Wish me luck...

[MIm20c]

You handled the emergency (again) more calmly than I would. However, I have to say your honest play by play had me wondering how much “get out of there” similar to the “get there” was going on. The fuel pressure, mysteriously dry tank, radio trouble, intersection departure, etc after all the work done had me a little worried. I’m glad everything worked out!

[chrixxer]

You have had two outright complete power loss events and both, for one thing, have dubious fuel states. And neither was solved. So nothing can be applied here to learn from.

What are you talking about here? The second power loss in no way had a "dubious fuel state." I had dozens of gallons on board and had filled to tabs (and sumped, etc) about 1 hour of flying before, same day. I checked both tanks before we departed Camarillo and after when we landed at Mugu and both were full of fuel. The A&P has been working on the plane for 3 weeks, and had been running from the tank I found empty. The A&P had signed off, too, before I flew it out of NTD.

The recent loss of power had everything to do with the fuel servo / pump, which had given no indication of problems prior. I had done a full run-up about 8 minutes before the engine quit. (And don't take my word for it. Sitting next to me the entire day was a CFII who happens to be an FAA employee, and a friend.)

It's 6nm NTD to CMA, I had at least 90 minutes of fuel on board, the ownerMs manual specifically contemplated flying with one tank completely depleted, there were no visible problems with the fuel system (other than the dry tank, which could have been deliberate (vs mechanical)), and there were no issues at all, whether during taxi, run-up, or in flight...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chrixxer]

You handled the emergency (again) more calmly than I would. However, I have to say your honest play by play had me wondering how much “get out of there” similar to the “get there” was going on. The fuel pressure, mysteriously dry tank, radio trouble, intersection departure, etc after all the work done had me a little worried. I’m glad everything worked out!

Fuel pressure, I asked the A&P about that before I ever taxi'd, and would have aborted had I not been satisfied with the response, which was, copied and pasted:


Me: Fuel pressure way high

A&P: The fuel gauge line needs to be purged and the gauge needs to be degunked. I purged it twice but the gauge is sticky. It takes a while to creap back down. It will read between 15 and 30 b 4 we are done. It was reading about 33. Air still in the line.

Me: Fly with it?

A&P: Yes. You are fine to fly.

Fuel tank, no indication of a leak, other tank was fine. From A&P: "The only thing I can think of is that someone took the gas out. I can confirm that when I was there last weekend both tanks had about the same fuel level. I was using the left [tank I found dry] because it was indicating more fuel."

(Again, this was all before he confirmed I was "fine to fly." Recall he'd been deep into the fuel system for weeks and had expressly checked for leaks etc.)

Re the intersection departure: I had 3600' of runway ahead of me, and then an empty beach. 3600' is more than my old home airport. But you're right, better to have runway in front of me than behind. (NTD tower did ask how much take-off roll I'd need; I conservatively said 2000' (sea level). They had Hawkeyes in the pattern...)

No hint of radio trouble until I was in the air, at which point I could have returned to Mugu (where I knew services were not available and how cumbersome it would be trying to get anything fixed) or continue to CMA - 6 nm away - where my A&P is based. The plane was running fine. I made the conscious decision to go to where I knew help was available. It was a CAVU VFR day with minimal traffic (I had just flown into CMA minutes earlier; listening to the LiveATC recording later, tower had one plane rejoin the upwind after having had it turn midfield to resequence it behind me, and held another plane on the ground "for a minute or two" while I was on final). I stand by my call to continue to CMA.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chrixxer]

1 hour ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

Cessna tank dipsticks

 

Where's the pre-calibrated dipstick for the 64 gallon M20?

That's right, there isn't one.

I've verified the accuracy of the Cessna stick multiple times in a variety of configurations, as had the previous owner. Add 5 gallons to what's indicated and you'll always be conservative but in the ballpark (e.g., I've had it read 18, so "23," but when I filled it to full it only took on 7, so it actually had 25. I've had it read 9, so "14," but filling to full took 16, so I actually had 16. Etc.)
 

