AndyFromCB

My overhaul shop, I would say, one of the better ones in the midwest, 2 year/1000 warranty says the following: -hoses: no way to replace 25 hour hoses, flush them, they do the same to brand new ones as most are full of crap as well. -prop and governor: same story, the small amount of metal that might be inside them is nothing comparing to what will be created during the piston ring break in -oil cooler: yes, no question about, you need all the cooling you can get I agree on engine mounts, if it ever sags in the next 12 years, I would be pretty unhappy. The fuel injection was overhauled during the overhaul, in house, by Central Cylinder. What's the reasoning on IRAN on the alternator? Just put this one on about 5 months ago, only got 25 hours or so on it. The other one is 125 hours or so. I think the turbo, being it's only 400 hours old, will last a few years or more at the rate I fly this airplane. I think it's only a few hours of labor to replace plus I'm hearing Kelly is having some issues with their latest batch of them. As to cylinders, I agree, mine looked brand new when we tore them off, so 1200 a pop for all new pistons, guides, springs, valves, rockers, etc vs 2600-2800 for new ones made a lot of difference, about $8000 to the cost of overhaul

So, The engine is back from Central Cylinder here in Omaha, NE. Other than the camshaft and two tappets, it looked pretty damn new at 1700 hours. Total cost a bit under 33K with new camshaft kit, rebuilt cylinders ($1200 a pop vs $2500, they only had 900 hours on them), all accessories overhauled other than the turbo (400 hours on it), alternators (25 hours on them) and mags (25 hours of them) and hoses (25 hours on them), so all and all not bad, engine run great in the test stand yesterday. So now my question for those of you you had done this before. What is a fair labor for removal and reinstall. My mechanic said it took him 2 days to remove and says a week to reinstall. So about 60 hours total. That sounds about right to me, but just want to make sure. -Using new engines mounts even thought they have less than 400 hours on them. Would you reuse them? -All new exhaust v band clamps. 400 hours on them. Would you reuse them? Being this is the number #1 killer of Bravo drivers, I think it's worth the cost. What else am I missing? Andy A little video of the central cylinder crew running a P51 engine on a test stand

Quote: jetdriven Brett, that article is spot-on in its analysis. Folks these days aint the same size as they were in 1956. Except one thing. Mooney had the 6-place cabin class single, the Mooney 301, in 1980-81. But the recession hit hard, and Mooney took a partner in with the French. Those scoundrels stole the 301, put a new cabin and a turbine on that beautiful wing, and called it the TBM-700. Having flown the Bonanza and the Mooney, I can say if gas was 2.00$ a gallon you would see a V35B in my parking spot. But I am rather chea, err, frugal !! !!

Quote: Mazerbase I had a problem with my Rocket's speed brakes from icing. Wouldn't go down for a while. At the next annual (or maybe the one after that) we found that all the cables on both sides had stretched and needed to be replaced. Basically the entire rigging we re-done. No problems since and the IA didn't think the icing was the cause especially since it was on both sides. My speed brakes won't work unless the engine is on or the master and the backup vacuum is running when the engine is off. I have been told but don't really know that they are electric and vacuum operated.

Vacuum system does not have any clutches and a asymetric deployment is not possible because there is a single drum pulling both cables so unless a cable brakes both will pop up. Now when it comes to retracting, that's a different story. Sometimes you just need to slow down. What I love about my vacuum system on my 1990 Bravo is that short of the drum/below going, my total overhaul cost was 30 bucks for some new springs and a few hours of my own labor with a fishing line to replace the springs. How is it overly complicated. One valve, one drum, two cables?

