All Activity

Well, at least that’s the claim

I don’t know much about chemical interactions but carbon breakdown is its primary use and design.

Lance, thank you, good point, will get the GDL51 and the little external XM antenna, the GXM42 is limping, probably heat on glareshield killed it

Yeah it's huge, but seems to have capped out at 75k ish people for years now. I'm assuming the BLM/other agencies won't approve a larger event as there was drama about it back in the day but I haven't kept up. I stopped going regularly when tickets became a lottery situation.

Cool! TY for sharing. Wish I'd checked it out back in the 80's when I was in SoCal. It looks quite large now in those pictures.

I used this for a separate copy of regular and emergency checklists living up-front in the side ankle pockets (the leather ring binder full offical AFM type POH lives in back within reach when needed): https://flyboys.com/collections/frontpage/products/checklist-book-ring-combopak the rings are better than the typical ones, so I also bought extra for my kneeboard, for oft-visited airport diagrams, quick refs, notepads. Yup, still use a regular kneeboard. I found thin stone tablets with a 7-hole pattern so that, when I get a clearance I can easily chisel it down...

I hopped over the hill for a couple laps around Burning Man on the final day of the event. Lots of traffic in and out, they have their own conga line to/from Reno shuttling people. Would have been cool to go out during the week to take some friends out on sightseeing flights but didn't have the time to make the trip. I've attended the event many times but it's been a few years. Tower has you fly at 7000 MSL (about 3000 AGL) clockwise around the outside of the city for sightseeing. There were a few other Mooneys I saw going in and out, any here?

I am grateful for all the experiments and documentation Janice does with WinginIt, esp. since I have the same airplane and it's otherwise hard to find good comps (watched some Bonanza examples but still not apples-to-apples). More recently I am working on more short approaches and overhead maneuvers (since I'd otherwise been trying to reduce variance as much as possible in pattern approaches and stabilized GPS/ILS approaches until everything was dialed in). It's been an eye-opener as there is a learning curve on figuring out energy reserve. I feel I am quickly going from the inital to break (or turn) and dropping gear to "bleed off energy" then, before I know it, the stall horn is going off at 90 kts in a turn and it doesn't quite look right on downwind-to-base; I realize I'm probably stretching it. And then occasionally I am surprised and find I am carrying extra energy to a curving short final and it feels smarter to go around. All in all, I think it's really surprising how fast it sinks with the engine even at idle and full-fwd prop, leave alone if it were truly power-out. It's a heavy plane and the descent angle (or "wire" as Nate Jaros calls it) is pretty steep. Trying to find small power and prop settings to simulate a coarse prop and dead engine would be nice, but I think the bigger lesson is that it feels quite a bit different even when you're trying to work it out intentionally.

The problem with that, which I believe they demonstrated in a Bonanza in the AOPA trials, is once you reach 1500' you'll probably be too far away from the runway to make it back. Brian Schiff did a podcast on this topic and provided some exercises to execute at altitude to determine your aircraft's capabilities and potential for making this all work. Here are a few links to his different discussions. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D7ujKRXTj5b8&ved=2ahUKEwjD4dSk3riPAxXU5ckDHb7WOP8QwqsBegQIGRAG&usg=AOvVaw2DKC5nnXEW5cIq743tIkpA https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DinTw5L-vg8E&ved=2ahUKEwjD4dSk3riPAxXU5ckDHb7WOP8QkPEHegQIGBAG&usg=AOvVaw0LSifYeOw2IUcGa5Pudv6J https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DzlC3AfCaXAE&ved=2ahUKEwjD4dSk3riPAxXU5ckDHb7WOP8QwqsBegQIFhAG&usg=AOvVaw0n9w33hvX2X73-ZHRe0fcI

I don’t know that I could process wind direction, speed and all those other critical factors if you are on the edge. If I were to lose the engine on takeoff. I usually try to identify where I can put it down when I am filing my flight plan and then recite to myself where I will put it down as I am taking off. I don’t think I would try the turn from anything less than 1500’.

