M20F

Well you get a knot or two closing it so mission critical :-p

Congrats!!

On my phone so hassle to look it up but odds are you technically need an updated W&B to put the 24-15 in.

That's the one :-)

Going to make some calls Monday but wanted to see if anyone knew of a quick location on an overhead knob for the air scoop (part S1003-1-40916). Some stupidity on my part requires me to get a new one

A bit different in a pressurized plane. Dry ice sublimating in a closed vessel like a cooler, pressurized compartment, etc. is bad. In a little GA plane it is just going to exhaust out the vents as Don suggests.

Only comment I can add is once you start messing with the rigging it is easy to make things a lot worse. It is one of those things where it's worth the money to get somebody who really knows what they are doing to fix it. As Maurader points out sometimes it gets rigged to fix a non control surface issue and even if the boards are all correct it flies wrong.

Goofy fuel systems aren't limited to twin's. Cherokee six has a weird one for some years, any Continental with two tanks you have the fuel return issue which if you don't burn off correctly can cause you to dump fuel over board, Bonanza's with the tank in back have CG issues, Cirrus's are wildly unfun to fly if you get uneven tanks, etc. Then there are twins like the Aerocommanders which have a single tank feeding both engines that is even easier than our Mooney's. The NTSB statistics on twins are a bit skewed as well. First you don't see all the people that lose engines and don't have an issue only the bad news. Second twins fly a lot more in 135 operations so you have a lot more probability for an incident. I only have one personal experience with somebody killing themselves in a twin and it was the same issue as you see in singles, they got to slow. The expensive factor for a twin is spot on, the odds of engine loss being greater than a single is spot on, the fuel burn is spot on, the odds of losing an accessory being more is spot on. A twin though overcomes all of the loss factors though by having redundant accessories, fuel tanks, cross feed, and most importantly an engine. Fly fast and life is good! Fly slow and just like in a single you are going to have a bad day but with two more reasons than a single Vmc and Vyse.

+ for Don he did my prepurchase (as an annual) and other work. I did my deal with All American and we split the annual cost and they paid for anything airworthy or had the option to cancel the contract and give me my deposit back. Worked out great and highly reccomend their services as well.

Mineral spirits isn't going to remove zinc chromate or paint. I use it with a spray gun on my belly all the time and other parts to strip off gunk. So if patches are coming off something other is causing it to happen. Once you know what caused it to come off, fix that issue, than I would just clean/sand, and spray with zinc chromate. Even though it is now chromated I would still Corrosion X it as the fog will bind to any parts in that section that didn't get chromated. The fog also works as a good lubricant to the moving parts.

Twins get a bad reputation for neediness/ proficiency. It isn't some much how you deal with single engine flying or loss of an engine as it is adopting a different mindset. While speed matters in all planes in a twin it really matters. In a single you pitch for Vy and hope to gain enough altitude to have options. In a twin altitude is secondary to speed. After Vr getting clean and to Vyse is much more critical so you need to adopt a much flatter climb profile to rapidly accelerate. After that it is just a single for the most part. Most twins will maintain or climb on a single engine and a windmilling prop isn't a huge amount of drag. People get into trouble when they get slow or they rush to play with the controls when they lose an engine. The speed issue comes often from people forgetting in a twin if the engine quits you can maintain/gain altitude and instead focus on the altimeter instead of airspeed. The controls issue comes from training where so much emphasis is dead foot, dead engine, throttle, prop, mixture drills to where people try to run the drill in 5 seconds. Take off flat, clean up quickly, get speed, pitch for cruise climb and you won't have issues. Lose an engine, get a stable and sustainable level flight or climb at or above Vyse and then secure the engine (short of a fire or similiar). The horror stories everyone hears about twins I personally think cause people to just panic when they finally lose an engine and then the rapid fire rote memory from training to feather in 5 seconds just secures it. Twins are different than singles just like gliders (which also take a different mindset). There is no need to spend 100hrs a year on pulling engines to be safe. Just practice the same basic airmanship you do in a single and remember, speed is everything in almost all situations. Get stable and do the checklist.

Friend of mine had this issue in a 64 C320.

About 16 man hours.

I am having problems finding Aeroshell Fluid 3 Mineral oil, any suggestions?

In the summer we have a choice between a massive line of thunderstorms which an approach is about the last thing you need to worry about or CAVU. In the winter entirely different story with fog, snow, rain, low vis, and everyone's favorite ice where I would really want to be going someplace that has an approach.

This time of year it really shouldn't be a problem to where you would need an approach. I always file to DPA and either cancel close to the B if Chicago is vectoring me to much or just cancel with DPA tower and tell them I am over to Schaumburg. Getting out of 06C IFR on the ground is pretty tough but again this time of the year you can get it in the air with no issues (133.5). I was based at PWK years ago when they redid 06C and it is a nice airport as is DPA but the costs are a bit nutty. Getting out of PWK IFR depending upon direction of flight (or coming inbound) can be a bit challenging due to ORD as well. It looks like you are coming from East Coast so getting into PWK means either going over the lake or going around the south side of the B. It is pretty rare to get into the B space, not saying it doesn't happen but doesn't happen very often. Fuel at all three airports is $1 or more over what you can get resonably close. I just looked at KMGC which was $3.99 for awhile and along your route went up but KOXI is $4.04. Also keep in mind what looks like 20 mins is going to vary a lot depending on traffic. Going one side of Arlington Heights to the other is going to be 40 mins and any road near PWK in rush hour is a nightmare pretty much. If you are coming on the weekend or off hours the 20 mins is probably ok.

This is one of the things I really like about my MVP-50 is that you can put in what you added and it will compare to what it expected and tell you the % +/- to adjust the K factor if need be. Mine has always been within 1-2% so never needed to futz with it, but really amazing the things these monitors will do for you.

Arlington Heights is big depending if you are on the north or south side 06C could be closer. All I can say about FBO's at PWK as a local is expensive but have never heard any bad things. Hope somebody can give you some details.

Very busy with corporate and expensive for GA. in terms of cost 06C would be the cheapest and about 30 min drive to PWK. Cheapest area gas these days is KMGC and KBUU. I am based at 06C and just file to KDPA and tell tower going to 06C.

In reading through most of your posts here it is fairly clear to me your agenda. I am going to drop out of this and future discussions with you.

It's called hyperbole which I think most people smart enough to fly an airplane can discern (this last part is called sarcasm/passive aggressive so you don't get confused further).

One of the articles said the Angels were parked on the runway and they had to move them off. I find it very hard to believe they didn't have the fuel to go 80 miles. Declaring an emergency when you didn't need to in order to get into a TFR isn't going to bode well. At least the Blues didn't "thump" them....

Doubtful given the inconsistency of problem and issue with both flaps going up and down.

That is my favorite part of flying still, always makes me smile a bit pounding through them :-)

They feel having pilots without medicals flying near airlines to be bad. I am not saying this is good or bad logic but their letter is clear on their view. I am an NRA member and in their mind you should be able to carry a rocket launcher on a 747. I don't necessarily agree with that but it follows the slippery slope principal. Once you start moving the line in the sand it is difficult and expensive to stop further movement, so the logic is fight everything. If this legislation fails it doesn't impact airlines pilots at all but if it passes it is foreseeable this could create an avenue for something negative to occur for them. All about keeping the status quo. Remember this is an exercise in political action both sides, not a reasoned debate per se. The best course of action is fund the side which supports your position (pro or con) and write/call your representative. Debating what ALPA is doing isn't going to have any impact on the outcome though.