Scott from Iowa, One day, when you get past the age of 5, you will understand what sarcasm it. No kids under the age of 5 get it (proven fact) and apparently neither do many adults. The thruth about the world is that no matter what a constitution says the world becomes how the world is. As to the ride in the SD, put it down into Platte rRver after loosing power. It's totalled. Flipped. Thank the Lord for making a river with 6 inches of water. The Bravo is getting a new engine as well, so if you'd like to keep a crazy guy current, feel free to fly down to coucil tucky ;-). I'd be glad to explain my point of view having have lived in many countries and considering moving back to Chech Republic. Andy

So before you all call me crazy, show me a year where the entitlement program called social security took in less than it paid out and tell me what happend to the surplusses? Because as far as I am concerned, they are sitting somewhere at about 2 trillion. Here are the cold hard numbers: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/Content/PDF/ssreceipts_historical.pdf What happend to all that money?

What I posted were cold hard numbers from 2010 budget. Which is apparently why my soberiety was being questioned. Everybody is always up in arms about the non-existent entitlement programs which are not only self funded but well into surplus via payroll and medicare taxes because we have been programmed by the powers to be to call them 'entitlement programs' as opposed what they which is a contract with the goverment. Words don't have any meaning anymore. To all who are calling me crazy, show me one number where Social Security has not actually been paid for or for that matter has ever run a deficit. It hasn't and it wouldn't if it wasn't for B2 bombers, F22, etc. We pissed the money away. There is non such thing as entitlement programs in US of A. We don't get shit for our dollars other than an occasional blue angel fly by, collapsing bridge and the TV telling us we're number #1 while we fall behind the rest of the world in almost every aspect. For crying out loud, Cuba has us beat in infant mortality. The same MRI we pay $2000 in US costs $100 in Japan. If you take into account the federal taxes, the payroll taxes, the state taxes, the sales taxes, the property taxes most of us regular people without means to hide assets off shore like Romney pay taxes as high as northern europe, around 50%. We don't get shit, they get world class health care, child care, vacation time, decent retirement, great primary and secondary schools for free. We have this crazy focus on the poor, thinking they are draining everything from us while in actuallity it's the GEs and Exon Mobiles that have been stealing from our federal coffers and then creating PACs to confuse everyone. If for a second anyone of you thinks that there is an ounce of difference between Obama and last Bush, you are severly mistaken. Both do what they are told. Has any one of you actually been to Europe before? I mean Germany, Danmark, Sweeden, etc. Things run like a swiss clock, they have much less debt than we do. They have almost no crime, things just work. Why is that American's reject any idea they did not invent? The only countries in Europe that have major issues are countries run more US. BTW, I am a EU citizen with a EU passport on top of US passport. They actually have political parties that argue about issues not how many angels fit on a pin (for example, our ever present battle about sex vs abstinance eduction which has no effect what so ever other than keep two groups of people butting heads with one another while at the same time uniformely voting to fund the next F22). The thruth is that we spend almost 100% of what we take in real income taxes on so called 'security' which is where I would think most of so cold right wingers would be having a heart attact. Why in the world does a country with more guns than humans need a standing army? What is so wrong with the Swiss model. What happend to the constitution and standing armies in time of peace. Most Americans are so closed minded it's unbeliavable. We are quickly heading towards the south american model where we will have the 1% ultra rich, 5% professional class supporting them and the rest will be dirt poor. It that's what you want, enjoy. But before you do, go visit Columbia. There is nothing great about having money if you have to drive around in a bullproof car everywhere you go. It's called ignorance. It really sucks when you are told that not to roll your windows down on your way from Bogota airport when on business down there. Really, really sucks. There has to be a certain level playing field and equality otherwise we will end up just like them. Top federal income rate was 91% in the 1950's and somehow that where everyone looks to for the best, most properous times. We were pretty socialistic back then, working on 'commie' projects like the interstate system, ATC, etc. The interstate system was 50%, I repeat 50% of the entire federal budget.

Quote: 1964-M20E My solution is do a true across the board 10% cut every department every program and if that does not work another 10% the following year and on and on until the deficit is gone and the debt is eliminated. This cut is 10% less than was spent last year not 10% less of an increase. When making these cuts cut 10% of the Fed employees as well. In each department at each pay grade starting at the top with the President and the cabinet, congress etc. If a particular pay grade in a particular department has 8 or fewer people all get a 10% pay cut for larger numbers round up the the nearest whole number and cut that many positions. Follow this for a few years and soon the deficit will be gone and then we can work on eliminating the debt.

