All Activity

I feel like most of my training was learning how to use the avionics, not necessarily how to fly Instrument. Same with the check ride, can you execute the correct procedures to program, and re-program the avionics in the air (on a GPS approach, now enter a hold on a VOR Radial, reset for VOR approach, whoops which to ILS!). This lines up with the famed $1,000 check-ride button of forgetting to switch the CDI source. I've been sitting here thinking about what it would have been like if there wasn't an autopilot in the plane... I don't have experience to say if it would have been better or worse, only different. Interestingly after I finished my IFR I went to the Mooney PPP where my instructor made me fly the plane by hand! I couldn't remember the last time I had done that. It was hard and fun! I make it a point to hand fly a good amount now.

I'm looking for a 3-blade prop box in S. Arizona or SW New Mexico. Coming up empty with area prop shops. Any one out there have one?

The GFC 500 (including servos) line item was $19,445 when I had it done. Labor has gone up since then I'm sure.

It’s a beautiful day in the neighborhood

No criticism (well, I do hate mnemonics :D). Just a thought. Years ago I divided the before takeoff checks into two separate ones. One was the runup sequence that might be done anywhere. Might be at the hold line. Might be in a dedicated runup area. Might be back in the ramp. On a full-stop taxi back, might not be done at all. The other was at the hold line just prior to entering the runway. That’s where final freedom of control movement (correct has been checked multiple times, starting with the walk-around), trim check, flaps, and other “need to check thus before every takeoff” went.

I was to switching from FlyQ to FF at renewal this year but decided to avoid FF because my experience with all of aviation companies that have been bought by Arcline through the Hartzell acquisition has soured me on PE. That being said, I have seen some buggy behavior out of FlyQ lately. Do you ever see a brief course reversal on the moving map and wide variations in depicted ground speed (35-460kts). Usually only happens for a few seconds.

Had a CO alarm go off in flight and de-cowled to check what’s going on. I see nearly every ball joint and exhaust probe leaking a decent amount. Any recommendations on how to go about repairing? I know how to deal with the exhaust flanges and replace the gaskets there l, but I’m not familiar with how to seal up ball joints or probes.

My team did a 0 issue upgrade on a 1.2 Billion dollar /year system. We ran 600 functional tests. It was a wonderful thing.

I just didn’t want to push that hard.

Is there a pull-up requirement for first class?

Alternatively, you could just move the elevator into appropriate position and trim the pressure out of the yoke. I’ve done lots of soft field takeoffs in various aircraft over the years. With full aft elevator, never once did the aircraft lift off into a departure stall.

Or I could just not update my foreflight version until we see where their coding goes the nav data and charts are just mostly .gov or Jepp data which is what it is

Have you done a 3rd class, I'm not even sure you need a pulse

I will admit I have taken off with full up trim, and I’m here typing right now. Not that big a deal. You notice it at about 40 KTS, then if you have enough runway, throttle back a bit, spin the wheel as fast as you can, then full power. It takes about 100 yards of runway to do it.

How much force does this take? Honestly on most 4-6pax planes it’s some force but I don’t know how someone who can pass a medical or do a pull-up can’t overcome this

Oh come on. Full aft trim…raising flaps on the go around… Let’s see, what are some of the other deadly scenarios that are supposed to be killers that really aren’t?

That does make a lot of sense. The original was a million lines of code, and the AI version is only 100 lines of code. If it duplicates the functions of the original, I'm totally in favor of it. BTW, I'm holding you personally responsible for the outcome.

My poh section V page 12 shows stall speeds vs angle of bank at gross weight. at 0 degrees bank kcas is 59. would I be wrong to assume this aircraft would qualify under mosaic rules as light sport? can other 201 owners check their POH to verify?

Good one. Strong reader?

This attitude is winning lately, and I can't really argue with it. But no one seems to know where the next generation of Senior Developers is going to come from, when there's no time/patience/money for Junior Devs. That's a future problem to be solved by someone else, I guess. In the mean time, the employment landscape for legions of young software developers is a wasteland of filing literally thousands of applications (because both the producers and the consumers of the applications are using AI, natch), who are drowning in bitterness. On the other hand, I'm sure that 50 years ago someone claimed there eventually wouldn't be anyone with enough machine language programming skill to write compilers. Hasn't happened yet.

Kind of a strange quote. One of the G5s is required for the GFC, so you can’t actually get a GFC installed without at least one G5*. And the second G5 is required for all practical purposes if you want to fly IFR. (I’m not sure what backup instruments the STC allows for a G5 AI, but they’re cheap enough that going with two G5s is the choice for most people - it allows the HSI unit to become an AI if your AI unit fails.) * Technically you can install a GFC with a GI-275 or a G3X as the control head, but that would be beyond the budget here.

Isn't it semantics, though, that have caused crashes and even started wars.

First, many remaining motif is defense which cuts any use of anything cloud, many companies don't want their products code on cloud. Second, doing a fairly simple test ai cannot accurately or efficiently create a qt code base ui from motif, whether cloud like anthtropic or train our own models. Third, i can very easily and quickly do it. I can architect in my head, i do that with the estimate. While porting i am making a million design decisions for maintainability, language correctness, security and all the other ilities. Things you cannot train ai to do. Every ai written code i have seen has major problems, security being top, code correctness, design cohesion etc. For me not worth waisting my time on it. Rewriting a 30+ year old code base, usually is never good idea nor in the financial wheelhouse, particularly critical code. Another issue i see with ai, much more than in the good old days of things like stackoverflow is the stupidity of programmers. Them using ai, no longer understand what they use and you get blobs of turds. Most couldn't walk through a code base to save their life because they have had something else do it for them. Large firms code bases are falling apart now because of it. Only going to be hilarious when i retire

I have had it for a few years now. I do really like it.

Meh... that's debatable. I'm not a Luddite about autopilots ,and I'm not saying you're outright wrong. I've had good IFR training experiences with students in autopilot-equipped airplanes. If it's there, I incorporate it early and often in the training (including failing it, though honestly I get to teach plenty of autopilot "failures" that are simply pilot error in using it). And I am definitely not saying an autopilot isn't both an operational and a safety advantage in real-world IFR flying. I'm just not convinced it's "immensely helpful" during training as you say, and I don't really think it's critical for the OP to get one in his airplane right now. My experience may be biased by easy access to a pretty good AATD, which I regularly put IFR students in when we're going to do intensive cognitive stuff: first time making them fully responsible for an entire instrument approach sequence with no help, introducing new types of approaches, etc. The "pause" button in the AATD is incredibly helpful during those exercises, and I guess a reliable autopilot is sort of an equivalent if you're limited to doing all your IFR training in a real airplane.