Shadrach

Maybe it was the one used in Psy’s “Gangnam Style” video.

If the engine is running well, I would focus on ensuring that the left mag is firing at TDC.

You could simplify things by eliminating step 1, 2 and 3…

My dad (86) loves to talk about how smooth it was when he flew through the eye of Hurricane Agnes back in the summer of ‘72. He knows we’ve all heard the story more than 20 times so he thoughtfully embellishes it just a little each time to keep it from getting too stale.

I don’t like to be a nitpicker, but I must disagree with the assertion that an IO360 floods when shut down. It does not. Skip already did an excellent job of explaining what happens to the fuel in the lines at shut down. This is not a flooded condition. If it were, the engine would not fire off in 5 to 8 blades with the throttle set for 1000 RPM, which is the norm. Here’s the bottom line. When you start an IO360 within an hour of shut down, there should be adequate fuel in the manifold to support start up without priming. If it fails to start, the best course of action is to add fuel (prime) in very small quantities. Leave the throttle alone. FYI, when you flood an engine, it is entirely possible to end up on fire. I have seen it happen on two occasions at the fuel farm

When it fires and dies, It’s almost always lack of fuel from not advancing the mixture in a timely manner. A properly set up IO360 fuel system won’t flood a running engine with a full rich mixture unless you’re at high DA. If you miss the first time it catches on a hot start, give it one thousand one, two, shot of prime with the throttle cracked. It should fire off again easily. If you miss it again, do it again. The IO360s reputation for difficult hot starts far exceeds. It’s operational reality. I have zero anxiety about starting my Aircraft under any conditions. There is no reason why others shouldn’t be the same.

An unprimed IO360 should start in 20 blades whether hot or cold. Given that yours does not, I would suspect something else is going on. 20 blades after a 10 minute stop makes zero sense. I flew my aircraft to North Carolina early this week to support disaster relief, repositioning on the field three different times before departing. Times between startup buried between 10 minutes and 30 minutes.. The airplane started every time without prime I have been flying this engine for more than 20 years and the only time I’ve had the kind of symptoms you describe are when there’s an ignition problem. @PT20J Skip gives good advice and information above. What is a “gear clicker“ and what does that mean in terms of throttle position? An eight Mississippi prime is an awful lot. If I primed that long on a normal cold start, I would surely hear a bang from the exhaust when the engine fired. I use a four second count with throttle open. I might do closer to eight seconds if it’s freezing or below, but I’d probably try six first.

Weird that an overly rich mixture manifests symptoms on cold, dense days but less in the warm months. The opposite would make more sense. If you took it into the shop complaining of an overly rich mixture, I’m not surprised it came back leaner. A misfire that is induced by a rich mixture would be preceded by a significant power loss. Are you sure this issue was caused by a rich mixture?

this reads like a number of things could’ve happened. Have you verified that the injectors are in the correct position? It’s possible they removed them to clean them and did not reinstall them in the proper cylinders. With regard to the fuel system, I hate to say it, but this is something you need to be actively involved in. They may have leaned out your your fuel flow in an attempt to get it under “red line”. Like anything, if you were asking to have something addressed on your Aircraft, you need to be very specific about the desired outcome. When I had my fuel servo overhauled, I wrote on the intake ticket that I wanted it set as rich as possible within the specification range. The servo I got back yielded a much cooler running engine. My EGT’s were ~ 60-80° cooler then they were prior to rebuild. They did exactly what I asked. Had I just said rebuild it, who knows what the outcome would’ve been. I feel your pain. You might be a good candidate for Savvy Maintenance. It seems like lightning is striking the same place over and over again.

Not at all. I allow for the fact that ATC may make a a mistake, and the pilot may be tasked with disregarding an instruction to save his own life. I should’ve used the term guts instead of gut because it takes a lot of confidence to disregard an ATC instruction (or a tremendous amount of incompetence). Indeed the outcome does matter, it’s the difference between incompetently disobeying an ATC instruction and heroically saving yourself from an ATC mistake. If you’re going to do it, you’d better be right

The hope is important, but so is food, water and gas money for the helo pilots. They had multiple wheelbarrows for offloading.

Have a nice day Vance. You win whatever you thought this contest was by virtue of me not caring. You're right...you've deduced that I don't really care about physics and I have just as accurately deduced that you are likely the life of a party.

I totally agree that it's doable but I think it's unlikely.