 

Edit: "his planned mission for his previous M20E was ill-advised, at least right away, under the totality of the circumstances"

And deferred. I never took on the planned "limited partners" and wasn't going to until I had more confidence in the plane and had made some safety upgrades (e.g., shoulder harnesses, a LED landing light - it only had a 50A generator and the landing light drew 20A by itself - and modern anti-collision lighting (it had the original Grimes beacon)). I was working through a punch list of issues and upgrades that I never got to finish, including replacing all the 51 year old engine instruments; I had picked the plane up from the avionics shop a week before the crash (in Marana, AZ, and she flew back to Santa Monica, CA flawlessly), and was already discussing with them installing an EDM-900. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Edited August 1, 2018 by chrixxer

[Skates97]

28 minutes ago, chrixxer said:

 

Where's the pre-calibrated dipstick for the 64 gallon M20?

That's right, there isn't one.

I've verified the accuracy of the Cessna stick multiple times in a variety of configurations, as had the previous owner. Add 5 gallons to what's indicated and you'll always be conservative but in the ballpark (e.g., I've had it read 18, so "23," but when I filled it to full it only took on 7, so it actually had 25. I've had it read 9, so "14," but filling to full took 16, so I actually had 16. Etc.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Get the FuelHawk Universal dipstick and follow the calibration instructions. I did it filling 2 gallons at a time on two different occasions before making marks with a sharpie on the stick and noting the gallons. It is accurate to within about a half gallon.

http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pspages/fuelhawkuniv16.php 

[chrixxer]

5 minutes ago, Skates97 said:

Get the FuelHawk Universal dipstick and follow the calibration instructions. I did it filling 2 gallons at a time on two different occasions before making marks with a sharpie on the stick and noting the gallons. It is accurate to within about a half gallon.

http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pspages/fuelhawkuniv16.php 

Yeah, but for that to work, I'd have to drain the tank completely, and I don't have the facilities to do that (it's expressly forbidden in my hangar lease). I can do it (I'd assume) with an A&P at their shop, but I haven't had it with an A&P yet except for an oil change / inspection. Until I have a chance to calibrate a dipstick like that, the Cessna one is accurate "enough," (again, always conservative, and I'm never close enough on the W&B where even 6 gallons (36#) would be determinative), especially when it's mostly used to cross-check the fuel totalizer (FS-450) and fuel gauges (which seem accurate, but are lower resolution than the dip stick (even given its limitations) and especially the Fuel Scan).

[jaylw314]

10 minutes ago, chrixxer said:

Yeah, but for that to work, I'd have to drain the tank completely, and I don't have the facilities to do that (it's expressly forbidden in my hangar lease). I can do it (I'd assume) with an A&P at their shop, but I haven't had it with an A&P yet except for an oil change / inspection. Until I have a chance to calibrate a dipstick like that, the Cessna one is accurate "enough," (again, always conservative, and I'm never close enough on the W&B where even 6 gallons (36#) would be determinative), especially when it's mostly used to cross-check the fuel totalizer (FS-450) and fuel gauges (which seem accurate, but are lower resolution than the dip stick (even given its limitations) and especially the Fuel Scan).

No, the lowest fuel level a dipstick will measure is about 5-8 gallons, so there's no point draining the tank.  Just use enough fuel so there's no fuel under the inlet.  Then start adding one gallon at a time, making note of the location on the dipstick until you get to a known volume on the tank (either the tab or the filler neck).  Then you work your way backwards from there to connect each mark with the known quantity.

[chrixxer]

Just now, jaylw314 said:

No, the lowest fuel level a dipstick will measure is about 5-8 gallons, so there's no point draining the tank.  Just use enough fuel so there's no fuel under the inlet.  Then start adding one gallon at a time, making note of the location on the dipstick until you get to a known volume on the tank (either the tab or the filler neck).  Then you work your way backwards from there to connect each mark with the known quantity.

D'oh. Yeah, of course, that makes sense.

