All Activity

This was operator error (me). When you choose your mins on the selected approach, the minimums and circling notes persist in the “timeline” view.

^^^^ This.

I think my manual says 2-3 gallons …. Let me check … ETA: Yeah, it says 2.5-3

My F is completely under CAR3 and I replaced all the belts and added shoulder harnesses from Hooker Harness. The J certification reads a bit odd. Maybe @PT20J or @kortopates know if the below would still require the expensive TSO C114???

I had mine rewebbed at an annual a couple of years ago by Aviation Safety Products https://aircraftseatbelts.com/ (recommended by Top Gun). They did a great job with a quick turn around. They have many color choices. I'm not sure but I think I paid $250 for the two front seats lap and shoulder belts.

I sent feedback to Foreflight this evening. I’m copying it here in the event anyone shares my observations and recommendations and also wants to send feedback. If we use similar words to present the same ideas the chances of our comments being grouped together increase and potentially raise the priority of consideration by the development team. Greetings, I’m sorry to say that the Dynamic Procedures implementation is disappointing, especially as compared to Garmin Pilot’s SmartCharts. I’m staying with Foreflight due to the superior aircraft performance features, but Garmin Pilot is catching up on that feature set and once they do I will be more compelled to make the switch to GP. I’ve subscribed to Foreflight since 2011, so this isn’t a decision I take lightly. I installed a full Garmin panel in my Mooney and while Foreflight does everything I need, the Garmin Pilot integration with my avionics is naturally cleaner and the SmartCharts implementation makes it more usable in a single pilot hard IFR environment. I do prefer the weather, filing, and aircraft performance functions in Foreflight but those are all primarily on-the-ground planning functions. GP is moving ahead in the inflight functions that reduce workload when ease of use and timeliness are critical. Specifics on Dynamic Procedures. 1. The disclaimer “Verify with chart” is a show-stopper. For a tailored SID/STAR/IAP feature set to be effective it must be a stand-alone simplified presentation of the applicable data in an easily digestible format. The disclaimer implies things may be missing or incorrect, and that’s not acceptable. I suspect the development team was constrained with a requirement to not produce anything that could fully replace Jepp plates. Garmin obviously had no such restriction and produced a superior product that can stand alone, and could become a standard or template for others to emulate. Recommendation: Drive toward a single page stand-alone presentation of tailored data. 2. The data overlay on an IAP plate, accompanied by the side bar data, is cluttered and feels kludged together. I know a lot of thought and good work has gone in to this feature set but the result has a sub-optimal feel. For instance the pilot must scroll the sidebar or refer to the IAP plate to see the missed approach instructions. The GP implementation makes the instructions available with a single button, and in the very simple graphic format used on NOAA plates. Recommendation: Reduce use of overlay/sidebar data to only supplemental or briefing data that flows and is easily digested. 3. The Dynamic Procedure presentation is only available on the Map page, and an approach must be either entered into the flight plan or sent to the map from the Airport page Procedure tab. This can be cumbersome in a divert scenario when identifying the best divert airfield. Recommendation: Make display of the Dynamic Procedure format available directly in the Airport page Procedure tab. This would require implementation of a single page stand-alone tailored procedure format.

Interestingly Garmin Pilot does the same, but going back to select circling mins is only two button presses. In Foreflight it takes at least four button presses and possibly some scrolling.

It appears that part 23 airplanes are subject to TS0-C114 while CAR 3 airplanes can do as they please? Looking online, two places that re-web belts have prices were at $800 for the all 4 seats while another was at over $800 per seat. I do plan to call around and learn what makes a belt better than another but I'm shocked at the price difference and struggle to see what makes on 4x the cost of the other. It's even worse when a friend with an experimental just told me he has $50 in the job and places that specialize in re-web/certification for race cars are much cheaper than what I'll pay. Is it all about getting belt with the proper paperwork or should I be looking for more? Who have you all used and why? BTW: do you know that that multiple manufacturers have a 10 year limit on belts?

Circling minimums are presented when you select the approach. They don’t persist in the display after adding the approach.

LOL! As a definite NON machinist, I always appreciated having the correct tap supplied!

I would just always end up with the heilcoils unwinding or binding as they went in, or the tang on the bottom would snap off. Plus they always came with a tap, and as a machinist I was super suspicious of any "freebie" tap. If it wasn't a spiral point gun tap it had better have a damn good explanation for why! Maybe in aluminum it isn't such a big deal.

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:6830500 Here's an "improved" rear seat recline lever I made.

Why?

I hate to be yet another guy to not answer your question, but I always liked the time-serts better than helicoil.

I worked on an electronic assembly system for missiles. Every tap had a Helicoil. They had Helicoils on #4 screws. They were all perfect. I was bidding on a system to automatically insert the helicoils. They were all tangless inserts. And not necessarily the Helicoil brand.

That's a really good idea, I'll check with my IA to make sure he won't have an issue at annual and they I can start carving away. Thanks!

Somebody did that in the past. It was a #10. I'd rather not have a #12 in there. You guys are just full of good information!. My original question - does anyone have info on the dimensions of that wheel? I want to put in a thread locking insert. Before I do, I would like to know if there is enough metal to do that.

+1 on RG-400. You can get a crimper and the little plastic stripper tool and some loose BNC (or whatever) fittings and cut it to length.

I’m in as a Class A airplane, so maybe a future version would omit helicopter notes, too. I will verify all this in flight before reporting it to FF. -dan

You could just tap it for the next size screw, which you'd have to do with a helicoil, anyway.

Thoughts on going with the GNX 375 GPS-Nav and ADS-B IN/OUT transponder instead of the 355? This will allow me to ditch the 327 transponder/tail beacon ADSB/Sentry setup I currently have, and it will then give me weather and traffic on both the GPS and my iPad/Foreflight/Garmin Pilot. Then I can install the GTR 205 for a secondary Comm. I'll still run the 430W to the CDI, and then next year I'll add dual G5's or 275's, which will give the 375 a needle on the HSI, and then in year three I can finally replace the 430 with a 650 or 750.

Also concerned about this. All the others I’ve seen have been goofy looking when installed bc they are so long.

In my experience #10 and smaller helicoils are hit or miss. Maybe others have better luck with them, but I don't.

An Arrow would be nice. I'm between a Warrior (160hp) and an Archer (180hp). As much as I like to complain about how beat up and smelly they are, I'm still flying, and it is marvelous!

When my tanks were stripped and resealed (52 gal), I was billed for 52.4 gallons. Both were up to the caps when I checked. Some variation is to be expected, especially if the tabs are welded in during tank neck construction. (My C has no tabs.)