Mine is not an extreme example at all. Indeed I was trying to pic the most practical and most familiar example that I could. I have no dog in the fight. If it's the job of the FAA to eliminate "wiggle room", then folks should not complain when 60 year old regulations are interpreted through a 60 year old lens. It's not the sort of thing that promotes much progress, but it does provide a clear pathway to compliance.

Not in real time with the level of detail we have today. There is no comparison. The whole world has changed in the last 5 years because of this. Surgeons were not doing remote surgeries in 1960. Nor were Australian Radiologists analyzing images sent electronically from American during the early morning hours.

Opps. good catch. will edit.

No stick = non ferrous = weights OK

I don't need to know any of that to know that my 8 year old son is more likely to go over the bars of his bike under hard breaking than I would on the same bike. Can we agree that the drag profile of the gear vs the size of the aircraft vary by quite a bit? That ratio is worth noting even if we don't know the exact numbers. The caravan is a relatively long, heavy bird with a MGW in excess of 9000lbs. but the drag generated by the gear is likely very similar to that of a Cherokee 150 (MGW 2150lbs) with wheel pants. Also the PT6A on the front of that Caravan outweighs an O320 by just ~100lbs. To be clear, I don't think an A320 would flip on it's nose with the gear down while ditching for the same reason. I can deduce this without calculating speed and impact angle at the moment of touch down or the co-efficient of friction of the water depending on conditions. It would be quite a challenge to leave the house if this kind of granular analysis were needed to make decisions in all scenarios. I hope you never need to ditch, but if you do, take it from me, leave the gear up...

Just to be clear, it's no so much "common sense" which is typically based on repeated experience as it is physics involved in the predictable initial reaction of the airframe to the gear impacting the water first. There may be no statistical difference in survivability but there are clearly three high drag, protrusions sticking out of the bottom a fixed gear aircraft. If I were forced to use a wheelbarrow as a toboggan, I would remove the the undercarriage. There may be no statistical difference in the outcome in terms of survival, but I don't need a statistical analysis to know the ride down would be better without the undercarriage.

So let's say you're at a field with no maintenance facility. A very straight forward AD is issued regarding elevator counter weights. Your IA is two hours away by car but is available by zoom/FT to view the tail weights in 4K with magnification as well as see the magnet not sticking to the weight. What utility/safety is added by the four hour round trip drive? Mr. Busch's point in the live stream seemed to be that when the rule was written, no one could have envisioned the technological advances we would have available to us 60 years later to shrink the world. His point is that the person conducting the supervision/inspection should be tasked with determining to what degree their direct and/or in person supervision is needed to ensure airworthiness.

Perhaps. I would think the sample size is pretty small to draw meaningful conclusions from the data. Can anyone find images of folks standing on the wing of a highwing or a fixed gear AC waiting to be rescued? There was a cirrus the ditched a few years ago and remain up right, but he parachuted in. We can certainly say that retracts stand a better chance of staying upright. I leave you with one of the coolest movie stunt sequences by a GA aircraft since Fandango.

You takes you chances when you chose to follow your gut over ATC instructions. ATC is sometimes wrong and a perceptive pilot might save his own skin as well as others by refusing to obey an instruction that puts their aircraft in harms way. If you're going to do it, you better have good a reason. "Feelings" are not a reason in my opinion. "I feel unsafe rolling through a crossing runway with out permission" is a hazard that exists entirely in the pilot's mind unless there is visible activity on the crossing runway. I understand your argument is that he deferred to his conservative side by not entering the runway and that it only caused minor inconveniences to others in the pattern and tower. However, your position taken to it's logical conclusion, boils down to this: It's not only OK to ignore ATC instructions due to one's ignorance of the regs, but it's also a sign of good judgement to ignore ATC instructions provided that one's ignorance of the regs makes them uncomfortable with ATC instructions. That is no way to operate civil airspace...

Thanks for this Chuck. Depending on what Milton does, I will likely try to organize a trip to Elk River.

It looks like a good sized Garter Snake doing its level best to look like a scary pit viper.

I live in a very old field stone house. The foundation is 26" thick and made of stone and mortar. When we moved in, the basement was like a scene from an Indiana Jones film. Heads would appear and retract into the foundation. I relocated a few the first few months. Now I only see a few. They do keep the rodent population down for 3 seasons, but in the winter we usually have a field mouse or two try to move indoors. I have three cats and none of them are worth a $#!t when it comes to mousing.