[bradp]

@chrixxer read about the very experienced Mooney pilot who went through a living room at W78 one or two summers ago by mistaking runway available during an intersection departure.  First flight after major maintenance is just about as prone to failure as if you just slapped a newly overhauled engine. If I were flying after an invasive engine surgery I would expect the engine to fail at the worst possible time and plan for more than the availability of the ocean ahead. Flight of Hawkeyes inbound?  What’s the rush ... you wait or they wait.  Use your PIC authority in more than emergency situations. That’s risk mitigation. 

In fact you did likely have some sort of MIF with your alternator....

[aviatoreb]

2 hours ago, carusoam said:

@aviatoreb‘s engine out experience...

i copied the link while 1/2 through the thread... start at the beginning for the full feel...

Best regards,

-a-

Holy Beggeeeez don't make me look at that again!  Yeah - I have NOT forgotten that unfun experience.

[Marauder]

Fuel pressure, I asked the A&P about that before I ever taxi'd, and would have aborted had I not been satisfied with the response, which was, copied and pasted:


Me: Fuel pressure way high

A&P: The fuel gauge line needs to be purged and the gauge needs to be degunked. I purged it twice but the gauge is sticky. It takes a while to creap back down. It will read between 15 and 30 b 4 we are done. It was reading about 33. Air still in the line.

Me: Fly with it?

A&P: Yes. You are fine to fly.

Fuel tank, no indication of a leak, other tank was fine. From A&P: "The only thing I can think of is that someone took the gas out. I can confirm that when I was there last weekend both tanks had about the same fuel level. I was using the left [tank I found dry] because it was indicating more fuel."

(Again, this was all before he confirmed I was "fine to fly." Recall he'd been deep into the fuel system for weeks and had expressly checked for leaks etc.)

Re the intersection departure: I had 3600' of runway ahead of me, and then an empty beach. 3600' is more than my old home airport. But you're right, better to have runway in front of me than behind. (NTD tower did ask how much take-off roll I'd need; I conservatively said 2000' (sea level). They had Hawkeyes in the pattern...)

No hint of radio trouble until I was in the air, at which point I could have returned to Mugu (where I knew services were not available and how cumbersome it would be trying to get anything fixed) or continue to CMA - 6 nm away - where my A&P is based. The plane was running fine. I made the conscious decision to go to where I knew help was available. It was a CAVU VFR day with minimal traffic (I had just flown into CMA minutes earlier; listening to the LiveATC recording later, tower had one plane rejoin the upwind after having had it turn midfield to resequence it behind me, and held another plane on the ground "for a minute or two" while I was on final). I stand by my call to continue to CMA.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the message that is being conveyed is that at the end of the day we all accept you made the decisions you did based on you being the PIC. That said, those decisions made were questionable. This isn’t about I’m a better pilot than you discussion, it is just pilots with a lot more experience pointing out their concerns. I know where Jim is coming from. We have lost several MooneySpace members and unfortunately there are indications they were cavalier about the acceptance of risk.

Personally, if an A&P were to tell me that stuff about the fuel pressure, I would insist on it being corrected before I flew. After the repair, there would be no way I would accept an intersection departure. And I certainly would not accept the fuel “just disappeared” theory, especially on a military base!

I applaud Jim and Byron for pointing this out. At the end of the day I treat flying as something that could kill me and my job is to stack everything in my favor so that it doesn’t happen.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[chrixxer]

6 minutes ago, bradp said:

@chrixxer read about the very experienced Mooney pilot who went through a living room at W78 one or two summers ago by mistaking runway available during an intersection departure.  First flight after major maintenance is just about as prone to failure as if you just slapped a newly overhauled engine. If I were flying after an invasive engine surgery I would expect the engine to fail at the worst possible time and plan for more than the availability of the ocean ahead. Flight of Hawkeyes inbound?  What’s the rush ... you wait or they wait.  Use your PIC authority in more than emergency situations. That’s risk mitigation. 

In fact you did likely have some sort of MIF with your alternator....

(1) I didn't mistake available runway, in fact I confirmed the exact length I had with the tower. I had in excess of 3600' available. (Just clarifying.)

(2) I don't disagree. Looking back, that's definitely one thing I would have done differently. Not because it was necessary (it wasn't, by a long shot), but because runway = options, and why unnecessarily deny yourself options?