Quote: RJBrown Rampant inflation is at least a fair tax. Affects every one. Cut all socialism. The items you mention are miniscule compared to social (paid to and for individuals)programs. It is not about taxing more it is about spending less.

Quote: RJBrown The only answer to the budget deficit is to end SOCIALISM. This current administration is pushing SOCIALISM as far as they can. We as Americans are TOO stupid to realise that there is no pie to get a piece of. 60% of the federal budget is to support SOCIALISM. Taxes pay 150% of the cost of government. SOCIALISM steals that extra portion of the taxes and forces us to borrow 40% of what the government spends. THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH. Stop the vote buying. STOP SELLING YOUR VOTE. No socialist government has EVER not eventually gone bankrupt morally and fiscally. End the stupidity before it ends us.

Try NationAir. The have been great. My Arrow there first year was $1800 for a full coverage, hull valued at $75,000. Then it dropped to below about a grand or so after I got my 100 hours at next renewal. The requirements were 10 hours with a CFI. I didn't even have my complex when I bought the airplane, no IFR, about 110 hours total time. I'd wait with the purchase after getting your PPL.

My problem was identical, however with a King HSI. Take out the HSI and send to Autopilots Central in Oklahoma. My HSI came back working like a charm for about $500 bucks. The needed to replace a photo receptor.

I went up yesterday to shoot some approaches and "wash" the airplane. My autopilot is still shot so I remembered one rule. Trim the airplane and take your hands of the yoke when doing anything not flying related like pulling up plates or adjusting power. Worked like a charm. Shot 3 approaches, stayed current for another 5 months, washed the airplane. The temps at 3000 were pretty warm so no need for TKS yesterday. I seriously suspect one could teach a rat how to fly a LPV with right combination of needles and kibbles.

LOP/ROP doesn't really matter, keep the damn cylinders below 380. With the Bravo, I don't have a choice. They get cooled with fuel ;-( I'd much rather cool them with air but the engine vibrates too much when I go over to LOP. My IO-360 in the Arrow run great LOP. My understanding is you can't really run the Bravo LOP or at least not most of them. Mine just starts vibrating too much.

There is no traffic whatsoever between about 14K and 22K. They say it's lonely at the top but I kind of like it ;-) Plus no mater what some say, you are above most weather at 20K. You can see for miles, plan ahead and not relly so much on stormscope and NEXRAD. What you can't top, you can dodge much easier. I see a lot of trips this spring/summer that either got cancelled, chartered out or were flown comercial last year being doable with turbo. Just "washed" the airplane. 3 LPV in actual down to about 1200. Altitude hold still no working ;-( I miss my s-tec.

Parker, There is no question about that. I've stated that before. A M20J probably climbs twice as fast as a short wing Arrow at altitude. My Arrow was a dog above 10000 DA. Quite a few times out of Denver, being about 400 under gross we would see 200fpm until we got out farther away from the mountains. I know a J will still do about 500fpm in same conditions. Andy

Quote: M016576 I've been trying to dispell the myth that a "turbo is a must" in the rockies on this board for a while... and here it is again! I don't know why Mooney pilots seem to think that you need a turbo any time you get west of the mississippi... anyway, here I go again: I learned to fly in a C172 (NA) at an airfield with a field elevation of 5000MSL in the heart of a valley in the rockies. lots of NA aircraft fly out of there... and fly north into the sawtooths north of stanley, ID. Many are much smaller aircraft than a mooney, and they do just fine. I fly my M20J in the rockies and sierras and everything inbetween on a regular basis, and I've never had to cancel a flight due to the lack of a turbocharger. In fact, I've never said to myself "self... sure would be nice to have a turbo charger right now!" I find that the fields that I have visited (and that most mooney pilots would visit.. with the exception of Piperpainter (he's crazy!)... are not only paved, but more than long enough to accomodate a NA mooney on a high DA day). I make fairly regular trips to mammoth in the summer time, and that DA can climb above 10000msl. Flying in the rockies isn't about having a turbo or not having a turbo... It's about mountain flying, and knowing how to plan and fly in that environment. Just like anything else in aviation, it's a matter of training and proficiency.. OK, I'm off my soap box now... Oh, and for Eric- I have a N.A. M20J... because N.A. M20J's are better (oh, and I can't afford a turbo!!! hah!)

