. But non of the Continental installations call for use of the boost pump except in an emergency and this has everything to do with how different the two fuel injection systems work. With the Lyc installation the boost will simply eliminate the fuel pressure oscillations and will not allow excess fuel to be pushed through the fuel controller but with the Continental you need two different circuits - high and low boost so you don't overly enrich the cyls with two much fuel. I can't recall specifically if the advise to run a tank dry was ever put in the fuel injected POH's but keep mind running a tank dry on a carbureted mooney is a non-event and much different than doing it in a fuel injected Mooney. Delaying the tank switch in the FI mooney may surprise you as to how long it takes to restart. Try it in a Turbo charged installation and you may find yourself taking 30 seconds and have no luck at all till you descend to 12K! It's really important to understand the systems used in your Mooney from both a trouble shooting standpoint as well as giving you informed knowledge for how to best operate your mooney and avoid surprises. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I much prefer the P2 Audio Advisory system. Google it and check it out. It is plumbed into your pitot system as well as stall and gear warning systems and is much more helpful in that it will give you a voice alert at Vref+10. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have EZtrends operational on my Windows 10 64 bit system - just had to setup the compatibility options to do so. The newer the version of Windows the easier it is it seems they make setting the compatibility options. But as mentioned, except for the LeanFind function in EzTrends which I really liked, I otherwise find the Savvy Analysis app on the web superior - but I use it daily and have become pretty adept at using it. It allows me to view multiple graphs at a time and the Gami spread button is nearly as good at Eztrends LeanFind function and it provides additional niceties such as the Delta function and Rate function. And perhaps the best feature of all is you can share your data with anyone plus you get a professional help with analysis as many people do. There are lots of Mooney pro subscribers!

Certainly not from a messy oil change, that oil would go out the bottom - not the top. It would have to be from the prop or crankcase seal. When the oil mist is on the face of the propeller its more likely the prop. Pull the spinner and look inside that as well as the blade roots and look at the crankcase seal area. Be careful to put the spinner back on the same orientation it came off to not upset the balance.

I believe there have been 4 or 5 breakups over the years, and all from convective activity. I recall Bruce J used to discuss these in the MAPA PPP he participated in so I would expect he would recall specifics the best. The two most recent I recall was a most recent one in the Bahamas with the next previous being a much more publicized event where a K model departures into convective weather and broke up by Bakersfield CA (north of LA). That was chilling since some other Mooney pilots from the same gathering heard the chilling radio calls before they were lost. As Robert already pointed out, it's highly unlikely one is going to find themselves in an upset attitude in IMC without turbulence and thus very important to use a spin like recovery starting with power off, rolling wings level before pulling back. Then it won't likely be the pilot pulling to many G's per se but a high G gust added from the turbulence that rips the tail off. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Since you still have fuel remaining (from both tanks together) I am not sure that's such a bad thing. If you look at downloaded data for Left and Right fuel levels you'll see it osicllates up and down quite a bit from the fuel moving around in flight anyway.

Yes, on all the Continentals when you pull the mixture back to ICO, and operate the boost pump the fuel divider prevents fuel from flowing forwards to the cylinders and the fuel pump circulates the excess fuel back through the fuel return line at the pump. The technique should be in your Ovation POH under hot start, my recollection it says you can use the high boost pump for short time like 15sec or the low boost pump for twice as long. See you POH or better yet, get a copy of Continentals Operators manual for your engine - that's were it came from. ​Earlier K's didn't get that wisdom added to the POH but its their in the Continental Operators manual and really helps. Don't try that on a Lyc though as it will flood the engine.​ ​

CLH is right, they are located here: http://www.mooney.com/en/Support.html# but as I write this, none of the download links work yet. But I am sure they'll have that corrected very soon.

At least the more modern Mooney's have a gear safety bypass switch and a red light that would have illuminated when the gear is being raised to tell you why and enable you to bypass the warning and raise it. I can't say off the top when they started that but I'd bet the early J's had it if not sooner. Somebody will know. But whenever the gear doesn't come up right away, its a good idea to check the actuator CB to see if its popped from the emergency manual handle being dislodged - it should be a part of your emergency gear failure to raise checklist even though it took Mooney something like a decade to get that added to the POH's.

I really doubt this was a Nexrad coverage issue unless we're talking about just southern Oregons coast. More likely I think the issue is Nexrad filtering. This really goes to the heart of why its important to not overly rely on what you see on Nexrad, you can exerperienvce the same missing returns with severe convective cells too. There is much written about differences in nexrad weather products available if you search around. But both XM and WSI due to their best to filter out non-precipitation returns that would otherwise really clutter our screens. Non-precipitation returns come from ground clutter, anomalous propagation, dust, birds and even birds. The nexrad service provider, WxWorx in the case of XM, has meteorologist that apply a gross filter to remove all returns over areas they believe has no precipitation. Of course the filters remove real precipitation too. So the problem then becomes how quickly they update the filters when precipitation begins. People have documented cases when they were seeing severe cells out the window (and even before takeoff on NWS nexrad) but their XM nexrad screen was showing nothing, then all of a sudden the filter is removed and now the Nexrad screens show severe cells. Usually they are much more on top of things but given the human element of the filtering sometimes they are left when they shouldn't have. The opposite is true too in that all ground clutter is removed with the filter. So the bottom line is to not overly rely on nexrad; especially to keep you out of convective turbulence.