I'm a relatively new pilot (October 2015), and I'm still learning and overcoming "tunnel vision." (Not sure that's the right term. "Failure to consider options not incorporated into a personal, subjective knowledgebase" might be better?) Which is why I subject myself to abuse here

I only have my experience and training with me in the cockpit, and the sorts of things I smack myself for ("d'oh, of course more runway is more options is better just in case") when I'm reviewing a flight after the fact, I sometimes miss in the moment.

Similar consideration ... Running numbers and realizing "airport hopping" in a flight plan to stay within glide distance of, e.g., IZA and SMX vs. going straight to PRB from RZS over rocky terrain ... Adds just a few minutes to the total trip time but significantly increases options. (Direct to PRB from RZS is the standard assigned IFR routing, and I used to fly IFR-in-VMC all the time just to stay proficient with being in the system ... Until I realized en route IFR is easy, and having multiple options when low(ish) (6500') in that terrain is a better option than the marginal utility I might get being on an IFR flight plan...

[jaylw314]

13 minutes ago, chrixxer said:

(1) I didn't mistake available runway, in fact I confirmed the exact length I had with the tower. I had in excess of 3600' available. (Just clarifying.)

(2) I don't disagree. Looking back, that's definitely one thing I would have done differently. Not because it was necessary (it wasn't, by a long shot), but because runway = options, and why unnecessarily deny yourself options?

I'm a relatively new pilot (October 2015), and I'm still learning and overcoming "tunnel vision." (Not sure that's the right term. "Failure to consider options not incorporated into a personal, subjective knowledgebase" might be better?) Which is why I subject myself to abuse here

I only have my experience and training with me in the cockpit, and the sorts of things I smack myself for ("d'oh, of course more runway is more options is better just in case") when I'm reviewing a flight after the fact, I sometimes miss in the moment.

Similar consideration ... Running numbers and realizing "airport hopping" in a flight plan to stay within glide distance of, e.g., IZA and SMX vs. going straight to PRB from RZS over rocky terrain ... Adds just a few minutes to the total trip time but significantly increases options. (Direct to PRB from RZS is the standard assigned IFR routing, and I used to fly IFR-in-VMC all the time just to stay proficient with being in the system ... Until I realized en route IFR is easy, and having multiple options when low(ish) (6500') in that terrain is a better option than the marginal utility I might get being on an IFR flight plan...

What's the runway length at Pt Mugu?  3600' is obviously plenty long to take off, so a little more might only give you more margin for error, but once you get above 4500' or more, you have the additional benefit of taking off and being able to set it down again safely if something weird happens.  I'd value that if I had a squirrely airplane in any way...

[chrixxer]

1 minute ago, Marauder said:

Personally, if an A&P were to tell me that stuff about the fuel pressure, I would insist on it being corrected before I flew. After the repair, there would be no way I would accept an intersection departure. And I certainly would not accept the fuel “just disappeared” theory, especially on a military base!

 

(1) He wasn't able to correct it on site or he would have. Limited access to tools, no access to electricity ... 

(2) Agreed and conceded.

(3) Yeah, but again, what could we have done about it? No 100LL on base. We weren't able to bring any on. No way to diagnose, and extremely limited options regarding repair. Take the wings off and take it out on a flatbed? Write the plane off?

The other tank had more than enough fuel to make it to CMA with more than double the required reserves (I landed with 13 gallons in the tank, my dipstick said I had "15" before I fired it up, did a (lengthy, cautious) run-up, had a text message conversation with the A&P with the engine running, departed, climbed to 3500' (which put me within gliding distance of CMA - at all times I was within gliding distance of one of the two airports) and flew to CMA, all the numbers fit.

The fuel selector was on the tank with fuel in it. No indication of any leak. The fuel had been in the tank for 3 weeks. The A&P had done several run-ups over those several weeks, and had inspected the fuel system (fuel lines, pumps, servo, filters, etc), and confirmed no leaks and proper operation. The owner's manual expressly contemplates flying with one tank dry. Given the totality of the circumstances, I made a safe, if less than 100% optimal, choice that would maximize the mechanical attention the plane could receive (6nm away over empty fields). The A&P, more intimately familiar with the exact state of the aircraft than either you or I are, advised of the empty tank, nonetheless stated unequivocally "you're fine to fly." I was watching the (working) fuel gauge, and it wasn't moving (see below (taken during pre-flight)).

