Shadrach

When ever I’m doing panel work I trim full nose down. It pulls the yokes right up against the panel and out of the way. I can imagine there is very little authority to raid the nose in that position.

I know it sounds ridiculous but I would remove the 165 and gently clean the connector strip with a pencil erasure on both sides, then wipe with an alcohol soaked Qtip (leave no fiber behind). With the box out, shine a light into the tray and get a visual on the female side of the connector. Ensure all the contacts are properly oriented and undamaged. Re-rack and test. If that fails, it will need to be bench tested. The good news is that it’s a very robust radio, and most of the parts are available save for the display which is unobtainium… BE VERY, VERY MINDFUL OF THE DISPLAY WHEN HANDLING AND RACKING.

I diverted into Allentown/Queen City after a gen failure on my way back form Manchester. I had the local mx facility charge the battery overnight and I reinstalled it the next morning. I launched for home in clear VFR weather planning to arrive in under an hour. Before departing, I called my home tower to tell them my approximate ETA and that I may have a comm issue upon arrival necessitating light signals. I flew home with a handheld GPS and the master off, powering up from the Harrisburg TRSA (Now Class C) to HGR. I had adequate power to complete the trip with no issue. A CFI friend suggested that departing with defective, required equipment could get me in hot water with the FSDO.

I expect a manufacturer to make a case for their product to their target audience. I take issue with misrepresentation. I have not seen any misrepresentations made. Prior to the availability of AGM batteries, most of us had Gill G35s that weighed 27lbs, had just 250 CCA and a capacity of 23AH. The Gill batteries I used for most of my flying had a shelf life slightly better than pasteurized milk. Perhaps, for this reason, I’m not as concerned with rated capacity as you are. I’m not entirely sold by any means, but I am intrigued. I also think the BMS offers some beneficial features that aren’t currently available with other applications e.g. over discharge protection. I think they would do well to enhance BMS info beyond a flashing LED.

The RG35A is a 29Ah battery at 100%. I kept my last one until it fell below 80%. The plane does not do a lot of hard IFR. Everything is a trade off. So the practical question is, how likely is it that I find myself in a situation where I’m airborne with a dead EarthX that would be alive if it were a Concorde? Seems to me, not very. Conservatively speaking, the weight difference equates to more than 20mins of fuel at cruise. Statistically speaking it seems to me that more pilots get in trouble exhausting fuel rather than electrons…though I would never do such a thing.

My reasoning is that my airplane’s electrical needs are trending downward and that I have had a single charging system failure in the last 20 years. If the EarthX offers an honest 1 hr of operation, the delta between that and my RG35 is what, 15-20 mins at best? In exchange 24lbs of UL. It’s worth considering. I still think a dual battery with a switch would be ideal

Thank you for taking the time to explain in detail. I am warming to the idea. In truth, I’ve spent most of my flying days not having much confidence that any aviation battery would function for long as a reliable backup. I am on my second Concorde AGM and they have been far better than the Gill G35s I used up until 10 years ago. When this one is due for replacement, I will consider an EarthX. Look forward to pireps from those who’ve already switched.

My comment had nothing to do with ground testing. It was simply my observation that what is sufficient in theory is not always sufficient in practice. Let’s talk testing. Perhaps you can add some perspective. What number was used for average draw of a GA single in cruise. I suffered charging system failure that resulted in lost comms before I was able to land. This was at least 20 years ago and I admit that I did not catch the failure right away (plane is better instrumented now) but I was only ~1.2hrs into the flight when the comms failed. I had about .5 hours of coms after I noticed the failure and shut down all non essential electronics. That was supposed to be a 23Ah battery. I landed at Allentown NORDO at dusk. Grateful that my gear are not electric. I want to understand worst and best case scenarios.

I only hit the stop on short final if I’m at min fuel with two up front. This is a function of two things: 1) A forward CG 2) Very low approach speed at <2200lbs. Usually down to 65MIAS by short final. The combined effect is: Less airspeed requires an increase in AOA Increase in AOA requires more elevator input. Forward CG requires more elevator to increase AOA. Less airspeed makes elevator elevator less effective requiring more input. All in all, I think the plane is pretty well balanced across its weight, cg and speed envelope. Why not add a 50lbs ballast to the baggage compartment?