Yeah, but…. Idle throttle and coarse prop have residual thrust rather than the drag of a windmilling prop pushing a dead engine. plan for 800-1000 FPM descent rate dead stick and best glide. 2x standard rate turn is approx 30* bank at Vbg (90 KIAS). Stall clean is 67, so some good margin there. However, you need approx 240* of turn to reverse course and align with the final. that is 2/3 of a minute at 2x standard rate turn. And the sink rate is going to go well beyond your wings-level 800FPM perfectly flown deadstick descent. If you have diverted 30% of the lift vector into the turn, you’re now coming down at 1200-1330 FPM. Add the startle factor, and it just won’t work. This exercise, as demonstrated, reminds me of all the wannabe hedge fund stud traders I crossed paths with years ago who could paper trade their way to a 4.0 sharpe ratio and immense riches. Seldom did it work out in real time and with real money. I’ll stick with small deviations from the upwind heading, a landing wings-level with as little energy as possible, and a good takeoff briefing so I’m not making things up under stress. -dan

That’s a nice one one can at least practice wing level, trimming for sensible speed, at 50ft they will know if they will make it or not ! This makes the manoeuvre with lot of tailwind very tricky ! I once practiced in M20J, it needs more than 1000ft agl in calm wind to make full 360 turn, one can get in less than that with some headwind. However, less than 800ft, it looks like it has to be 180 turn with tailwind landing (or 270 turn to taxiway or cross runway). In glider, one can do 360 turn and land into wind after cable break at 400ft agl

Kind of hard to practice that… But the video is informational regardless of the success or failure. I know that since I fly the exact same plane, this will be imprinted on my brain forever. just hoping I can overwhelm the instinct to pull up…

Yes the video has that caveat about 4000ft-6000ft runway with all disclaimers but still fall short of a conclusive demo: looking at wind conditions, it seems like nice calm day to do a demo rather than landing with “15kts gusting 25kts” in the tail The problem with “impossible turn” into opposite runway comes with “50 shades of grey” of aeronautical decision making, I can see how it works with cross runways or long runways in clam winds, however, I still don’t get is wrong with landing ahead into wind? they are survivable even with trees and obstacles? If the terrain ahead is completely not survivable one is better off taking off with tailwind (to turn into wind landing) or start 360 turn back to runway after liftoff (while engine is running)? Even experienced pilot can’t make “impossible turn”, two years ago, a Thunderbirds Commander, AOPA Safety Guru and one of the most accomplished GA pilot passed away after attempting impossible turn in C177. https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/193166/pdf A sobering lesson for many of us: land ahead unless you are overhead !

My understanding from the video was that she landed on the same pavement she departed from. There is another runway at the airport, but she always departed 01 and returned to 19.

Follow the money....

She stated at the beginning that she was only going to use the first 4000 feet = 1210 m of runway, and based on her runway exit, she used a bit less than that. English and European fields are generally smaller than American airports, but I've taken my C in and out of 2000' = 610 m grass runway, but never loaded heavy. I've also been based for almost a decade at 3000' paved fields with few options, but am now getting spoiled with 5000', full length taxiway and multiple Approaches.

I recently interacted with Scott, also privately and I will never again nor will I watch his content. I did watch this video just to see what he had to say and it's more of the same from him. He is not a truth seeking individual, is arrogant and presumptuous and unwilling to hear, really listen to, the other side. That's my opinion of him. And this video confirms it for me. He will not admit that yeah sure G100UL is way worse on certain materials than 100LL. No, he seems to think that it's either us dealing with whatever the fallout to switching to G100UL will be or not flying at all. Well ok, sir, have that position. But at least be honest about it and don't pretend getting a new paint job, o rings, gaskets and sealants is just easy peasy and super cheap to do and everyone will be able to continue to fly. Be honest and say that all GAMI did was test on a single 172. Be honest and say that your tiny leak became a major leak very quickly. Say it how it is. G100UL eats most of the materials used until now and most of the planes will need extensive investment to make them compatible with G100UL, if at all. And no, 100LL doesn't have the same effect. It's present but way way less. Bah it's all just so stupid. Someone in the comments of his video says it well: "This problem would have been solved 30 years ago if the EPA and FAA had simply told the industry back when lead was removed from auto fuels that leaded avgas would be sunset in 20 years and they thus had that long to find a solution. This would have forced the airframe, engine and fuel makers to work together aggressively to find a solution and I am 100% confident a solution would have been found." This is the real problem. We were let down by regulations. But more on the side of certification. Hopefully stuff like this will be a solution (although I'm not holding my breath):