As PIC I have to rely on those with more knowledge about things than I have, like the A&P who just spent 3 weeks working on it, and the folks in Kerrville who wrote the manual.

I'm asking, in all sincerity, what would you have done in those specific circumstances?

[chrixxer]

3 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

What's the runway length at Pt Mugu?  3600' is obviously plenty long to take off, so a little more might only give you more margin for error, but once you get above 4500' or more, you have the additional benefit of taking off and being able to set it down again safely if something weird happens.  I'd value that if I had a squirrely airplane in any way...

>11,000' and, yeah, again, agreed and conceded. (Think you mean "once you get longer than 4500' or so," if I'm 4500' above a runway at sea level, I'm positive I can set it down safely if anything happens.)

 

[jaylw314]

13 minutes ago, chrixxer said:

>11,000' and, yeah, again, agreed and conceded. (Think you mean "once you get longer than 4500' or so," if I'm 4500' above a runway at sea level, I'm positive I can set it down safely if anything happens.)

Thanks for the diagram, don't have access to my stuff here at work...

Yes, the word "above" was poorly chosen

[MyNameIsNobody]

I had a gear up while under instruction and flying two hours (one hour under hood) with a simulated engine failure in pattern with a displaced runway on an unfamiliar airport.  I installed a gear warning and one of the “accusers” stated (paraphrasing) “Shouldn’t need this in your plane and thanks for making my insurance go up”.

Keep flying and keep learning.  Your decision to depart with over 3500 feet of runway was your decision as PIC.  I don’t question your decision.

[Browncbr1]

Chris, just a little reminder... A&Ps kill pilots too. Don’t assume that an A&P or IA designation means that they are never wrong. They are humans and many are a little rusty at best.   And sometimes, when they are wrong, the result is very serious or deadly.   Many of us on here try to become experts on our equipment.  I assume you have been learning a lot, as we all do everyday.   We do this so we and our loved ones might hopefully run a lower risk of being killed.    I humbly encourage you to slow down until “I think” is no longer in your mind.      Its also easy to do away with the number one cause of GA accidents by keeping your tanks full.  Glad you landed safely.  

[Guest]

I’m glad you were able to move your plane to a field we’re resolving the issues will be easier.  I’ll take a different tack than some others and I may be off base here.  Your maintainer may be another common denominator in your troubles.

Clarence

[chrixxer]

21 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

In that case this was probably just a communication error, but nowhere in your original post did you state that you had calibrated the Cessna dipstick.  Just that it was "conservative".  It was your intersection departure that really jumped out at me, though. You wasted over a mile of runway that you really might have needed.  Especially under the circumstances since this was the first flight following an engine failure. But you are now owning that, at least, which I do admire. 

I thought maybe you just didn't know the risks you are taking and how they could easily be mitigated.

Admittedly, I stopped reading your previous thread about your now-crashed M20E once I concluded, rightly or wrongly, that you had an argument for everything.  But I'm glad to hear that you never turned your eBay rebuild project into a day and night light IFR shared expense platform for you and your friends there in LA as you had originally contemplated. 

I'm glad you are ok. You are definitely filling your experience bucket. Hopefully so you won't have to rely on your luck bucket as much moving forward. That was the title you chose for this thread wasn't it?  Wish me luck ...

Jim

 

"nowhere in your original post did you state that you had calibrated the Cessna dipstick.  Just that it was 'conservative'"

I didn't go into the whole history of the aircraft, either. Didn't think I needed to explain that the dipstick gave me conservative estimates. (What I said was: "15+ gallons (I have a dipstick, but it's for a Cessna; if I add 5 gallons to what it indicates, I'll always be conservative).") I inherited the dipstick from the previous owner, who told me "add 5 gallons and it's pretty close." I like to know what "pretty close" means, so I made it a point to take readings at various fuel levels and cross-reference that with what it took on when filling. But that's not, to me, "calibrated." (I'm Tau Beta Pi.) In this case, the fuel gauge showed 97 lbs. of fuel in that tank (16 gallons), and when I filled up at CMA it took on about 12 gallons to the 25 gallon tab, so I had 13 when I landed - about right for taxi, run-up, full power full rich climb, and a few minutes of flight time. The dipstick told me I had "approximately 15." It may not be "calibrated," but it's good enough for a sanity check to ensure the fuel gauge and totalizer are doing their thing properly.

