Who's Installing a G5?

[kortopates]

On 3/7/2019 at 4:53 AM, aviatoreb said:

Same issue for many of us with vacuum operated speed brakes.  So when sooner or later I remove all the vacuum operated avionics, I will likely remove the primary vacuum, but keep the backup electric vacuum in the tail.  SO operating speed brakes will be a two switch process.  Turn on backup vacuum. Hit speed brake button.  Which I think is ok for a non critical device.

Aren't there electric options for the vacuum step?

Electric options for speed brakes exist but are very expensive. 

Just a thought, but I'd think you'd rather remove the heavy standby electric vacuum system and keep the engine driven pump. That's what I did and got back another 6+ lbs of useful (I'd have to check my t & Bal for the exact weight as that's just from memory), plus no electric motor to maintain. But I got my useful load back up 1127 lb after all the changes I went through.  

[aviatoreb]

3 minutes ago, kortopates said:

Just a thought, but I'd think you'd rather remove the heavy standby electric vacuum system and keep the engine driven pump. That's what I did and got back another 6+ lbs of useful (I'd have to check my t & Bal for the exact weight as that's just from memory), plus no electric motor to maintain. But I got my useful load back up 1127 lb after all the changes I went through.  

The goal in my mind would be to increase reliability more so than decrease weight.

Plus the vacuum AI is the KI256 which is very expensive to keep working.  

Edited March 11, 2019 by aviatoreb

[gsxrpilot]

41 minutes ago, kortopates said:

Just a thought, but I'd think you'd rather remove the heavy standby electric vacuum system and keep the engine driven pump. That's what I did and got back another 6+ lbs of useful (I'd have to check my t & Bal for the exact weight as that's just from memory), plus no electric motor to maintain. But I got my useful load back up 1127 lb after all the changes I went through.  

This is what I did. I've still got the small engine driven pump but it's only hooked up to my speed brakes. We pulled all the other vacuum lines out as well. We also removed the standby vacuum pump from the tail. It's really heavy, like two hands heavy.

38 minutes ago, aviatoreb said:

The goal in my mind would be to increase reliability more so than decrease weight.

Plus the vacuum AI is the KI256 which is very expensive to keep working.  

If my engine pump fails, I only loose speed brakes. So no big deal. 

[aviatoreb]

40 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

This is what I did. I've still got the small engine driven pump but it's only hooked up to my speed brakes. We pulled all the other vacuum lines out as well. We also removed the standby vacuum pump from the tail. It's really heavy, like two hands heavy.

If my engine pump fails, I only loose speed brakes. So no big deal. 

Thats my thought.

How much weight did removing some plumbing and the stand by vac save, but as you said, keeping the primary for sake of running the speed brakes only?

Edited March 11, 2019 by aviatoreb

[MIm20c]

2 hours ago, bradp said:

Mine has a tight 90 set radius that goes under the horizontal steel tube - that would be a hell of an awful bend on .090. 

I just measured a blank set purchased from Mooney. The pilot side panel is 0.100 inches thick and the copilot side has a thickness of 0.040 inches.  Both have the 90 degree radius at the bottom and notches cut for the controls. 

I need opinions on what cutting method would be best. Especially critical are the beveled cuts around the flap and trim indicators (three sides have a 45 degree bevel). 

[Aerodon]

Do you have pictures of your Mooney blank panel please?

[donkaye]

7 hours ago, MIm20c said:

I thought it was .090 but I need to measure it. The right side panel from the factory looks half as thick. 

FWIW mine is .090 and had the 90° bend and bezel for the flap, trim indicators, and rudder indicators, all done by the panel shop.

[Oldguy]

14 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

Thats my thought.

How much weight did removing some plumbing and the stand by vac save, but as you said, keeping the primary for sake of running the speed brakes only?

I did the same thing as @gsxrpilot and the stand-by pump weighed in at 12 lbs.. including all of the tubing, etc.

[aviatoreb]

1 hour ago, Oldguy said:

I did the same thing as @gsxrpilot and the stand-by pump weighed in at 12 lbs.. including all of the tubing, etc.

That's some pretty good savings.  Thanks.

[kris_adams]

17 hours ago, kortopates said:

 But I got my useful load back up 1127 lb after all the changes I went through.  

that's amazing...

[kortopates]

21 minutes ago, Kris_Adams said:

that's amazing...

I sure think so. I don't know of any modern Mooney's with that much useful load (1127 lbs) and a fully glass panel.

Edited March 12, 2019 by kortopates

[Oldguy]

42 minutes ago, aviatoreb said:

That's some pretty good savings.  Thanks.

I was pleased with it. Overall, my partial panel redo netted me about 20 lbs.

[gsxrpilot]

16 minutes ago, kortopates said:

I sure think so. I don't know of any modern Mooney's with that much useful load (1127 lbs) and a fully glass panel.

