Cessna 310 Penny first flight 11 months
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 10. 2022
- After almost 400 hours of maintenance and 10 months of work Penny takes to the sky again! She is a 1960 Cessna 310 D model and in this video I look at how I get ready for my test flight after so much maintenance as well as some of the items that were done to the airplane.
- Auta a dopravní prostředky
Well I guessed I missed it !! I had no idea you did not have the Aztec anymore - I came on here today to do 2 things {1} catch your latest video - which I did - man I tell you what, you leave no stone unturned for sure !! I absolutely love how you approach your maintenance as well as your flying. You raised a fantastic point about predetermined points on the runway for takeoff !! I have "always" been puzzled on turbine aircraft V1 & Vr calculations - I have asked pilots who fly them does V1 & Vr assume a normal acceleration ?? If the jet is slow to accelerate, it may very well reach V1 & Vr, but possibly past the abort point. Nobody has been able to answer that question, because I suppose as a turbine pilot, you just simply go by the numbers and like I said, the calculations assume you have normal acceleration. I suppose someone will say that in a 2 man crew, one pilot is looking at N1 or EPR or on a turboprop torque. If those numbers are bad I guess if you have not reached V1, you abort {and hope you have enough runway to stop} {as you can tell I don't fly jets - but I was a mechanic on Boeings for 27 years.} - Now the other thing I came on here for {2} - when you did have your Aztec, were you ever aware of AD 83-22-01 ?? This is the AD that puts a zero fuel weight limit on the Aztec {to supposedly prevent damage to wing attach fittings} - it limits the A model to a zero fuel weight of 4000 LBS and B through F 4400 LBS and turbo charged 4500 with the later models at 5200 gross. But the information on the AD is totally confusing. All I could find is Revision 1 which just says to change the wording in the pilot's manual. I could never find out where the zero fuel limit came from. Was it issued originally in 1983 ?? Or did the Aztec always have a zero fuel limit {like the Seneca} The other thing I spotted in the revision was it said "in order to prevent wing damage from excess fuel". I think that is a MISTAKE !!! Zero fuel means everything ABOVE the limit must be in fuel. I think it should read "in order to prevent damage to the wing attach fittings from excess PAYLOAD" - and the giveaway for me is on the turbo charged Aztec the zero fuel goes UP 100 lbs. The only explanation is the extra weight of the turbos DECRESE the wing bending moment by a small amount. It's weight in the cabin that's the problem, NOT weight in {or on} the wings. So do you know anything about this ?? And also, are there mods available that stronger attach fittings could be installed to get rid of the zero fuel limits ?? {on the Aztec} And I read an article where the writer said that many Aztec owners are not even aware of the zero fuel limits - with an emphasis if you purchase an aircraft that had an unaware owner to check the fittings. But no elaboration as to what kind of check - visual ?? dye penetrant ?? Eddy current ?? Thanks !!!!
Yes the AD was put in place to stop overloading of the fueselage. Many were flying with very little fuel and alot of payload in the cabin causing extra stress on the wing attachment fittings.
You are correct that the extra weight from the turbos in the wing allowed those models to have a higher zero fuel weight. For the same reasons most aztec pilots should be burning their inboard fuel tanks first and outboard fuel last so that the weight of fuel helps alleviate stress on the wing.
All the fuel in an Aztec is outboard of the main landing gear. It therefore is acting as a blance to the loaded fueselage. The more fuel weight you remove the more stress is put on wing attachment points as the wings have to hold it up.
Some aircraft, such as the ATL-98, actually had large wing tip weights that could be installed to increase gross weight for heavy lifting operations. The same principle here is that the weight at the tip reduces stress at the root.
I am unaware of any mods to increase the strength of the wing to get away from this zero fuel limit. It was not a restriction on the aircraft when it was new and was brought in by the AD.
I hope that answers most of your questions?
