Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won



About FlyingMonkey

  • Rank
    Flying Monkey

Profile Information

  • Location
    Georgia, USA
  • Interests
  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. FlyingMonkey

    Decalin RunUp and Oil Changes

    When they're worn out or show signs of heat cycle damage (dry rot).
  2. FlyingMonkey

    Decalin RunUp and Oil Changes

    I thought Rotax actually says maximum 100hr / 50hr (with 100LL) changes, but the "conventional wisdom" is to cut that in half.
  3. FlyingMonkey

    How much are you guys spending on ADSB parts?

    Stratux, $200. Using it now.
  4. FlyingMonkey

    How much are you guys spending on ADSB parts?

    GDL-82, $1800 and -$500 FAA rebate, so ~$1300 total. The GTX345 is awesome, but over twice what a GDL-82 costs.
  5. FlyingMonkey

    Garmin GDL 82 ADS-B installed this week

    BTW, anybody wanting to install ADS-B before the 2020 deadline, might want to think about picking up their equipment now, because I think the rush is starting. I tried to buy a GDL-82 from Spruce and they are out of stock until MAY. Sporty's and most of the other big shops are sold out too. I got one from Sarasota Avionics, it arrives Tuesday. But if you have near term upgrade plans, just be aware that the more popular gear like the 82 might get scarce or only available on the secondary market at a steep markup.
  6. FlyingMonkey

    CTSW Cruise Speed

    Jacques, that’s a pretty old document, and I think more is known now. The flutter problems (including mine) seem to be a result of two factors: 1) a full span stabilator anti-servo (trim) tab 2) inadequate structural stiffening forward of the tab hinge line I know of mine and one other CT that had the flutter issue. I had extensive discussions with the other pilot, as well as Tom Peghiny at FD USA, and I have a good handle on this problem. The other affected pilot told me he thinks the problem originates with the swirling slipstream fromthe prop around the airframe, which sets up an airflow that pushes down on one rear corner if the stab, and up on the other one. Add to this the pulsing from the individual prop blades, and you have a high frequency pulsing moment in opposite, complimentary forces on the stab. I think this is a good theory. Most CTSWs, especially later ones, have a bulkhead wall just ahead of the tab hinge line, that provides a large amount of stiffness. Early airplanes, and a few later ones like mine, didn’t have this reinforcement. That allowed the forces describes above to flex the stab at high speed in a fluttering manner. I actually think the movement in my case was better describes as “pre-flutter vibration” that was not terribly violent, but definitely noticeable. In my case this occurred just past 120kt indicated at 2000-3000ft. The fix in both airplanes was to send the stab back to the factory and have the missing bulkhead added into the stab. Since then I have taken the airplane to 140kt+ indicated several times without issue. But I am wary of pushing beyond Vne or even close to Vne for extended periods. There is no need for it and I’d rather be kind to the airplane and make sure it’s kind to me in return. BTW, I have no concerns or hesitation about the safety of the airplane, and would not hesitate to fly it aggressively throughout the published limits of the airframe (and have done so).
  7. FlyingMonkey

    CTSW Cruise Speed

    Do you know what speed that failure occurred at?
  8. FlyingMonkey

    CTSW Cruise Speed

    I know that some CTs in different legal jurisdictions have a Vne over 160kt. I also know I personally experienced stabilator flutter at 122 knots in level flight. Forgive me if I'm a little shy about pushing the limits... https://www.flyingmag.com/technique/proficiency/technicalities-are-you-feeling-lucky
  9. FlyingMonkey

    CTSW Cruise Speed

    I would not want to fly too close to the 145kt Vne, and at higher altitudes TAS overtakes IAS for calculating load limits. 140kt doesn't leave much margin if you get a really strong gust or turbulence. I'd do it in smooth air though. I'm not at all agraid of the CT's wing, it's strong as hell. But that stabilator...
  10. FlyingMonkey

    CTSW Cruise Speed

    This thread makes me want to organize a CT race. Maybe at Page...?
  11. FlyingMonkey

    CTSW Cruise Speed

    Yeah, mine was grossly coarse. IIRC I took about about 1.5° of pitch total. I went from a top speed of 108kt indicated to 125kt at 2000ft solo. I didn't seem to lose any climb. I definitely think any CT owner should follow the 5600-5650rpm at cruise altitude rule of thumb. But with Ed's situation it's harder to tell if that would make him better, since he's at the extreme of operating conditions.
  12. FlyingMonkey

    CTSW Cruise Speed

    If that is true and I lived at Ed's altitude, I'd be tempted to run at higher than approved RPM. Of course, even pitched for 5650rpm WOT you are going to see nowhere near that in a climb, but a higher WOT rpm in the climb (say 5100rpm vs 5000rpm) will equite to better climb rate. I'd be hesitant to run much hotter in cruise because at higher altitudes you should be using TAS for airframe limits, and I would not want to cruise much past Ed's 127KTAS number above 12,000ft anyway. I do think Ed should consider a different prop, the Warp is inexpensive and easy to fix, but heavy and not as efficient as some others.
  13. FlyingMonkey

    CTSW Cruise Speed

    Sure, but mine was severely over-propped and nowhere near a normal, much less optimal range. And I'm not faulting your methods, they work well, but like everything with a fixed pitch prop, they are a compromise. My only point was that I don't think you can really get higher speed *and* lower RPM at that speed by flattening pitch. Flatter usually means less speed and higher engine rpm, so something is not quite right there. Rotax engines are a little different from other aircraft engines, but they're not magic devices that alter physics.
  14. FlyingMonkey

    Get off the runway

    "Get off the runway" is good advice, but the fault in that video clearly rests with the second pilot in the T-28. Lower/slower airplane has right of way, especially if on the ground vs. landing. If he was paying attention he must have known there was an airplane ahead of him landing, and he should not have assumed the first airplane was off the runway when he lost sight of it under the nose of his airplane as he got lower. He shouldn't have landed unless he heard a "clear of runway" radio call or could visually confirm the first airplane on the taxiway. Even the second is risky because there could be two airplanes of the same/similar type in operation at the airport.
  15. FlyingMonkey

    CTSW Cruise Speed

    I don't understand how what you're saying could entirely be true Roger. How are you flattening the pitch and getting higher speed at lower rpm? Flattening the pitch *should* increase rpm at a given throttle setting and increase rate of climb. Assuming the same HP at a given RPM, it should not be possible to go faster at flatter pitch for identical airplanes, unless I'm missing something. Are you sure the 200rpm difference was prop pitch and not just that the CTLSi was certainly a much heavier airplane? Or that the injected engine doesn't have a different hp/torque curve that peaks later? Both? I think there are too many variables in your scenario to pinpont the flatter pitch as clearly superior in this exact circumstance.