Chessieretriever

I had a similar problem in my rocket many summers ago. It would go away when I added the electric boost pump and turned out to be a failing engine driven fuel pump.On my bird I have to add the boost pump when climbing above 12,000 or the fuel flow is insufficient for the big TSIOL-550 even when everything is perfect. Perhaps you have fuel pressure before and after to confirm? Either way you were flying leaner on the flight you are describing (higher temps and lower fuel flow).

I have the original M20M (TLS not PFM) that Conrad used to obtain the STC for the Liquid "351" rocket from the FAA. That STC was used to later include PFMs albeit I am not sure it all of the original mods were included. Mine has extra gussets on the steel cage, stiffeners on the tail for flutter prevention, stronger landing gear, and an 8 point engine mount as opposed to 4 points. Logs show flights at FL 350. Can consistently cruise faster than an Acclaim in the flight levels at cruise power (due to the higher HP number used for the 70% to begin with). Awesome aircraft. Not for the faint of heart. Chessie

TO EVERY ONE THAT CONTACTED ME REGARDING N92AV. Thank you very much! The airplane sold several weeks ago and is now happily reisiding with its new owner 700 miles from our airport. A trip out of the country for me with a return 'sandbagged' by hurricane Sandy and no electricity and communications infrastructure afterwards prevented me from responding to all the inquiries and comments in a timely manner; my appologies for this. Good luck with your search. OFB

Many folks have asked questions so below are answers to the most common ones: Have All Logs since new Current in all aspects (airframe, engine, AD's, SB's, IFR checks); flown on regular basis Total Time Airframe 4030TT Engine 569SMOH, Mena Aircraft Engines done at Tach 216. Major Overhaul in March 1993 at 3378TT Engine Inspection Prop Strike at Tach time 639, Mena Aircraft Engines in January 2004 At that time engine had 423SMOH. Engine now has 146hours since prop strike inspection. No Oil Leaks. Upgraded Fuel Pump, Carburater, Plane Power Alternator Engine Oil changed every ~25 hours Useful Load is 875 lbs Total Fuel is 60.5 Gallons All speed mods have the corresponding STC in the records of the aircraft Turbo is operated with a manual waste gate from the cockpit with a vernier type throttle cable. Yes we have flown over 1000nm non stop with favourable winds. See flightaware Fuel can be managed to fly 5.5hours. Hope this helps. OFB

Selling our little 1963 Mooney that was used to back up our 351 Rocket. She is a fast and economical plane, cruises at 165kts on 12.5gph at FL 150 and does 170kts at FL 180. Down low without the manual Rajay turbo it will cruise at 150kts all day long. Has 12 gallon auxiliary tank in the rear and the standard 48 gallons in the wings. Since we purchased it we: re-sealed both tanks got a new paint job And added: Aspen EFIS Garmin GTX330 Mode "S" transponder with traffic (ready for ADS- (Traffic displayed on Aspen and Garmin) PS Engineering top of the line Audio Sytem with recall and bluetooth Garmin 400Waas GPS coupled to the Stec-50 AP with GPSS (Flyes approaches to minimums) Dual King Radios Garmin 496 in the dash for weather JPI 730 With: Progressive maintenance at MSC (Weber) The plane has pretty much every speed modification available for a Ranger including: 201 windshield Gap seals Rear vertical stabilizer fairings Leading edge wing fairings Cowl closure 231 dash Additionally, 92AV has a great manual Rajay turbo. It has the battery relocated to the rear, dual oil filter systems, Mena Aircraft engine (785h), Plane Power alternator, plus one oxygen bottle with 4 cannulas included for the winning buyer! We have all records and paperwork for the aircraft (one thick folder of pure STC stuff alone). Main wing spar was replaced by previous owner (Maintenance Director for Southwest Airlines). No corrosion at all anywhere (pics are all available). We have flown >900nm non-stop (take it FL170 with the turbo and then decrease power to 50% and continue at 150kts burning 7.4gph) without having to install Monroe tanks (would make this a 1300nm+ airplane if you can handle it) PRICE $55,000. Aircraft is located at KMPO. We can help with transporting it for reasonable distances and coverage of out of pocket costs. Private message me or call Otto at (570) 807-7513.

