Shadrach

This leaning for taxi business as a potential panacea for idle engine problems just confuses the issue. Save for high DA operations, the Lycoming IO360 is designed to be ground operated at full rich and indeed it operates beautifully at that setting. Nothing wrong with ground leaning if that’s your bag. I do, depending on CHTs. However, choosing to or not to ground lean is not what’s causing the start up problem. It’s either technique, fuel or ignition related.

That might work on a Lycoming in cold weather. In summer, it would likely flood the engine or perhaps make the exhaust go boom.

Next time you shut down, set it at idle (should be ~650rpm) and slowly pull mixture to ICO. Should see an rpm increase of 25-50 before it quits. If the increase is more than 50 rpm, the idle mixture is too rich.

Perhaps your idle mixture is on the rich side leaving more unburned fuel in the intake at shutdown? I don’t know why your IO 360 should be any different from any other. Hot starts are a non issue for my engine. Shut down at 1000rpm. On start up, treat the engine as preprimed. Leave throttle alone, crank and enrichen when it fires. It usually starts in the first 3 or 4 blades. In the rare instance that it does not, I try a second time to ensure that there is no combustible mixture in the intake. I then prime for a few seconds (3-5 depending on OAT) and try again. I’ve never failed to get it started. If that method does not work for you, somehing else is going on. What’s the status of the ignition system? SOS or impulse coupling?

His stated goal is maximizing flight time not distance traveled. He is theoretically seeking a power setting that yields the lowest fuel flow with smooth operation and adequate temps for L//D Max without causing harm to the powerplant.

That’s me all winter. I don’t close cowl flaps in climb though.

Those charts state that the numbers are for full rich above 75% and 100ROP below 75%. There is no operational advantage to operating an NA engine LOP at the altitudes in question. Of course, you’ve seen me say many times that LOP operations are better suited to altitudes where there is a surplus of air. Above 7500, operating at peak EGT (richest cylinder) makes the most sense. It puts you in the best BSFC curve, sacrifices little in the way of power while offering good temperature margins, excellent efficiency and smooth operation. It’s interesting that you feel that your airplane gets doggy at higher altitudes. I’ve always thought that the aircraft had a unique aptitude in its class for for cruising at the least busy GA altitudes (10-13K). I prefer flying high unless I am west bound. I have been fortunate enough to enjoy 200kt+ GS on many, many occasions over the years, and nearly 250kts a few times. Typically you have to fly high to catch those kinds of winds.

It does not really matter whether it’s under the wing walk or not. Those screws are just as easily removed and reinstalled. Whatever the sealant that you decide use, be mindful to use just enough to seal the threads and screw head.

The only thing I would add to this is that in addition to using a new screw, it would also be a good idea to gently clean the nut plate threads of old sealant. Cautious use of a thread chaser and compressed air is usually sufficient.

What’s the metal switch(?) to the left of the ignition?

I very much like the look of that. .Reminds me of my old man’s 78 XJ6L. Just needs a few flakey Smith’s gauges and you’re there.

On the vintage birds at least, the nut plate is sealed with a fuel proof cap during manufacture. It’s not hard to push them off the nut plate by pressurizing the screw hole with 3330 or 3204. The sealant will squeeze out around the cap like grease around a bushing. It will then leak for sure until the nut plate is replaced or resealed with with 3204 from the backside.

Or sometimes someone tried to stop a leak by putting too much 3330 or 3204 in the screw hole and then when the screw was tightened it pushed the sealed caps off the back of the nut plate. I’ve opened tanks and seen sealant stalagmites and stalactites where sealant was pushed through the nut plates.

It will seal a leaking screw, so yes. However, suitable and ideal are not the same. Living with wet wings means having to open the tanks every now and again. I dislike the residual sealant that it leaves on the threads of the nut plate. If it were on the underside of the wing, I would use CS3330 access door sealant it is “non adhesive” and easier to remove.

It is most certainly the same. After years of wet wing ownership, I personally prefer non-setting sealer where appropriate. These types of sealants tend to work pretty well on the top of the wing. I don’t like gluing screws in with 3204 unless I have no other option.

Humid, seaside, environment. That airframe looks bad but that does not mean all of the surface corrosion is an airworthiness issue. However, the wing has areas of inter-granular corrosion that make it a likely throw away. Pitted and chalky surfaces need to be cleaned an analyzed. There is guidance regarding allowable levels of corrosion.

I’ve had pretty good luck with Hylomar Blue. Does not take much.

Can you upload a picture of the problem you’re having. Hundreds of vintage birds have had their discs replaced without having to cut off the shock dampener boss.

Do you have the W&B revision? I’d be interested to know the net weight difference between the original manual system and electric.

I’ve always felt like 2500 was optimal for noise, speed and N, V & H.

@DCarlton it’s not as low as some would think according to the POH.

I’m not doubting your statement, but I am curious where you found this information?

Was it retrofitted? I thought the early electric gear Mooneys had squat switches. Was your bird a manual gear that was converted later in life to electric.

The process is broken. I try to remain positive but there is little evidence to suggest it is warranted.

I could probably find some configurations I have not explored. I have done full cross controlled, forward slips at under 70KIAS with full flaps…at altitude. That being said, there’s rarely an operational need for an aggressive slip at that speed, and when there is, it’s likely that an alternative correction could have been done earlier. I’ve been guilty several times of having to take more aggressive measures to correct what could have been mitigated gently just a few moments prior.