"I thought maybe you just didn't know the risks you are taking and how they could easily be mitigated."

I knew them, but honestly, and I'm not sure why, I didn't think about it at the time. Tower asked how much length I needed, I said I could comfortably be off the ground in 2,000' (which is true, when normally operating); tower told me I had 3600' remaining and cleared me for the intersection departure. I had, in fact, actually expressly pondered the advantages of the long runway earlier (and before you skewer me for that post, I'll point out it was (a) not my idea and (b) skeeved me out, and I was more wondering if I was being unreasonable ... But ultimately opted to cajole the mechanic into replacing the mechanical pump on the ramp at NTD (which was not exactly cheap) and getting her 100% no ferry permit required airworthy (which he did sign off on) before flying her to CMA to give attention to the rest of the squawks he identified (none of which affected airworthiness, all are "recommended maintenance" items)).

It's not exactly apples to apples, but I kinda want to point out I'm still daily driving the 1995 Jeep Wrangler I bought new when I was 18; everything it needs, mechanically, it gets, and it has never so much as failed a smog check despite being a "49 state" equipped vehicle (bought it in Missouri before I left for California). My M3 is currently at the shop getting a 90K service (it's an '04 I've owned since '08, CPO, I put the last 60K on her). My '94 Porsche is in storage (it's relatively rare) and had one catastrophic failure (lost a drain plug on the freeway and the empty transaxle locked) that I firmly believe was the result of an inattentive mechanic (I'd had a bumper-to-bumper service performed a few weeks prior), but couldn't prove it. I have the "Exemplary Driver" discount on my car insurance. My last traffic accident was when an SUV hit me on my motorcycle on the 101 in 2002 (despite being a SigAlert, a dislocated thumb and a whole-body bruise were my only injuries; I wore "all the gear, all the time"). I'm not - or at least I try not to be - an idiot. I hit WINGS seminars regularly. I fly with experienced pilots constantly (and cringe at many bad habits I observe regularly, and catch shit for things like following the Cirrus checklist to the letter, including pulling the CAPS pin, which I've seen multiple-thousand-hour ATPs refuse to do). I invite the scrutiny, and these conversations - with most of y'all - mirror some of those I have with friends in meatspace. The other day I was talking to a friend who was second-guessing declaring a situation where, when the flaps stuck at 10° extended (retracting after take-off) and nothing in the QRF helped, they as PIC made the decision to declare and divert to a suitable airport 80 miles away, flying there at ~5000'. (Regional jet, FWIW.) I'm a lowly PPL but talking through the decision making process with another pilot, one who's had two declared emergencies, was reportedly helpful.) IDK.

[EricJ]

3 hours ago, Marauder said:

And I certainly would not accept the fuel “just disappeared” theory, especially on a military base!
 

 

Oh, hell yeah.   I'd just about guarantee some swabby with a race car saw an unsecured 100LL tank (aka chrixxer's Mooney) sitting on the ramp and decided to help himself.   

While I get that people want to put a bit of feedback and teaching back in the system, monday morning quarterbacking should be taken for what it is.   In this case I don't see much reason to question the decision-making process, and the guy(s) that are there on the scene at the time are the only ones with the real perspective.   

Most people don't have to be encouraged much to learn from something like that when it happens to them.

I'm a bit of a kindred spirit in that when I bought my airplane I had three engine failures within the first three months of ownership.   Since then it's been a reliable airplane, and I'm glad the people I was consulting at the time weren't blaming or shaming me.   It was already a painful enough process, and I didn't need any encouragement to suck all the learning that I possibly could out of the experience.