Quote: jetdriven When I got a job flying the 1900D, I thought, man! 25,000 ft ceiling we can get above almost any weather! Turns out, it really didnt. When I got to the CRJ, I thought, man! FL360 gets above most any weather! Wrong again. The 747 has a certified altitude of 45,100'. Guess what, there are still some bumpy clouds that go much higher than that. I give up.

Quote: jetdriven When I got a job flying the 1900D, I thought, man! 25,000 ft ceiling we can get above almost any weather! Turns out, it really didnt. When I got to the CRJ, I thought, man! FL360 gets above most any weather! Wrong again. The 747 has a certified altitude of 45,100'. Guess what, there are still some bumpy clouds that go much higher than that. I give up.

Being a Bravo owner for about 5 months now, I'd say we burn about 4 gallons per hour more for same speeds as 252. What we get in return is a never ending climb rate. My airplane performs considerably better than the book in both cruise (not much) and climb (200 to 300fpm than book at published weights, book at our regular take off weight of about 3500lb). I'm not sure what the critial altitude of the big lycoming is, but I've never seen it yet. Being 150lb overgross on take off does not seem to affect anything other than maybe 200 feet more runway needed. I see 195knots at 17-18K all the time at about 19.5 an hour at 32/2400, 180knots at 14.5 at 28/2200 at same altitude. 205 or so is doable, but takes close 22gph to keep temps cool. I assume an Acclaim is probably 10 to 15 knots faster but 3 times the cost. I paid 130K for mine, spent about 10K on catch up maintenance. Everything works, 400 hours left on the engine supposedly (case and crank overhauled 1000 hours ago, new cylinders and camshaft at the same time) but 1600 or so since full overhaul. 400 since new exhaust, engine mounts, etc. New hoses at last annual. If I'm lucky, I'll run another 800 hours, if not, Central Cylinder in Omaha quoted me 39,000 with new cylinders but no exhaust so probably 50,000 after all is said and done if I do most of the removal and installation work.

Quote: danb35 I believe they could, but not in terms of efficiency. There's no particular technical reason that we can't have electronic engine management, and there's even at least one aircraft electronic ignition system out there (the P-Mag) that is self-powering. Such a system could certainly do away with problems of hot or cold starts, and adjust mixture or timing as appropriate for the operating conditions. Still, though, the best efficiency I know of in the auto world isn't much, if any, better than what's on the charts for the 1940s tech we fly behind. Higher compression, EFI, EI, and all, it doesn't seem to get a lot better for a gasoline engine. Diesel could, but there are other tradeoffs there.

Let's not forget that NTSB also busted FAA/Mooney for crappy hose layout and firewall design after a first of these fires. There already is an AD covering this, requires an inspection, every 100 hours I believe?

I had one of the first 500 produced. I love the way the valvles bust open at 6500rpm on your way to dusting Mustangs off the innerstate. My favorite, was doing 4500rpm in 6th at about 80 mph, then drop it straight to 4th and be over 100 in about 1.5 seconds. Great engine!!! I needed ear plugs to go near redline on that car.

Quote: orangemtl Shame on them, indeed (I mean lyc and conti). Meaning no disrespect, but: the two major suppliers of GA engines in the United States for, what the past 60 years, get outengineered by....Austria? That's like having Apple outmaneuvered by Radio Shack. Or losing a war to Wisconsin. Rotax could shove the two of them into the dustbin of history with a solid, higher output engine that many/any of us could retrofit in our current rides. Yes, I know: STC, regulatory costs, etc: but 100LL may or may not stick around. This thing will run on avgas. I see an opportunity here. Anyone for a 6 cylinder, 180HP Rotax next?