@@fastbackflying853 Thanks for the answer !! So what prompted the AD in the first place ?? Was there reports of damaged wing attatch fittings ?? I heard for years that the Aztec wing was one of the strongest production GA wings second to the Mooney wing - because the Mooney wing is a one piece spar. But I definitely heard the Aztec wing was super strong. To me the "wing" includes anything that attaches the wing to the fuselage and I was very surprised the Aztec had zero fuel limits. So if the limit is now 4400 {on NON turbo} - that means the next 700 pounds must be in fuel which means there is no trading fuel for passengers or cargo. Because 700 LBS is essentially FULL fuel. I mean I guess it makes things easier - if you wanted to leave fuel behind, it would be for a lighter gross weight - maybe it's a hot day and you want SE performance. This means the Seneca actually is less restrictive, because at max weight, the Seneca must have 250 LBS of fuel verses the Aztec's 700. So because of that, I'm now thinking the Seneca is the {slightly} "better" aircraft because the SE ceiling is 13,000 feet, NO critical engine, an actual rear door, tiny less fuel burn, AND the best one - Piper is STILL making Senecas. Although I must say, Piper needs to offer a more basic Seneca - the current Seneca V has too much stuff in it and it's basically a 3/4 seater with a decent amount of fuel. If I had a Seneca V, I would get rid of a seat and make it a 5 seater. I bet taking the seat out gives you 30 LBS of useful load. If you can't use the seat anyways, why even have it ?? Ha !!
Thanks for another fantastic video! I looked for and purchased a Piper Aztec after watching your Aztec videos. Love the plane! I moved up from a Cardinal and fly over allot of water her in Hawaii and that second engine gives me some piece of mind… the first annual was a big one as the flight school Mickey-moused some systems… no problems in the first flight but I asked my instructor to fly with me as he has tremendous experience… thanks again!
I am really glad your enjoying the Aztec. I am really missing mine. It worked so well and was a pleasure to fly. Thank you for your comments.
Hi Jeffery !!! Hey congrats on becoming an airplane owner - since you have an Aztec, I have some burning questions !! Do you know anything about AD 83-22-01 ?? That is the AD about zero fuel weight limits on the Aztec {and Apache} - It's a confusing AD to say the least - All I could find was the revision which came out in 1998 and it called for to put information about zero fuel limits in the pilot handbook. But it had confusing information. It said to not confuse turbocharged with normally aspirated, but then it specifically gives zero fuel limits as follows: models B through F 4400 LBS normally aspirated and 4500 LBS turbo charged. So I'm totally confused on that one. Then in another sentence it says "in order to prevent damage to the wing to fuselage attach fittings from excessive fuel weight" and I'm TOTALLY confused on that one. If you have a zero fuel limit, that's a function of PAYLOAD, The fuel is in the wings. Their statement makes no sense. The purpose of zero fuel is to NOT have a tiny amount of fuel with a lot of payload. If anything, it would be best to just fill the tanks. I'm calculating that in a typical Aztec {going by zero fuel limits} you can put 1300 LBS of payload in the cabin and then up to 800 LBS of fuel - of course you can less fuel if you want. I have tried to find info as to why the AD was issued in the first place with no luck. And I tried to find info on if there are mods that can be done such as stronger fittings to get rid of the zero fuel limits. I also tried to find info on how to have them inspected - because one article said many Aztec owners are not aware of the zero fuel AD which again makes no sense because it appears Revision one is to change some wording about turbocharged verses normally aspirated where as I assume the initial AD was putting zero fuel limits on the Aztec line in the first place. But I would also like to know how it came about ?? Does it have anything to do with aging aircraft ?? Did the original Aztecs NOT hae zero fuel limits ?? If you know the answer to any of these questions, let me know if you have time - THANKS .
@@mustardseedsociety hey! Will leave this for Fastback flying. You won’t find a more thoughtful pilot/mechanic on the web! Good luck with everything!
That first flight after major maintenance is a unique combination of pleasure and terror. Even on a plane as nice as this one. 😎
When I started flying my Musketeer on her new engine I had two things on my mind. Crib death, if something is drastically wrong it will show up quickly. Then karma, when you take something that far apart there will be settling-in issues. Both are well in the past now; we had a spectacular fall here in B.C. and I flew enough that it was starting to get expensive. #FirstWorldProblems
It really is. I have a few stories about major work like this and a pilot showing up and jumping in and taking off. No walk around, no documneta check no nothing and they have not seen the airplane in months! Thats scary!
Kirby died here in Brevard County...after speaking at KSC, on his return West, lost control of car. He drowned in ditch.
A terrible way to go. He sure was an inspiration to alot of people.
What happened to your little Green buddy?!
Just got moved to a location with a seat belt 😃
Almost had to sell the plane to pay for the annual. I always hate first flight after annual. I always ask the Aand P to go up with me and he says No way.
That seems alarming! Is that not like a cook that won't eat their own food?