If all you want is XM and not ADS-B in you can get a GDL-51 used on Ebay for between $400 and $500. But you can also get a used GDL-52 there as well and save a few hundred dollars. Other Benefits: The GDL-5X series adds AHRS so you will get synthetic vision on your Aera 796. It also offers the ability to bluetooth more than one device, such as a tablet or phone, which of course a GXM antenna didn't have. I have had my GDL-52 for a few years and I really like it. I also have an Aera 760. No regrets on either . The unit being on the glareshield is a non-issue. You can wire the Aera and the GDL 796 together power and data: https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/aera795datapowercable.php?clickkey=20142 If you're really concerned about heat, I added one of these to my GDL-52 since I'm in Texas: https://www.ebay.com/itm/326232198845?_skw=garmin+GDL52+heat+shield&itmmeta=01K43AK1MQ410T7B0K2AK2KK16&hash=item4bf4f44ebd:g:~QIAAOSwjchmu4-3&itmprp=enc%3AAQAKAAAA8FkggFvd1GGDu0w3yXCmi1eyp3x8I%2Fs1Btxy0dFt6x6w2YyLHRpg5wt3wZui21zsCD1YVRVS1kpPHQ3NZUMDOz2sQeeCTELa%2Fp6Cl5kX2h8e1QWm5sv9ezOycs4IkaOIX8AAdfvSnFl2mSpeShl2uKIssPqtVj35Bkh8CDUbDR213xlWz5j3dTunrLHl%2BuW3MGYtpWyM27yUHtNteepfv1WIr4nMzazhzMCBJZw28cG6an30u%2BKMk1%2BpWI7KoLns9kN7%2BVv9I3gxPB058KRh8xyCt9WOYItLd2ezgke2toP%2FKVIftWjzdswcAghFM2hGsQ%3D%3D|tkp%3ABk9SR76azOqgZg

think I answered my own question, only need XM, have ADSB through GTX345 transponder, there is a GDL51 receiver that can be outfitted with a small external antenna, receiver stays under glareshield, small antenna gets mounted on glareshield

Scott Perdue wrote: “I have to add a mea culpa- I got the AOPA Baron Fuel Leak at Oshkosh wrong. There was a 100LL leak, but there was also a G100UL leak and the culprit was an overfill and the cork gasket failed. Just wanted to correct the record. Once a video is up I can't really edit it without taking it down completely. I also made a note in the video description.” It was highly public with the G100UL leak on the Baron with the black goo under the wing as Osh24. I’m not sure where Perdue obtained his background research for this video. I suspect GAMI? Certainly makes it appear that Flywire is GAMI’s new advertising spokesperson. https://flyeagle.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/AOPA-Baron-Fuel-Cells-Report.pdf "Given the areas of stain and stickiness observed during the receiving inspection, we expected the left hand auxiliary cell to leak as well. However, the stickiness could have been caused by seepage into that cavity. The stickiness of the leaking main cells was in keeping with the number of leaks found. There is no doubt the patch may have been partially loose given its location however, the extent of the detachment in situ is in question. The removal and subsequent handling would have further separated the repair. The important question is why the repair began to detach. It may be possible that the missing internal rubber may have allowed the solvents in the fuel to penetrate the fabric and the exterior rubber coating and then getting beneath the external repair. This is most likely the reason given how the repairs are bonded." There’s more to the story than “move along folks nothing to see here” that Mr Braly likes to suggest. It’s striking that Mr. Perdue would suggest in a video that “surprise, it was only 100LL that leaked.” This suggests that his video isn’t researched and educated but just parroting support.

Wow! Just over half the displacement, and almost a third heavier. Not sure I can take an extra 75 lb on the firewall, and they cleverly don't say if the 335 lb weight includes oil and coolant. Lycomung advertises 258 lb dry weight, and 6 quarts of oil is ~9-10 more pounds.

yep, chances are the GXM42 is shot, lasted 4 or 5 years, the only thing I do not like about the GDL52 is its sheer size, copilot view blocked

Nicely done!

She's great. A lot to consider and I suspect the hardest part is forcing yourself to point down rather aggressively and holding off lowering the gear as long as possible.