Oldguy Posted May 14, 2018 Report Share Posted May 14, 2018 I just got word back from the avionics shop my plane is finished with the upgrades I had done to her. New Aspen EFD 1000 Pro with AOA and SV, new PMA 450B, new 406mHz ELT, Sandia 340 Quattro,a KAS 297B, and various cleaning up of leftover wiring and "stuff" from years gone by. By installing the Quattro and Aspen, I have lost the stand-by vacuum pump (to @NJMac) but have to keep the engine pump for the speed brakes. I was hoping to pick up some useful load, and while I did gain a bit over 10 lbs., is still leaves me shy of my self-imposed goal of a 900 UL. My J is a 1984, so the MTOW is 2,740. In reading through my POH, the "basic empty weight as delivered" is 1836 lbs., so I am thinking my goal is unattainable. I know as a 4-seat plane we are closer to 3 people, fuel and some luggage, but what are the useful loads others are seeing in the pre-2900 MTOW J models? Should I be happy with the 880 lbs. UL and fly the wings off, or is my plane, like her owner, needing to slim down a little? Thanks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtVandelay Posted May 14, 2018 Report Share Posted May 14, 2018 My 78 was 1744 as delivered, wonder where your extra weight came from? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldguy Posted May 14, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2018 1 hour ago, teejayevans said: My 78 was 1744 as delivered, wonder where your extra weight came from? I don''t know, but they are incredibly detailed in the equipment list. Did you know the "D" rings in the cargo area weigh 0.16 lbs. and sit at an arm of 119"? Maybe one night when I can't sleep I will go through the list and see what is checked off and still in the plane. But I am reluctant to have it weighed until I get it painted and have the inside cleaned out well enough to eat off of. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldguy Posted May 14, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2018 4 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said: I'd just fly the wings off of her. That having been said, your goal is probably very much obtainable, and then some, via the installation of an MT prop and lightweight starter and alternator if you are not already so equipped. I've got the starter but not the prop and not sure of the alternator. And I am not sure I am willing to pay the cost of the prop to lose the weight. Not saying never, just not sure at this point. But you do bring up a couple of things to research. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KLRDMD Posted May 15, 2018 Report Share Posted May 15, 2018 8 hours ago, Oldguy said: Should I be happy with the 880 lbs. UL and fly the wings off, or is my plane, like her owner, needing to slim down a little? My 231 had 892 lb useful load. I wanted more so I sold it and bought a Baron. Now I have 1702 lb useful load. Simple solution, sell the Mooney and buy a Baron 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xcrmckenna Posted May 15, 2018 Report Share Posted May 15, 2018 My 77’ J has 1000lbs useful load. Im about to remove my vacuum pump installing a G5, all stock gauges with a jpi900, and a lot of garbage with a new clean panel. Still contemplating installing the HSI G5 to remove the Bendix King 55a. Then I can get rid of the heavy gyros for it. I’m hoping for 15-20lbs more of useful load. Even more with the second G5. My better half and I have a couple we fly around with. I can get full fuel, us, my survival pack and maintenance bag now. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xcrmckenna Posted May 15, 2018 Report Share Posted May 15, 2018 Early J’s are a pretty sweet compromise on all of the variables. But, admittedly, I am biased towards them. Jim ’78 J My thoughts exactly!! It took me over two years to find my plane. But I had a set criteria that I was able to hold myself to and very happy with the plane I have. Useful load was number two on my list. It gives the plane a lot of utility because of it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raptor05121 Posted May 15, 2018 Report Share Posted May 15, 2018 Apples to oranges, but my C has 1,015# useful load and I get heavy, often. But then again, all the fancy stuff up front would be nice to have. Disclaimer: Just so my posts are clear, and non - harrasing to others and don't get reported again: By apples and oranges, I am referring to the edible fruit and their contradictory appearances. By "heavy" I am referring to weight, in this instance, in Imperial pounds. By "fancy stuff" I am referring to complex avionics. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INA201 Posted May 15, 2018 Report Share Posted May 15, 2018 I’m at 984lbs UL with bladders. I did JPI 900 and removed a lot of stuff. Also sky tech starter. I have a big fat old alternator that’s still trucking and looks heavy compared to Plane Power. Haven’t shed the vacuum but that’ll be next for maybe 8+ more lbs or so. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 15, 2018 Report Share Posted May 15, 2018 How many of the higher useful loads are based on a calculation or an actual re weighing? Clarence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marauder Posted May 15, 2018 Report Share Posted May 15, 2018 11 minutes ago, M20Doc said: How many of the higher useful loads are based on a calculation or an actual re weighing? Clarence Most of us probably have 10 pounds of dirt hidden in the corners not to mention 5 pounds of skin flakes. From my observations, avionic shops tend to leave a lot of dead wires during upgrades. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xcrmckenna Posted May 15, 2018 Report Share Posted May 15, 2018 How many of the higher useful loads are based on a calculation or an actual re weighing? Clarence Mine was put on a scale in 2013 according to the weight and balance calculations form. If mine has five to ten pounds of dirt and grime in it I’m okay with it. I’m not promoting it but people fly their Mooney’s 100’s of pounds over gross. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INA201 Posted May 15, 2018 Report Share Posted May 15, 2018 2 hours ago, M20Doc said: How many of the higher useful loads are based on a calculation or an actual re weighing? Clarence Mine is calculated. I plan to weigh it at some point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted May 16, 2018 Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 7 hours ago, M20Doc said: How many of the higher useful loads are based on a calculation or an actual re weighing? Clarence Few people outside of Canada actually weigh their planes, unless they find a second / third layer of paint when doing a full strip and repaint job. Lots of figuring and reckoning happens over the decades, an occasional mistake is inevitable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 16, 2018 Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 6 minutes ago, Hank said: Few people outside of Canada actually weigh their planes, unless they find a second / third layer of paint when doing a full strip and repaint job. Lots of figuring and reckoning happens over the decades, an occasional mistake is inevitable. I guess that’s my point, actual weights are usually higher than the calculated weight, so most are living a dream as to useful loads. My 400 lost weight with the MT propeller and avionics changes, but has slowly been gaining some, so I’ve chosen to reweigh it to know the truth. It’s now less than 1500 pounds. Clarence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hank Posted May 16, 2018 Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, M20Doc said: I guess that’s my point, actual weights are usually higher than the calculated weight, so most are living a dream as to useful loads. My 400 lost weight with the MT propeller and avionics changes, but has slowly been gaining some, so I’ve chosen to reweigh it to know the truth. It’s now less than 1500 pounds. Clarence But but but it's legal! And the plane flies! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted May 16, 2018 Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 600+ pounds of that is engine and prop.... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycoming_IO-720 According to my Piper expert, Siri... The MT is surprisingly light... Best regards, -a- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradp Posted May 16, 2018 Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 Mine is a 77 J as well. Calculated UL of 1004. my SN doesn’t qualify for the 2900 lb GW increase but I know I’m in a safe margin even if UL is calculated. Don’t fly over gross. . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtVandelay Posted May 16, 2018 Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 I guess that’s my point, actual weights are usually higher than the calculated weight, so most are living a dream as to useful loads. My 400 lost weight with the MT propeller and avionics changes, but has slowly been gaining some, so I’ve chosen to reweigh it to know the truth. It’s now less than 1500 pounds. Clarence In your experience, how much difference is there between weighed vs calculated? What’s the biggest increase you’ve seen? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 16, 2018 Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 10’s of pounds in small airframes and I have seen hundreds in a Beech 200. Clarence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldguy Posted May 16, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 Well, it seems I am closer to my UL than it originally seemed. When the avionics shop wrote up the new W&B at the end of the process, they inventoried everything they had removed and added, netted them out, and updated the W & B doc for the POH. Unfortunately, they missed the standby vacuum pump I got from the tech early in the job and sent to @NJMac, so it looks like I gained another 12.04 lbs of UL. That will take my UL up to ~897, so I am going to stop whining about a 900 UL. And if I look at what @Hank posted above, I probably have lost a couple pounds of paint from rain buffing off paint on various places on the plane during IMC flying. Co-pilot and I are working on gaining back about 25 lbs. of UL ourselves, and I am still pursuing some of the weight saving updates mentioned above, which I want to thank everyone for suggesting. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted May 16, 2018 Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 John, To get a feeling of the weight saving afforded by the composite MT option.... From MT site... ‘Approx. 11 lbs less weight than the original propellers’ http://www.flight-resource.com/Datasheets/FL015.pdf Oddly, the spec sheet doesn’t list the actual weight... This is a three blade version, a two blade would save another blade’s worth... I’m not sure why the two blade option wasn’t listed... When removing the weight from the front... it is helpful if weight comes off the back as well... for WnB See if the ADF and it’s antenna have been completely removed... the back up vac system from the tail cone is a nice balance... PP thoughts only, not a mechanic... Best regards, -a- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJMac Posted May 16, 2018 Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 Ha. You shared 12 lbs with me. Thanks! LolSent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldguy Posted May 16, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 Just now, NJMac said: Ha. You shared 12 lbs with me. Thanks! Lol Very welcome. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldguy Posted May 16, 2018 Author Report Share Posted May 16, 2018 32 minutes ago, carusoam said: John, To get a feeling of the weight saving afforded by the composite MT option.... From MT site... ‘Approx. 11 lbs less weight than the original propellers’ http://www.flight-resource.com/Datasheets/FL015.pdf Oddly, the spec sheet doesn’t list the actual weight... This is a three blade version, a two blade would save another blade’s worth... I’m not sure why the two blade option wasn’t listed... When removing the weight from the front... it is helpful if weight comes off the back as well... for WnB See if the ADF and it’s antenna have been completely removed... the back up vac system from the tail cone is a nice balance... PP thoughts only, not a mechanic... Best regards, -a- Anthony, I have looked for a two blade MT, but it appears there is not one approved, and I am one of the two blade people when it comes to 4 cylinder engines. I will keep looking for intelligent options to reduce my weight (LED position/strobe lights?), but I feel I am approaching the area where things I want will likely add a pound or two (paint, interior, etc.). I think there is still a few pounds of wire to be removed, but rather than have the shop keep the plane for another week or so, I had them button it back up and get it to me. Since this will be my forever-plane, I am willing to take the long view on getting things done. Take care. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.