oldn0tded

Hmmmmm, well I can tell you why I wouldn't let my airplane travel away from my home base for a PPI. First, I'll cite an article written by Mike Busch, and published in AOPA magazine in Oct, 2016. It's a long piece, and you have to read all of it. For those of you who aren't familiar with Mike Busch, he is a widely respected AP/IA, with a strong background in our type of airplanes. The link to that article: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2016/october/pilot/savvy-maintenance-tales-of-woe Second, just the sake of the discussion, let's say the PPI does exactly what it's meant to do, a legitimate grounding item is found, rendering the aircraft unairworthy. The buyer walks away, goes home, puts his feet up on the couch, and breaks out the latest edition of Trade-a-Plane, feeling very good about the wisdom of spending that $$$. On the other hand, the seller is away from home, with a bunch of strangers, that potentially have $$$ in the eyes, and DEFINITELY now have control of the airplane. Again read the cited article. If I were having a PPI done on my airplane, I would insist on it being accomplished in my hangar for two reasons: 1. I'd want my airplane under my supervision at all times 2. If something were found in my hangar, I'd have control over the repair as opposed to being presented with an invoice (with little or no input/options) Please understand, I'm not suggesting NOT to do a PPI, just that I'm not gonna put my $$$/plane in the hands of someone who MIGHT have different goals. Oldnotdead

Hey guys, been away for awhile. Sorry for not keeping current. So, First, the advisory circular is good help for a flight test in general, but is not necessarily THE test profile to prove ADS-B function for rebate purposes, i.e. the requirement for 30 minutes of flight time in "rule" airspace. Second, the guidance on turns and bank angles is helpful. I suspect a couple of steep turns while I was attempting my second flight interfered with my out signals, giving me a "fail" in one critical parameter. The same parameter the equipment had passed earlier with zero faults. At this point, that is speculation. Third, the Public ADS-B Performance Report is computer generated, and 29:58 is not 30 minutes in the eyes of the computer. The reason for another "fail". Forth, The controllers have NO idea what you are attempting to do, and have been accommodating so far, but WILL vector you out of their way if need be. In doing so you may be vectored out of the rule airspace. You have to track your time, and know when you're in or out of the required airspace. My experience is limited to Class C airspace, Class B would different, I'm sure. I have to fly to Class C airspace to do the flight, I don't live near one. I have already done this twice. It doesn't take very long to burn up $500 of av gas. My story, so far, Old Knot Head

Well, I have done the GTX 345 install, interfaced with a GTN650. I'm pleased with the operation so far. Now to the point, Has anyone gone through the "Fly and Validate" portion of the rebate program? I ask because I'm finding it to be a challenge. Anyone?

Dan, at Lasar has them...

+1

All I gotta do is find a guy that can weld a feeler gauge..... Kiddin', that is another possibility....

Yessir, that's the part. Stop drilling might have worked several hours (hundreds?) ago, but the corners are past that now. I already have a call to Lasar, checking here just in case. Fabricating one, or adding doubler(s) to this are possibilities...

Anybody out there have one of these layin' around? Of course, it would be good if it were in better shape than mine. The pictures may not show it very well, but the lower corners on this one are pretty beat up. 1975 M20F, part #600050-501 Thanks in advance

Soooooo, ya take the cowling off, and that turns into new baffling, repairing the ram air seal, cleaning and degreasing, new fuel and oil lines, including fuel and oil pressure lines to the gauges. ANNNNND then scat tubes need replacing, fixing the master cylinder leak before it gets worse, clean, service and lube the induction drain (as per Don Maxwell), and finally motor mounts. If this thing flys before Christmas, it'll be a miracle. Ya know somebody could have stopped this before it got started!! Did I mention Dan at Lasar? He truly deserves a "shout out". BTW, Lasar has the servo induction boots in stock, just sayin'

I just started this job, and as in all things related to old airplanes, it has escalated .....considerably! Its gonna be a j-o-b...

.....and giving a lot of opinions, but very little factual evidence. But everyone is..... All I have is anecdotal evidence, what sort of factual evidence are you looking for? The OP was looking for opinions. Certainly, your experience gives your opinion more credibility than mine. If you say it's sound to put new cylinders on that bottom end, I would NOT say that was the dumbest thing I'd ever heard. Getting back to original question, If it were my plane, it would be a full rebuild with new cylinders. I could not use rebuilt cylinders, and I could not put new cylinders on a bottom end with that history. As to factory or field, I'd get you to do it!!

Byron, It's not the crank, it's the bearings. Well, and maybe a crank. Let's think about it for a sec. Are you familiar with BMEP? I don't know the number for a Lycoming blowing 72/80, but just for the discussion, lets says it's 125. If the new cylinders bump it up to 135, then YES, there will be increased stress on the crank, but more specifically the BEARINGS. This crank is somewhat special due to the prop strike, that throws an unknown into the equation. Does anyone out there know how torsional vibrations affect the cranks in our motors? I don't but it's a question. Finally, "a shed"? A shred of what? Its my opinion, based on prior experience. Do you have any "hands on" engine building experience? And you're welcome!

"I get plenty" Good, maybe you'll be more social. I think the bottom end in question is 2000 hours old, with a freshing up 4xx hours ago, and a prop strike. I'm reasonably certain that will increase the odds. I stand by the original opinion.

Well, somebody needs to get laid.. I'm guessing you have not had that happen? I have....not with an airplane engine though, thus the THEORETICAL part....