I have a '62 Ranger with a Rajay and purchased a used J cowling along with engine mount etc to convert the FW to J using a Mod Works STC. Still in the box in the corner of the hangar as this airplane is our backup and our Rocket has had perfect dispatch in the past year (not the case before that). If you are interested in exploring options pm me. Thanks, O

In my experience Gami was very good at working with us to get our engine to run LOP "at the power levels we were targeting" and supplied 4 sets of injectors for it. If you have a good engine monitor, confirmed a good ignition system (mags, wires, spark plugs) and have set timing properly (as advanced as you are allowed) you should be able to see which cylinder is misfiring when you are in the LOP state with your engine monitor and then work on that cylinder injector. It may still be hard to get to LOP but still may be possible (I know some that were succesful). We tuned our injectors for LOP operation as this is where we cruise. If you have an engine that operates great ROP and has the performance indicated by JGreen I would just go with it and don't waste time trying to go LOP. Looking at your fuel flow and engine power settings for the TAS quoted it appears that your airplane may be speriencing some avoidable drag. On the air speeds you quote, maybe you are experiencing similar problems as we did when we puchased our airplane; it was slow due to the gear hanging down, the rigging being out and the ailerons being tuned to their lower spec setting. We gained over 15kts TAS by correcting these details and our fuel flow went down to boot once we were done with our engine work. Good luck with your Bravo. Chessie N9154W

For those that wanted to know more about the 351, it is a converion done by Darwin of Rocket Engineering using the TCM TSIOL-550A Voyager engine (single turbo) which is the liquid cooled version of that TCM engine. The engine is orininally rated for 350HP continous at 2700RPM and in the Rocket it is "detuned" to 335HP by limiting RPM to 2600RPM. Our airplane is based on a TLS and has additional gussets on the steel frame and the flight surfaces. Our plane was actually used for the FAA certification process and has been flown to FL350 by Rocket during that process (so they tell me anyway). It loves to fly as high as you take it and really shines up there. Advantages are no cooling problems whatsoever (especially in the flight levels), very good critical altitude which makes for a quick climb into the higher FL's and (for me) the ability to fly LOP for cruise even as high as ~74% of the Mooney rating which is about ~70% of the factory HP rating. This translates into cruise speeds of ~220kts TAS at about 16.3gph and speeds of ~207kts TAS at ~15gph. Range is 1200nm+ in calm conditions and for max speed on ours at FL250 was 251kts (after a lot of work on the rigging and cleaning up the airframe itself). Obviously nobody (should) flys them firewalled. Disadvantages are ~100lbs of weight penalty which reduces useful load on the plane and if you fly it ROP it will use about 21gph. It has enough power to lift it's full gross at just about any airport in the US (including Telluride) at 1800ftm any time even when hot. Additionally it requires some special knowledge from your AP tech to maintain the watercooled system (a non issue for us as we work with Weber and they like N9154W)

I have a 351 Rocket and had the same problem until I adopted the following proceedure: Prop full foward Mixture completely out (cut out) Throttle full forward Prime for about 30 seconds Stop prime and put mixture full rich throttle back to idle Prime for 1 to 2 seconds Throttle to slightly more than idle (like 1/4 inch) Start Engine The priming with the mixture out is to purge the vapor from the hot fuel lines. Hope this helps

As a student pilot on my first cross country trip in our old 172 back in the day I lost a valve in #3 cylinder. The vibration was bad (valve head now part of the reciprocating mass of the piston in the dead cylinder). Declared emergency, went for closest airport (1800 ft grass strip about 10 miles away) and realized that I was able to maintain level flight and then choose a Class C airport about 15 miles for my landing. They cleared the traffic for me and I landed uneventfully flanked by fire trucks and law enforcement vehicles.

Sad series of events. Most folks that know this airport do not take off on this runway due to the terrain (slopes up in the direction of your climb and has 2 red lights at the top of the mountain). Unfortunately there is even the chance of a runway intersection TO which would leave only about 1100 feet of pavement with a 100ft obstacle at the end and therefore make it a mission that is simply not possible with a J model with 3 folks on board even with low fuel. Our thoughts are with the family of the friends we lost.

I fly regularily 1000nm with two people non stop so doing it with three people and a stop is no problem with just about any Mooney. Winds will be an issue (going West may be harder) but it should still be doable. Trick to range is being able to run LOP properly (don't want to start something here but it does make a large difference). N9154W and N92AV

I have a '63 Ranger with the Rayjay kit and would not trade it for anything. You can use it if you want to cruise at higher elevations or just go NA down low with minimal penalty. I did not realize how attractive this set up was until I flew with a friend in his M20E and could only get above the weather with a tremendous amount of effort due to the lower engine output. My recomendation is to keep it and use it from time to time to make sure everything works.

