All Activity

Yesterday I flew to Augsburg, outside of Munich. There were many firsts for me. The first first was the NOTAM for Augsburg (EDMA) stating that overflight is prohibited due to bomb disposal (exhibit A). The second first was getting the call, "free of storks" on climb out. At my home airport, we have an offset approach due to a stork sanctuary. Yesterday there were at least three of these flocks circling next to the runway and possibly directly over and around the grass runway. The photo is the best I could do from the taxiway. I counted about 70 in that flock, so there were at least 250-300 storks total flying in our airspace (exhibit B). The third first was this factory I saw in Germany in the middle of the forest. Maybe @MatthiasArnold knows what it is. Strange location; hundreds of employees (exhibit C). I had a fourth first, but I can't remember what it was. Anyway... interesting day!

Exactly. And no one has really taken on board my main point. Which is that even if you execute the turn back perfectly you still are left with only the one good option, low and slow. Never put yourself in a position without an out. Straight ahead if you set up for a field and you're high, maybe there's another field beyond it that you can take, but you can take more time to set up in the first place making hitting that field so much more likely. My main point is, unless you are Bob Hoover, if you make the turn back it's a gamble, not a predictable outcome. It's a gamble that may end in death - as it so often does. I just wish people, who plan to turn back, would admit to themselves this reality and see if maybe there are lower risk options. These demonstrations with idle engine instill a false sense of security because every single one of them has an out that wouldn't be there otherwise - the engine. All the while the same time could be spent on learning to judge your glide better, how to aim at fields and making sure you hit them, we have plenty of deaths from people over/undershooting perfectly good fields too. If only we admitted, finally, collectively, that this maneuver is ALWAYS a gamble and there are safer options. But alas, let's debate the bank angle for this gamble and kill some more people.

Of course, the quickest way to lose altitude is dynamique stall (spins also consume lot of altitude per turn) However, to fly a turn with minimum altitude loss you need 45deg bank and few kts above 45 deg stall speed, the typical "best turn speed" is something like 1.2×VS + 10kts (same for min sink speeds at 45 deg), doing 45deg turn at best glide Vbg with unloaded wings (1G) to result in huge altitude loss in turn. All of this stuff is theoritical, the only case where one is interested in this is gliding ("stalling inside tight thermal to climb" ). If one is interested in more theoritical stuff, a wingover flown at 0G is the quickest was to fly 180 with minimal loss of altitude I have done 180 chandelles with power and 180 wingovers without power: in Mooney, with +/-200ft, you are on opposite heading quicker than 45deg loaded turn (in glider -150ft, I am on opposite heading after wingover), unless stuff after an EFATO as no one is brave enough to do it... All this theoritical aerobatics stuff go into the bin at low altitudes as the human factors kicks in when one loses visual reference of the horizon (the scary ground fills the whole view outside), I was flying with a Polish national champion who did aerobatics by the numbers, he finished with loop at 500ft and wingover at 300ft straight to land on final with zero energy left On my side, I tend to keep wings level once under 400ft agl and the speed near Vbg or Vref. I may do +/-20deg bank angle to pick left and right within +/-30deg (sort of rate1 turn as some IFR pilots call it)

Not sure. I googled the difference and I haven't ever used any channels past 136 but I can check.

You cannot hold altitude when engine is dead. If you try that you will stall. You cannot load the wing just above stall, by definition you have then stalled.

Yes, the dome nuts have ears for rivets to secure them to the panel and keep the fastener from turning. (Apologies for saying the obvious.) I don’t see any ears on the nuts on your access panels. Maybe it’s some other kind of anchor method (fixed into the plate?), or maybe I’m not seeing clearly, but I hope you are able to figure out a solution so you can get back into the air. Another pic from the archives… even with sealant, the nut plate ears are obvious. You’re on the right track on access panel installation. The mx manual provides some guidance there.

I am amazed at how shiny your floorboards are.

Maybe he was being watched for previous beer runs? That wouldn't surprise me. I used to live next to the Navajo Nation and the road going in was paved with broken beer and whiskey bottles thrown out of the cars just before turning in. Where's Smokey and Bandit when you need them? :-)

I caution on bending control edges. Too much chance of going too far and pulling a rivet. For roll (If its close) I use a 1/4 to 1/2 turn on the flap up stop bolt. Nothing works well until the airplane is rigged WITH trim boards correctly. You have to get the throws correct. Just like rigging the gear you can't start in he middle of the procedure and expect to have good results. One can check to see if the airplane is even near correct by aligning one aileron counter weight with the top of the wing skin (tape it there) and then looking at the other to see how close it is to being flush with its top wing skin. The inboard ends of the aileron should be right next to the outboard ends of the flaps in this position . As old as our airplanes are, when in flight and with a load on them- the ailerons MAY be above the flap trailing edges. If the ailerons are rerigged by putting a simulated load UP on them and then rigging them to be flush the flaps can then be rigged to match them WITH the simulated load. This assumes the right flap is not twisted by 50 years of people standing on it by mistake. When ever the lateral trim is worked on the control wheels have to be locked level in place with an aluminum angle and straps. If the ball is not centered then it will roll off or wander back and forth with the autopilot. Make sure it is centered on level ground before you determine that it needs rudder tab adjustment.