I have manual gear. My father in law (also a pilot) teases me that all the knob turning and lever pumping makes it look like I’m running a steam engine during approach and take off.

I am not talking about acceptance. I’m talking about technical supremacy. There is almost no argument for non antilock brakes. The only argument for manual transmissions is light weight and joy of operation, autos are technically superior. Lithium Ion Battery tech is already close. It’s easy to say that less capacity is adequate on the ground. In IMC or VMC on top with icing conditions underneath you? I want as much time (capacity) as possible to sort out options.

No doubt that Lithium Ion appears to be the future. There is also no doubt that the capacity is lower than current AGM products but in a much, much, lighter package. I understand the argument that capacity is sufficient. Just as I imagine others understand that if you can reduce weight and increase capacity, you’ve shut down most performance based objections and are really talking about pricing at that point. Early adopters can choose when they’re ready beta test and I look forward to the first pireps. Your summary above is a bit optimistic in terms of how rapidly past innovations have lived up to expectations. It took over 50 years for anti locks and auto transmissions to become superior in all aspects of performance (save for maybe weight). I am happy that folks are innovating and hope the advances occur at an ever increasing rate.

That should depend on weight. I’ve run the trim into the full nose up stop on short final with the front seats filled and ~12 gals remaining in one tank. I Rarely fly with less than 2hrs on board but it’s happened a time or two.

Same. Positive rate, Gear up, swipe forward Flaps up <100MIAS, swipe forward pitch for cruise climb 120MIAS, swipe forward.

I think there would be interest in a dual EarthX set up giving more reserve Ah over a conventional AGM while still yielding a significant weight reduction. No downside to more capacity for less weight save for maybe the price. A single EarthX would increase my plane's Useful Load to approximately 1084lbs. I'd gladly give up 6lbs of that for greater capacity.

Some time at a safe altitude with take off flaps deployed and the airplane trimmed for hands off climb at Vy, try raising flaps without trying to making pitch adjustments. It is not so dramatic as it is while managing an accelerating aircraft in the airport environment. I have done more than a few full flap, touch and goes and even the pitch change during the transition from full flaps to no flaps is quite manageable though the procedure is not something I'd recommend. It's a fair amount of work coordinating pitch, initial trim, gear retraction, flap retraction and retrim at low speed.

The "out of trim" scenario is real but is more perception than reality, just like when people describe a brief "sink" when retracting flaps (which is all perception). When you retract the flaps, you change the chord line of the wing As the trailing edge retracts, the wing seeks roughly the same AOA. Because the the effective angle of incidence is reduced as the flaps come up, the same AOA equates to a higher pitch of the longitudinal axis (fuselage). There is likely a marginal increase in drag from the increased angle of the fuselage to the relative wind, but the perception that some have that raising flaps shifts the airfoil significantly towards a stall is a misunderstanding, unless the aircraft is already on the ragged edge.

I don’t know when the oil cooler was relocated by the factory, but the majority of Es and F’s and Cs have the oil cooler mounted in the same location on the lower pilot’s side cowl.

It’s limited by the jackscrew that drives the indicator not the indicator itself.

A third option would be to ensure that the indicator and flap position match factory specs.

That is the correct PN. It is does not appear to be available. I would reach out to Honeywell to see if there is a superseding part number. I have never disassembled one of those toggles, but there's a chance that a thorough cleaning and reassembly might make it serviceable.

The illustrated parts catalog for the 1969 M20C is available for download below. That is the appropriate place to find part numbers.

I have lots of M20F time, the only time it’s ever wheel borrowed is when I have tried to delay lift off by “holding” the nose down to build more speed. The trim indicator is simply a cable attached to a jack screw on one end and to an indicator lever on the other. After 54 years of maintenance, there's a reasonable chance that it’s out of adjustment. Mid bodies tend to be forward CG when empty which is part of the reason that they can be loaded to gross with almost no worry of getting out of CG. Proper take off trim is important. At a minimum, try running it to the stops in each direction and check the indication at max up and max down.

I have no experience with the electric flaps. But my first step would be taking a multimeter to the motor to verify it is getting power with the switch in the retract position. Here is a thread centered on the same symptoms:

That makes sense. It looks like my broker recently changed from being an independent to an Acrisure affiliate.