Had this happen many times on our TLS and would not worry about it. If you don't see the fine mist on the windshield from the prop then your slinger ring supply is not making it past the hollow studs to the prop and you may have a heavier than normal "drip" on the exhaust which could make this symptom worse (we have had it with everything working normally during heavy de-icing use during decent so you may want to confirm that it is indeed not making it to the slinger ring firt before concluding that this is a problem that you need or want to address). Chessie

Obviously there are many points of view to consider based on all of the opinions on this board. The main one seems to be the confidence and comfort level of the operator in this environment. We have a Ranger and a liquid cooled Rocket (which we bought from Jason). We fly both in the flight levels. Last Month we climbed with the Ranger to 17000 using the turbo for the climb and then pulled the turbo leaving the engine in a naturally apirated environment which allowed us to lean agressively, take advantage of a good tail wind and still get 5.5 hours of range with our '62 model Ranger to make 1200nm non top with legal IFR reserves (see http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N92AV/history/20111209/1601Z/KHUM/KMPO). The problems encountered are not airplane related (in this particular case we got so cold that we decided to down to warm up). We have had our carburated Ranger to FL230 but saw that the fuel pressure at that altitude is too low for comfort (still running fine but had only 2.5psig pressure) for us. Our Liquid Rocket will cruise at FL250 all day long with corresponding speeds and economy.

I recomend the Monroe STC. We fly a Bravo with the Rocket 351 conversion (TCM TSIOL550) which is similar to your engine (low compression, water cooled and higher output on T/O but essentially the same everywhere else). We have flown Denver CO to our home base in PA 1400 miles non stop LOP using 104 Gallons in less than 6 hours with an hour+ of fuel left. So if we can do it you certainly can do that and then some with 130 Gallon on board. The problem becomes physiological rather than fuel at that point. The weight penalty of the Monroe is negligible; just need to keep an eye on W&B and fly high and LOP.

It most likely is a partially blocked injector which you can confirm by looking at the exhaust (not cylinder head) temperature signature of this cylinder. If the temperature increased ahead of the cylinder head increase and substantially different from the other exhaust temperatures, then you most likely got a little obstruction on that nozzle and cleaning it should solve it. If however you saw a decrease in exhaust gas temperature and then a corresponding increase in cylinder head temperature I would tip that this will indicate detonation (which by the way could also be caused by a lean condition). Hope you can get to the bottom of it soon.

Our '62 "C" can do 5.5 hours up there with legal IFR reserves (See http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N92AV/history/20111209/1601Z/KHUM/KMPO). We have the 'old style' tanks with 48 usable plus a 12 gallon tank in the baggage compartment (STC'd back in the day) and have done 1100nm with the help of some headwind. A note from our other Mooney (Rocket 351) if you have Monroe's you don't have to fill them to capacity but can to W&B limits wich would give you variable range based on your payload for the trip. The weight penalty due to Monroe's is minimal.

I am puzzled like Jose. From race engine experience I understand that if you seal off the crank and have some blowby (all enignes have some) the internal crank pressure builds and eventually will create will find a way to be relieved and move seals (including turbo oil return seals) and gaskets and take any oil that may be lying around in its path with it out of the engine. The air/oil separator return line that has a kink explains a constriction on the gravity drain of oil back to the sump. The air breather on top would have to be blocket at the same time for the engine case to develop the type of pressure you are talking about. The only way this could happen is if the (oil) level in the separator rose the point of reaching the air breather (much smaller line) and then was unable to relieve through the (top and possibly ice constricted) air breather line. This indeed can only happen if the temperatures under the cowl were still under 32F which leads me to deduct that perhaps that cold morning the take off took place with an abbreviated engine warm up time (as in oil temps were less than 150F). Obviosly the obstruction in the oil line is the primary cause and the low operating temperatures (in the air relief line if indeed the culprit) were the secondary cause leading to the pressurization of your engine case. I would check the oil temps prior to T/O and perhaps wait until the main gallery shows 150F in the future in addition to improving the routing on the oil return line. Just my 2 cents worth. Glad you are all right and everything is back to functional.

