Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 9/6/2020 at 2:35 PM, Sam Muncy said:

I think I uploaded these correctly.  Got a little more time in the plane today.  Its a beast.  I am working on getting to know the systems. I need to hook an external power source to charge the batteries so that I can familiarize myself with the avionics...and not drain the batteries.  Dual batteries 24 volt system.   Best way to accomplish that?   Just a trickle charge on the batteries?  

 

Plane pics 2 - slmuncy335@gmail.com - Gmail.html 1.93 MB · 33 downloads Plane pics - slmuncy335@gmail.com - Gmail.html 1.93 MB · 16 downloads

I needed to do the same  for learning my avionics and went with this GPU that also has a built in Battery Minder for trickle charging the batteries.  Someone else on MS had the idea of putting the trickle charge plugs in the TKS door so I did the same.

 

https://www.audioauthority.com/page/gpu_home

EVFiyz9oKnc9CoYIm1SqJPCX5JTiVRtl1dJY0Hjy3lICCms8CKIsvz8VAbPb-MUDlI8DvFHcChT8NL4gE5sXvj7I1CNOkF_4QrXBCWX-WDk5KPo0pfaqDm9D-dqSHxO7iufmC8__7IO4S7STvgClwzq4TUG2ogJkfOChfzOjhl00O3Ij1YVKOMFyIOyjA6H-ktUaUO8viLUKFh6bxWklQ_Gj23taY1WBQxvvYa7gUQmW9Yj1V1YKrede5RwXznMna4HauYmx4uJwvP1_VbtLTwWgfHAyS6B5GLK2ybFCJptb6iEIfLzqL3aO1SNUPkdXXpoxlevbvWK6u2onG8LWMm4TIz29EKm8qFRwnCTkOMy6LV9JUq1AYlZpTmHDq0sESOqNSaUcp9szfkalL8ocqKoniQyDM8KF2sFnDj0xUy46teh_GOl-8Xt40d8uHOKmr-Q9quouHtq8VaFPNaLmaUBu6HEbICSuo5_5c_UFyJ-xut4Y24aIqUVoeS0rxsKaK66mGCbRP6h9LGayYR40cYpNx8T58mhthpPhqlyk9K60e5cnp2qSIHQT2Ufdp8lqNfOkobMST9Vfohc8WXgyZHoANBEqF4TBcalV-vtmjTiD9FHbBCdYFykj5T5cqmKrLuXQg1_vM6BnEemAMXFglY4D4RhqtFOnKpf4kxia_lJ5a8hkQcuj4eLlc5-RBw=w678-h904-no?authuser=0

GPU-banner-slides1a.jpg

Posted
On 9/8/2020 at 3:58 PM, Ragsf15e said:

Oh that’s my dream plane!  I live in the NW and fly an F so winter is a little tough for flying.  I see you have TKS... do you mind telling me what your useful load is?  Is that without any tks fluid in the system?

Thanks and congrats!!

Remember, the UL is calculated with full fluid. 

Posted
11 hours ago, Mcstealth said:

Remember, the UL is calculated with full fluid. 

I had hoped that was true, but there’s been some debate on other threads with guys saying that their W&B said “tks empty” on it.  It’s 54lbs, so I wouldn’t say it’s trivial and I guess I would like to think there’s a well documented standard, but I don’t think there is.  Hopefully I’m wrong?

Posted

I always want to know the payload. I define that as the useful load remaining after the fuel tanks, oil, and everything else is topped off. One must also consider the weight of headsets, portable O2, and anything else that lives in the plane. For my J, the 904 lbs. of useful load translates to 522 lbs. payload. My Sweetheart and I combine for 290, leaving 232 for baggage and additional passengers. 
I do not always need 64 gallons of fuel, so some payload can be reclaimed there. I get another 81 lbs. by fueling to 50 gallons (tabs - verified as accurate). Thus four Mooney sized people but very little baggage. Leaving another hour’s fuel behind gets me 58 lbs. of baggage.

I think with a few upgrades (about 25 amu worth) I can reclaim 30-40 lbs. with improved performance. We shall see.
 

  • Like 1
Posted
11 hours ago, Ragsf15e said:

I had hoped that was true, but there’s been some debate on other threads with guys saying that their W&B said “tks empty” on it.  It’s 54lbs, so I wouldn’t say it’s trivial and I guess I would like to think there’s a well documented standard, but I don’t think there is.  Hopefully I’m wrong?

@LANCECASPER @gsxrpilot

Let us invite a couple of flyers into the discussion. 

  • Like 2
Posted

We have all sorts of standard to rely on...

CAR3(?) is a big one... that covers what UL is and what needs to be in each tank, oil and fuel... For Mooneys...

The dual Fiki tanks have their own rule... Not too full, or too empty when using them...or not using them...

Best regards,

-a-

 

This May or may not be the standard I mentioned above... CAR some number...

https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/small_airplanes/certification_basis/CAR_3_1949_summary/

 

Posted
34 minutes ago, Mcstealth said:

@LANCECASPER @gsxrpilot

Let us invite a couple of flyers into the discussion. 

I'm sure there is an FAA hazardous attitude that speaks to my position on this :ph34r: but I think 54 lbs is fairly trivial for our Mooneys. As long as you're within the CG envelope, you won't notice +/- 54 lbs. Especially in an Ovation. 

So unless presented data to the contrary in black and white, I'd assume the UL listed for the Ovation is with the TKS tank full. 