[neilpilot]

3 hours ago, chrixxer said:

>11,000' and, yeah, again, agreed and conceded. (Think you mean "once you get longer than 4500' or so," if I'm 4500' above a runway at sea level, I'm positive I can set it down safely if anything happens.)

What if that "...if anything happens" happens a minute or so after you rotate, at about 6000' down that long runway you decided not to use?  While you maybe "still positive you can set it down safely", that may not occur on the remaining 5000' that you left behind.

[chrixxer]

21 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

Your maintainer may be another common denominator in your troubles.

Well ... Not in this instance. The flaps on 4BE were done by one A&P, at Chino, a Mooney-specific recommendation from Lou DuBois (who has an M20B on his flight line at Chino). The tires and tubes by another A&P, at home at SMO, who I thought did great work but then I heard some things that raised my eyebrows. I did some avionics work, which was signed off by an FAA repair station who also did the field repair on the S-Tec (they're an S-Tec authorized shop); I've found them to be attention-oriented and detailed, and they were a MooneySpace recommendation, but I've heard from another Mooney pilot that they botched some (non-avionics) work, so everyone's mileage may vary.

I've only had 3RM since mid-April, so the only work that's been done on her so far was an oil change and a full power static check, just to see if the A&P noticed anything I hadn't; that was done less than 10 hours before the engine out on July 8th. That was an A&P on the field at TOA who works on my boss' planes. I have a recommendation for another A&P who was recommended to me by another MooneySpacer, a fastidious gentleman with an immaculate E; I met the mechanic when we dropped him off to pick up his plane as it came out of annual.

The guy who's working on 3RM at Camarillo was a referral from another MooneySpacer, who works on that person's personal Mooney. The A&P is based out of CMA, which made the most sense given the plane was stuck at NTD, which can be 90 minutes or more from the folks I know in the L.A. basin, each way (on top of the delays inherent in the military's security protocols).

He seems to know his stuff (though I do suspect I unnecessarily replaced the fuel servo - I believe the issue was with the gasket piece in the throttle body, and the (cascade?) failure of the fuel pump; but I'd rather be griping about an unnecessary $1,700 than losing power again, or having a nagging question in the back of my mind re an unreplaced servo). And as long as the plane's up there and he's already identified a bunch of stuff that should be done, I'm comfortable having him do it. Given the geography, I don't see many scenarios where I'll use his services again, but we'll see how everything turns out when I get to the end of this chapter. 

[chrixxer]

1 minute ago, neilpilot said:

What if that "...if anything happens" happens a minute or so after you rotate, at about 6000' down that long runway you decided not to use?  While you maybe "still positive you can set it down safely", that may not occur on the remaining 5000' that you left behind.

Um, I think you need to re-read what I wrote...

[Ron McBride]

On 7/31/2018 at 1:07 PM, chrixxer said:

Arrive at Pt. Mugu in an Uber. The airfield manager picks me up at the gate and drives me to the Mooney. Shakes my hand, thanks me for working diligently to get the plane off his facility.

I preflight. Left tank, 15+ gallons (I have a dipstick, but it's for a Cessna; if I add 5 gallons to what it indicates, I'll always be conservative). Oil, 7 quarts (I add when it drops below 6). Fuel caps are already wearing some surface corrosion, after just a couple of weeks on the line here. Right tank ... Is bone dry. (I filled to tabs at Riverside and then flew a bit less than an hour to CMA, then about 20 minutes from CMA to engine out to partial engine recovery to NTD. I should have had *at least* 30 gallons on board.)

Check with the A&P. It's a mystery to him. There's no fuel pooling below the plane, there's no smell of AvGas, everything looks okay. Maybe someone drained it? IDK. I have enough to make it the ~6 nm to CMA with VFR reserves.

She starts on the third blade turn, as she always does, though the turns themselves are just a tad on the sluggish side. It's been sitting for 3 weeks, to be expected? Battery was new in October 2017 I think (relatively recently, in any case; Concorde RG-35AXC).