Hallo Folks, A couple of weeks ago we travelled from Houma, LA to Mount Pocono, PA direct with our little Ranger. We filed and got 17,000ft (Rajay Turbo) and were doing great until the temperatures dropped to the point of freezing the two of flying. The heater could not keep up with the heat loss to ~10F OAT. We had to decend to 11,000ft to continue due to human temperature limitations (see http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N92AV/history/20111209/1601Z/KHUM/KMPO). Does anyone make a more powerfull heater for this bird? I find the efficiency/speed combination of our little backup plane unbeatable even compared to our Rocket. Please advise if you know of something that allows us to fly N92AV more in the colder months of the year. Cheers/O N92AV and N9154W

We have a TLS converted to a Rocket 351 and see the following TAS numbers in the flight levels: 2370RPM - 27.8" - 14.6GPH LOP - 203kts TAS - 24000ft 2420RPM - 29.8" - 15.1GPH LOP - 210kts TAS - 24000ft 2440RPM - 32.0" - 16.5GPH LOP - 216kts TAS - 24000ft 2440RPM - 33.1" - 17.5GPH LOP - 223kts TAS - 24000ft If you run ROP you use about 20% more fuel for the same airspeed on our engine (watercooled TSIOL-550). We have flown a tiny bit faster at 25000ft but only ROP which has a large fuel penalty for a minute improvement in speed. Hope this helps. O N9154W N92AV

We have a Bravo with the Rocket 351 conversion. Although our engine is a liquid cooled TCM unit I imagine that the problem we experienced could be similar in a Lycoming power plant. So for the benefit of other members I will share our experience and the outcome as well. We had the same syptoms (for months and 100+ hours of flying) you describe and attributed the drops of oil on the ground after pattern type flying (to perfect LOP etc.) to engine oil coming from the breather when using aggresive climbs (above 1000fpm) as there was a bundle of oil hoses tied together on the pilots side of the front gear door (including the the vent from the engine) . Then we experienced a reduction in oil pressue in flight like you described, landed and found that we had lost 6 of the 12 quarts of oil that we started with. The culprit in our case was a diaphragm on the waste gate. It turns out that many aviation engines (ours included) use engine oil pressure to help regulate the manifld pressue (in addition to a spring). Oil under pressue from the engine is routed to a chamber on the waste gate which is separated from the outside by a diaphragm. There is a return oil line which is connected to a valve wich is regulating how much of this oil is drained back o the sump and in so doing effectively regulates the oil pressure in that little chamber. The more oil pressue is in that chamber results in the waste gate being more closed (higher manifold pressure); the opposite being the case for the open position. There is a smaller line on the waste gate that is vented to atmosphere and tied to the rest of the rubber lines coming out of the engine compartment. The idea is that if or when there is a leak in the diaphragm then the oil that leaked out goes into this little oil line and then to atmosphere with the indication that you have an oil leak (otherwise it would leak past the actuator on to the hot exhaust manifold and pose a fire hazard). Well in our case the diaphragm ruptured and all of the oil from the engine being pumped to the waste gate ended up on this little line and out the bottom of the airplane. It happened onthe descent to a landing so we did not realize that the low manifold pressure was not only the lower throttle setting but the waste gate being fully open. We changed the waste gate and solved the problem. I am attaching a picture of the waste gate with the two larger oil supply/control lines and the smaller oil "vent" line. By the way the same waste gate is used by many Lycoming engines (I learned when looking for a replacement). I hope this helps others which may encounter these type of problems in the future. Cheers, OFM N9154W, N92AV P.S. Could not post a picture due to my own computer limitations. If you need one please PM me so that I can send it via e-mail. Sorry

Hector and his team did the interior on our Rocket 351. The craftsmanship is first class, the schedule was perfect in spite of us getting delayed with fuel tank re-seal work and the business end was professional. From experience I can recomend Aero Comfort without reservations. I am sure that there may be other great service companies out there doing interiors for aircraft (including Mooneys) but I would rate Aerocomfort in the top 1% and will use them for our next aircraft upgrade again. Good luck on your upgrade.

I bought a second Mooney to back up my Rocket for work (need it to get around the Eastern US for my company) and find that most of the time it is in the hangar w/o the need to 'work'. Our Baby Mooney (M20C) is in great shape on a progressive maintenance schedule with Weber (Lancaster) with new upgraded Aspen/Garmin panel and a turbo for the flight levels (comfortably cruises at 165kts++ there). My mission profile is 400 to 600 miles IFR and given the choice I always seem to choose my liquid Rocket for travel time reasons. Contact me via e-mail and we can discuss what your mission profile and see if we have compatible ways to operate equipment. If there is proper overlap and it makes sense we can explore a partnerhip. If not we can still be friends and I will be happy to help in your search. Cheers, Chessie. Attached is a pic of 92AV