Posted
11 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

I'm sure there is an FAA hazardous attitude that speaks to my position on this :ph34r: but I think 54 lbs is fairly trivial for our Mooneys. As long as you're within the CG envelope, you won't notice +/- 54 lbs. Especially in an Ovation. 

So unless presented data to the contrary in black and white, I'd assume the UL listed for the Ovation is with the TKS tank full. 

While I agree that the airplane will fly just fine, that’s a slippery slope.  You get to make your decisions as PIC, but I really try to follow the rules, poh, etc as written.  Am I perfect? No, but then when I miss something, I have the most “slop” available before I end up bending something or making a bad situation worse.  

Not trying to be on a high horse, but I don’t like putting my family in an airplane that is overloaded according to my documented weight and balance.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

Those guys are good but we need guys with TKS airplanes and their weight and balance handy. 

I'll be at the SWTA shop all day tomorrow. There are a couple of TKS birds in the shop. I'll see if I can take a look at the W&B for them and respond.

  • Like 3
Posted

Nice looking plane.  It was the 3rd Ovation built.  If I remember correctly, it had a very high time engine.  If that's true, what is your plan where that is concerned? 

Posted

The first dozen Os didn’t change hands very often...

They were buy and hold for a reallllllly long time...

As if they were meant to be forever-planes...

The Os were so well built from the beginning... they all got updates along the way...

If high engine time is a concern.... that is a good concern to have... swapping the 280hp engine for an OH’d 310hp one.... is a fantastic idea... :)

Best regards,

-a-

Posted
On 9/29/2020 at 6:01 PM, Greg_D said:

Nice looking plane.  It was the 3rd Ovation built.  If I remember correctly, it had a very high time engine.  If that's true, what is your plan where that is concerned? 

It does have a high time engine. My plan? Swap it out for a factory reman.  One of my boxes that I was trying to check when I was looking was to find the airplane that had an engine that was at or beyond TBO.  I wanted to put "my" engine in. Not pay the premium of a mid-time engine only to have to change the engine right away. Heard enough of those stories. As I said, long and sometimes frustrating search.  When the time comes, I am ready. 

Why do you ask?

  • Like 1
Posted

The difference between the O1’s engine, and one from an O3... is spectacular...

But, the price of making the change for no other reason won’t make a lot of sense...

There are certain things that make the upgrade a little easier to choose...

An Engine with high time, or prop strike, can be helpful for the decision...
 

Not sure if this is what Greg had in mind... but it is the logic that I was following a decade ago...

I was looking forward to flying the IO550 past TBO... some odd chain of events changed that plan... :)

Best regards,

-a-

 

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
On 10/1/2020 at 2:09 AM, Sam Muncy said:

It does have a high time engine. My plan? Swap it out for a factory reman.  One of my boxes that I was trying to check when I was looking was to find the airplane that had an engine that was at or beyond TBO.  I wanted to put "my" engine in. Not pay the premium of a mid-time engine only to have to change the engine right away. Heard enough of those stories. As I said, long and sometimes frustrating search.  When the time comes, I am ready. 

Why do you ask?

Sam, I was just curious what your plan was, because that is the exact strategy that I have used before and it worked out well.

Posted

I agree with that thinking.  Better to put in a new engine rather than buy one with 1000 hrs left and find that it's not going to make it.  Especially when you are talking IO-550s it all depends on the care it's been given.  They are great engines but if you run them, as Carusoam puts it, in "fire-breathing dragon mode" @ 85-90% power and ROP they aren't going to get there....and realistically you have no way of knowing....buying a pooped-out engine and swapping in a new reman is the way to go.

Sweet looking ride, I know you will enjoy it!

Posted
On 9/23/2020 at 10:24 AM, Ragsf15e said:

I had hoped that was true, but there’s been some debate on other threads with guys saying that their W&B said “tks empty” on it.  It’s 54lbs, so I wouldn’t say it’s trivial and I guess I would like to think there’s a well documented standard, but I don’t think there is.  Hopefully I’m wrong?

I think there may have been some calculated without out fluid but my weight and balance on my Ovation specifies with full fluid.  It is 80lbs as noted by LANCECASPER.  I suppose you will have to verify this on the weight and balance in the POH of whatever aircraft you buy.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, r0ckst4r said:

I think there may have been some calculated without out fluid but my weight and balance on my Ovation specifies with full fluid.  It is 80lbs as noted by LANCECASPER.  I suppose you will have to verify this on the weight and balance in the POH of whatever aircraft you buy.

Thanks, I appreciate your input.  I don’t know why I’m hing up on this, but now I’m curious about the 80lbs... if that’s full fluid (54lbs), that means the whole system of leading edges and pumps and tank and lines is only 26lbs?  

Posted
5 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

Thanks, I appreciate your input.  I don’t know why I’m hing up on this, but now I’m curious about the 80lbs... if that’s full fluid (54lbs), that means the whole system of leading edges and pumps and tank and lines is only 26lbs?  

That's an interesting observation.  I suppose for comparison my vacuum pump is weighed at 5.68 lbs which would leave around 20lbs for panels and lines.  Assuming of course the pumps TKS and vacuum pumps are of similar weight which could be completely wrong, but just for discussion.  The electric propeller heater is not included in the TKS weight.  I have not held an uninstalled TKS leading edge in my hand and it does seem amazing that they could all be that light but It may be possible.

  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.