jetdriven

Hopefully the welder used the proper filler rod and a Tig with a Lanthanted tungsten. Plus that pipe was cracked almost all the way around. That pipe is 300 series stainless steel, and its mandrel bent around a curve, not commonly available in Foley AL. Anytthing ca be fixed, theoretically, but I would replace that part ASAP.

What are some of the things you don’t like about it ?

My hanger mate just had his plane painted at Hawk and it looks really good but out of the gun. I think it was upper 20s, but he had some extra things like stainless hardware and some stripes and stuff. I called Joe. He still remembers me. I’m the guy that showed up with 33 pounds of vinyl to make 33 stripes.

And they will sand all the alclad off of your plane and paint it with alumigrip and Napa thinner for that.

For a JPI 830 we had to program it as an eight cylinder because the RPM shown was twice what it was

we've been hearing this for 5 years now. ....

You want to collar the circuit breakers you may need to pull in a hurry, like In case the airplane tries to kill you such as the auto pilot circuit breaker, and electric trim, but for the GFC500 it doesn’t matter because it’s only for the manual control of the electric trim. The auto pilot still controls that, the AP circuit breaker will do that. And then you want to be able to reset the field to get the alternators to start charging again. Other than that, you just want to do like in the Boeing they circled the breakers in white that could be load shed in case of electrical failure. The airbus has no white circled breakers because if you have complete electrical failure, you’re going to crash anyway. You might as well enjoy the view instead of pulling breakers.

It’s covered over with fiberglass. Standard layup technique. The airbox has a flat aluminum piece riveted over the hole left by the stack piece that’s removed

I have all the Dukes hardware that came out of our 77J including that cable. If you’re going to convert to the Eaton unit, go ahead and go all the way and get rid of that side crank and put the floor pulll handle in the airplane and then you can free up some space in the left side for a pocket,

We’re paying that on a J model and we have owned if 14 years and I got a bunch of hours

Juan Brown’s video pretty clearly shows that the tail wheel wasn’t locked, as soon as it touch the ground it spun 360 and then the plane headed left. But it was probably mostly the fact that the right brake failed because the hose came unscrewed when the gear went up. It’s amazing how such simple small oversight can cause such disaster.

Yup. I’ve seen two magnetos at air races that fell out of the case. The pilot adjusted the timing and then tightened it back down. Luckily they were two separate mags, but still.

We just did that and we retrofitted a newer style Avionics products (Eaton) actuator. You’ve got to convert the plane and it takes some extra stuff to do that. We also have the Dukes actuator that came from our plane and an Eaton actuator here.

It contains more energy per gallon, so the range is either the same or slightly more for the same fuel load in lbs.

The FAA published an AC about shoulder harnesses and it basically said it’s a minor alteration unless you make major changes to the airframe. And even if the mounting point doesn’t meet the pull requirements it’s better than not having it.

Do you have to yell, wtf is wrong with you. And try to type legible sentences also. It hurts to read shitposts like this

Who is martin pauley

I did, on my own personal plane. These cylinders had something like 400 hours since new, and I sent the cylinder to Poplar Grove and he said the exhaust guide was totally shot and the valve was setting to burn. It had a large asymmetrical green area. So they replaced the valve guide and valve and then lapped it all properly and it’s fine for another 300 hours.

I don't know what the ratio is, but there were a few M20F's that were built at the factory like that with the pull thing in the floor and everything. We have one we take care of like that, even has the corrugated J style elevators, but it's a 75 airplane. Now 76's and 77's didn't have that but 78 did. its almost like they wanted to try it out for a while.

Respectfully, I disagree.. Yes, we understand how machines work better as time goes on that's why we revise manuals. To incorporate what we learned about these things as they accumulate service in the field. There's no certification infringement for saying you should bring the flaps in an partially open instead of fully closed position, it's actually within the usable range of what was there before, and you can issue a service letter that advises owners and operators. They always wanna say well you have recertify the device if you do this and that's rarely the case. This doesn't even mean the definition of a major alteration, or an alteration at all really. You know Lycoming ran an engine for 100 hours with the roller camshaft and tappets. And then they had a couple of test airplanes. They flew 100 hours or more as well. And then they sent them out ... They had revise the parts catalog to show the new stuff. If that's not a major change, what was. I think more than likely, it's the fact that these airplanes are already been sold and although you can get better performance out of it, they kind of don't care. They have to get involved if safety as it stake, but not for optimal performance.

I mean, what is optimal is optimal, but they should've at least put that in the service manual so that you can rig the aircraft properly for what it wants not just what looks right or what you think is right or what looks right on older planes.

It should be easy for @Pinecone to verify this. He's got some fancy radios now and at least in a couple places that shows TAS. Plus a brand new cowl flap motor for free courtesy of www.flyrpm.com

A chandelle is a low G maneuver though. Its fixed bank, then constantly increasing bank for the first half. . Then constant pitch and decreasing bank. Its a requirement of the maneuver.

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.

But is that net drag higher than having the cowl flaps not close fully? When my cowl flaps are in trail they're open about 1.5-2" at the trailihng edge. The plane also slows down 3 knots TAS. There's no free lunch here. Air forced through fins is still doing work.