Bolter

Conveniently this experience was a long body, so very applicable. -dan

Send me a PM with your email. It is a large file.

Has anyone had an actual flat with the FC 3's? I would think the stiffer sidewall has benefits in case of a flat, versus the lower rated tires. -dan

saw this on FATPNW. Unusual to collapse some gear on a Mooney with all gear linked. Does this require failure of a connecting rod? This appears to be at the end of the northbound runway 34, where you taxi to the parking area. If so, unlikely this is a typical pilot-forgot situation.

Where did you get the disks?

Fellow PNW flyer here. My personal experience was traced to fuel pump and divider wear from age, and leaking internally. Replacing these parts AND proper system tuning, fixed it all. You already confirmed good plugs and igntion wires, I assume.

No luck searching, can you specify the tape? Was the advantage of this tape that it adheres well? Or does not hurt paint? Both?

If the Garmin AOA is just a glorified air speed indicator instead of a real moving vane type, then it seems like a blocked inlet port. It is essentially tracking altitude, not airspeed. When you leveled off, it slowly restored, like 95% blockage will eventually let some air equalize.

My 1983 J had fuel pressure in the top row of gauges, near the fuel level and oil pressure gauges. What gauges do you have? The 830 is not a primary gauge, so the original gauges must be retained. edit: found photo example

I listened the Ask the A&P's podcast the other day, and they talked about the induction leak in-flight test. It would target if a single cylinder had an induction leak, not an overall leak. Essemtially (from memory), operate at a steady condition at high alitutude. When satsified with the numbers, make a large power reduction with throttle. I think he said 8". Watch for a cylinder that does not track like the rest, and that one has an induction leak and is keeping up power by sneaking in its own air. As I finished writing, I found that this link, end of the article, has the test: https://www.savvyaviation.com/wp-content/uploads/articles_eaa/EAA_2012-01_flight-test-profiles.pdf I liked that article on Turbo Troublshooting someone shared. I have a normally aspirated engine, so it was just academic to read it. If I understood the wastegate function, it is spring loaded to maximum bypass when there is no oil pressure. For as long as you have sufficient oil pressure, the wastegate will drive to the setpoint, regardless of the oil viscosity. In other words, it will always try to achieve its goal. If you don't get full MP because of the wastegate, then I think you have to have one of these conditions: pressurizing oil is leaking past the piston applies pressure to, assuming you have oil pressure in the green - look for oil leaks? you have reached min bypass already point already, and the turbo is already giving all she got. - check settings on wastegate since you are too low to reach min bypass? wastegate sensing pressure point is higher than MP gauge measurement point, perhaps due to temperature profile under the cowling - put a temp measurement gauge at the wastegate sensing point? Just a brainstorming exercise, certainly no expert on this.

310HP STC: I see 13 GPH at 170 KTAS (typical) when LOP, and average closer to 15 GPH on a long trip, when you factor the high fuel burn of climbing. For my margins this can go about 800 nm. With the full family and not demanding ultra-light packing and keeping the TKS full, I can only take on 75 gals, which means around 650 nm, which is enough longer than my typical 600 nm mission to see in-laws that it prompted me to buy this plane. My J was overall more fuel efficent, but slower. I did +800 nm in that with the standard 64 gal tanks. M20R LOP: 13 GPH at 170 KTAS = 13 nmpg M20J LOP: 8.5 GPH at 150 KTAS = 17 nmpg You can get better economy in the M20R if you go much slower, but that is beyond my tolerance for speed-range tradeoffs. -dan

The heat exchanger is typically called a "recuperator" and recuperates waste heat from the exhaust back into the thermodynamic cycle of the gas turbine. A land based gas turbine of similar size is from Capstone Turbine, and produced by the thousands since 1998, available today. That recuperator is very effective, doubling the total gas turbine cycle efficiency (from about 15% to about 30%), but very heavy, as it is land based. It proves the cycle out, but not aerospace ready. The cost of the recuperator is a major portion of the total system cost, just as it is a major part of the weight, not just an accessory. For aircraft, the recuperator effectiveness will depend greatly on size and therefore weight. Very difficult to make a solution that meets weight and cost targets. It is also a highly aggressive environment of massive thermal cycles from cold soak to +1000F exhaust temp on the hot side, plus a thermal differential with maybe 400F on the cold side. The exhaust gas is also highly corrosive at these temperatures, requiring fancier alloys (including Inconel 625 as a popular choice) Turb-Aero (https://turb.aero/) has a similar solution but with 2 spools like PT6. Also a long way from being availble for sale. -dan

I found internal fuel component leaks from dried out or ageing components, I think the engine driven fuel pump and flow divider. The dying on roll out was rare, then became more common as the components got worse in ananalog kid of way. Rebuilt all fuel system components and tuned per the manual, and the problem was positively gone. Other than the stalling on roll out, there was no external indicator of the significant problem inside the fuel system.

If you literally cut the wings off, won't they be useless because of the continuous spar? It would be a totally different disassembly if you want to fit the plane on a truck or in a container, AND have the wing repairable. The popular options appear to be removing the total wing, or removing the tail, and carrying the fuselage sideways on the truck. Either way, the wing spar is left intact.

At my old airport, Whiteman KWHP in LA, someone was working on a C or E, and when they swung the gear, the front wheel caught the ground, and pulled it off the jacks. Same wing damage. Most likely the jacks leaked a little overnight, so the plane was just enough lower. I am told that the plane was repaired. It was reskinned, as nothing substantial awas broken internally.