My engine computer is in Marana, so I have no volt meter (plane wasn't equipped with one originally); the landing lights are LED, so I don't have anything I can test with that will give me a visible draw on the ammeter (pitot heat doesn't move the needle, though I've confirmed the heater works), but it looks normal.

My fuel pressure is spiked past 30 psi. I text the A&P: The lines need to be purged, the gauge needs to be debunked, but it's okay to fly. Taking your word for it ...

COM1 is a GNS430W, COM2 is a KX-155. Audio panel is a GMA450, transponder is a GTX-327. I get ATIS on COM2, it's loud and clear. I contact ground on COM1,  loud and clear. They taxi me Alpha to Alpha 2, and I have the option of back-taxi the length of the runway, or an intersection departure. I still have 3500' of runway, and the engine is running strong. Run up is normal. Flaps to take-off. I'm rolling. I rotate.

Positive rate, gear up ... What the fuck? Why did the GPS just reboot? (Maybe it's loose and I bumped it; it's right next to the gear switch.) It comes back online in that slow way old Garmins do (you have to wait for AUTOEXEC.BAT to finish running and CONFIG.SYS to load before the radio's hot) and I let Pt. Mugu tower know I'm having radio issues, in case I missed a call. As soon as that brief exchange is over, the Garmin reboots again (I haven't touched it).

Crap. I switch over to COM2 and let them know I'm heading to CMA. The Garmin finishes rebooting, and immediately reboots again. I turn it off, it's going to be worthless this trip.

Then the audio panel fails. Hrm. Ordinarily, no big deal, it will "fail safe" to connecting the pilot's headset jacks directly to COM1. Except, see above. No COM1. COM2 is still online, but I can't use it for anything, not even receiving.

7600 into the transponder. I haven't touched flaps yet, and at this point I'm not going to. I put the gear back down while I still have power. Check the breakers - all good. Hrm. Ammeter showing a deep discharge. Weak battery sucking all the life out of it?

I pull back to 1950/19.5(ish) and enter a left traffic pattern for CMA. I don't see anyone else coming in, but I know I'm going to extend my downwind for a while to let the tower make whatever calls they need to. I activate Bluetooth on the Bose A20s and use my phone to call SoCal TRACON (the only phone number I had at my fingertips for CMA, courtesy ForeFlight), and try to get through the phonemail menu before just jamming '1' which is apparently Burbank. Hey, Burbank, sick of me yet?

They couldn't hear me at all and by that point I was getting a green light from the tower so I came in and landed normally. Got off at the taxiway and saw no light from tower, so I held there. Tried SoCal TRACON again, finally managed to shout my way to getting the Camarillo Tower number. Called them. They couldn't hear me either, but I could hear them, they told me to taxi Foxtrot, which I did, over to transient. Shut down and was met by a dark SUV with lights and a guy with a badge (airport operations of some sort), who just wanted to know what had happened. I explained the situation and that was that. He seemed to relax significantly when I mentioned who was going to be working on the plane (I'm using a mechanic local to CMA for all of this), and was just "glad [I'm] okay."

Met on the ramp by a line guy, who put 5 gallons into the "mysteriously dry" wing for me, and filled the "good" tank to the tab.

Called the tower on my phone waiting for lunch at Waypoint and thanked them for helping me get in, and making sure they didn't need anything from me. The person who answered the phone checked with her supervisor and confirmed I was good.

At least this time she's where she can be worked on easily, and without a military escort! (Getting an IRAN done on the mags, having the baffles reinstalled properly, replacing the spark plug wires and p-leads, and now troubleshooting whatever was going on with the electrical system...)

Chris. Was the tank empty, or below the visible fuel level in the tank? Could be 5 gallons in it and you could not have seen it.    Could the mechanic had something a little loose during all of the work and it leaked?

The mechanic may have drained the battery with the work completed. I would suggest charge it good, test and then decide. Battery was replaced last sept or October.

The age of the fuel pump and the mag wires is not known to me, could be the last engine overhaul.

if you have flown the plane 75 hrs. Since April you are getting close to several ad’s being due.  There are several that are every hundred hour due.  Annual time now instead of a couple months from now?

Fly safe.

Ron