Having to do approaches in low IFR in the middle of the night with a minimally equipped airplane sounds like the opposite of a good time to me. There must have been intense external pressure on that group to entice them into this scenario.

As a minimum, you need a g5 or gi275 or g3x (or maybe a g500) to act as the brains. With the aspen the op already has, this can get complicated.

Isn't that the "acid test"? If you don't notice any difference in handling, trim, balance or performance then nothing has "materially" changed. These planes are handmade and yours is 36 years old. This is like having a flaw in the paintjob that you never noticed, but once someone draws your attention to it, you continually notice it and worry about how it looks all the time. I am with Matt on this....

So today I was cruising back from the Oregon coast at 13,000’ and tried out 70%lop. It actually settled just below 70%, but it was 31”, 2300rpm and ~11.1gph. That gave me 175ktas. Almost exactly 5kts more than the 65% I had been using and exactly what the poh chart predicted. 70% had slightly warmer chts (highest ~360 with cowl flaps closed) and tit right at 1550. Tit at 65% is usually about 1515. Even lop, you aren’t gaining much by increasing power further. It will take another ~0.8gph to get 5 more knots and probably a pretty warm tit. It decreases your fuel efficiency (gal/nm). It seems my airplane is pretty content at 65-70% lop.

Double checked the logs. Last cylinder work was quite a while ago 10/14/2014 at 962 TSMOH. Last annual 6/19/2025 we were at 1567 and we've probably flown 90ish hours since then. Calling the local mechanic on the field tomorrow. Unfortunately mechanic availability is absolute crap at KPAE so I'm likely down for quite a bit for something as severe as this =(

Had a gfc500 in a F model. Worked outstanding. Not sure what you need to run it though. I had a g3x and a 275 and the 650. Not sure which one “runs” it though.

As a tech, they would not have messed with the rigging. I’m confident it was like that prior to the ding. Mine are not exactly straight either. I think it does help the roll . Aviat MFG, on the Pitts and Huskys, some are over an inch off between sides in the balance horns. I wouldn’t worry about it. It would be difficult to put the horn on crooked. -Matt

During an oil change last year I found a broken cylinder hold down stud. Fortunately it wasn’t a through stud which I think would complicate the process of fixing the problem. Fixing mine required removing the cylinder and an interesting process to remove the broken stud piece that remained in the case - but was broken off below the surface. I’d imagine the fix for a through stud will require removing two cylinders. I would certainly contact the manufacturer for their input on the proper procedure for removing and replacing a through stud. Hopefully there is a precedent for doing so while the engine is still installed.

My KX 165 is not in a good shape. Options are to either refurbish the existing unit, replace it with a used unit that is in better shape, replace it with new KX200 or replace it with something else which would involve major surgery on the panel. KX 200 seems to offer the path of least inconvenience in my case if it is, indeed, a slide in replacement.

Is it the 720 channel or 760 channel version? The 720-channel -165 in the M20K I’m trying to get flying has seen some better days, so I’m looking for a 760-channel replacement.

Can it be integrated with Garmin avionics to control it? I have an old avionics stack and I'm considering cost effective path to upgrade while keeping two coms/nav radios. I don't want go full gps.

Given that it was not the same engine I felt it might go wrong… but no they accepted the [emoji[emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]]]][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]]]][emoji[emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]]]][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]]]][emoji[emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]]]][emoji[emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]]]][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]]]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]]]][emoji[emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]]]][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]]]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]]]][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji[emoji638][emoji639][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]]]]]] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

@jrwilson and @IvanP Curious what is motivation to replace a perfectly good KX-165 with a KX-200? A cursory exam of the KX-200 data sheet doesn't show much practical difference (okay, it stores 50 freqs). What am I missing?

I would ask the shop, taking the left elevator out does not require changing anything in the linkage, so first thing to ask is whether anything was adjusted in the left elevator linkage, if yes, set the elevators equal and see how that feels, overall I would think that the elevators should be equal, compensating for a roll imbalance by offsetting the elevators would cause excessive drag

Late to the discussion, gear then flaps.

It could be the case was fretting, or some sealant got on the case halves where the through bolt went through. This can cause a lack of stress (torque) leading to what you describe. Lycoming has a service bulletin warning people that the use of any type of sealant around the through bolts can lead to this failure. Some were putting sealant around the through bolts to stop oil leaks. Lycoming says that is a very bad idea.