One of the reasons I bought a 252. It's the one Mooney in the fleet that can be converted/upgraded/manipulated to significantly improve the UL. 

I'm on a mission to match Paul's 252.

[Niko182]

3 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

One of the reasons I bought a 252. It's the one Mooney in the fleet that can be converted/upgraded/manipulated to significantly improve the UL. 

I'm on a mission to match Paul's 252.

Its one of 2 mooneys that can be upgraded. Cant forget the eagle. I started at 970, and currently creeping up at 1137. The goal is 1200, which is a gonna be a very hard but I"ll see how hard it is once a partial panel redo is completed and the vacuum systems are removed, and the strobes. Also 10 lbs can be gained with the faster acclaim prop once one of those becomes available on the used market.

[gsxrpilot]

8 minutes ago, Niko182 said:

Its one of 2 mooneys that can be upgraded. Cant forget the eagle. I started at 970, and currently creeping up at 1137. The goal is 1200, which is a gonna be a very hard but I"ll see how hard it is once a partial panel redo is completed and the vacuum systems are removed, and the strobes. Also 10 lbs can be gained with the faster acclaim prop once one of those becomes available on the used market.

The Eagle along with the M20F are the UL champions of the fleet. I looked very seriously at an Eagle before buying the 252.

What was the main thing you did to increase your UL?

[Niko182]

3 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

The Eagle along with the M20F are the UL champions of the fleet. I looked very seriously at an Eagle before buying the 252.

What was the main thing you did to increase your UL?

310hp stc and a 3 blade hartzell SS prop. Increases the takeoff weight from 3200lbs to 3368lbs. So adds 168lbs of useful load and you lose about 12 due to the heavier 3 blade prop. Theres a lighter 3 blade thats actually considerably faster so that gains you back another 9 pounds and about 5 to 8 knots supposedly.

[MIm20c]

1 hour ago, Niko182 said:

Also 10 lbs can be gained with the faster acclaim prop once one of those becomes available on the used market.

There will probably be lots of thin blade props on the used market in the next 5-10 years. However, they will be the improved “Q-tip” versions that are a few inches too short...

[Niko182]

3 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

There will probably be lots of thin blade props on the used market in the next 5-10 years. However, they will be the improved “Q-tip” versions that are a few inches too short...

or when my blades finally get too short, they can just be replaced with the faster 7498 blades. The hubs and spinner are the same.

[MIm20c]

11 minutes ago, Niko182 said:

or when my blades finally get too short, they can just be replaced with the faster 7498 blades. The hubs and spinner are the same.

Blades cost more than entire top prop, which is why so many people can upgrade after a mishap. 

[gsxrpilot]

Hartzell tells me that they are close to start testing on a composite prop for my 252. I'm hoping to provide the test platform for that prop. I'd love to take some pounds off the nose.

[Niko182]

51 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

Hartzell tells me that they are close to start testing on a composite prop for my 252. I'm hoping to provide the test platform for that prop. I'd love to take some pounds off the nose.

It would be cool if they did the Scimitar style blade like on the new acclaims and ovations. I know they're working on the acclaim prop for the Bravo, and I have no doubt that they'll see at least a 10 knot increase over the the older 3 Blade McCauley. I'm sure a composite top prop would give the 252's a good couple knots in airspeed, compared to the old round tipped 2 blade. I had nearly the same prop on my eagle and I did not like that prop very much. compared to the Hartzell its night and day.

[jturuc]

I am doing a complete panel upgrade that removes all of the Vacuum instruments. The only thing vacuum based will be the speed brakes.

I would like to remove the Standby vacuum pump but the shop indicated that it was required per the STC.

I have not seen anything in STC SA4342NM that indicates it is required.

Has anyone seen it listed as a requirement?

 

 

[gsxrpilot]

13 minutes ago, jturuc said:

I am doing a complete panel upgrade that removes all of the Vacuum instruments. The only thing vacuum based will be the speed brakes.

I would like to remove the Standby vacuum pump but the shop indicated that it was required per the STC.

I have not seen anything in STC SA4342NM that indicates it is required.

Has anyone seen it listed as a requirement?

I took my standby vac pump out. Same reason, the only vac driven kit in my plane are the speed brakes. Never heard of any STC requirement.

[carusoam]

https://preciseflight.s3.amazonaws.com/doc/SA4342NM__AFMS.pdf?Signature=D61gDbiGFs3jiL6mqu%2B5XMVB29I%3D&Expires=1588909917&AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIQJHHF2UOD3ZQP7Q

JT,

Did you read the STC?

Sounds like somebody may have misinterpreted what needs to stay, and what can go...

 

What would happen if you lost all vacuum...?

It looks like the breaks would become inop...

Speed brakes are not required for flight...

What seems to be the issue?

We have a precise flight guy around here... @Precise Flight @Precise_Flight
 

PP thoughts only, not a mechanic...

Best regards,

-a-

[bradp]

I took my vacuum out after dual G5 and autopilot went in.