All Activity

Anything you want?

Many years ago the fuel pumps in my 89 f250 started failing both front and rear tanks. Put some MMO in the tanks and problem never came back. Still to this day running just fine.

Hmmm - sounds like how a lot of things work nowadays. I wonder what you get when you "donate" a Boeing 747-8........

Top Gun didn't think so when they performed my annual. Not surprisingly, I'll take their judgement over the lack of yours.

So by your logic, if I sell you a permit to build on land I don't actually own, and you later discover you can't build anything there, there's no damage? Nothing broke, yet you still paid for something you can't use. That's the same situation here. Damage isn't limited to something physically breaking. Financial harm, like paying for a right you can't meaningfully exercise, is also damage. In this case, the issue isn't whether the STC exists. It's that GAMI sold approval for a product that isn't available at scale, leaving buyers unable to use what they paid for. That is, by definition, financial damage.

Also, I saw your airplane recently. It’s exactly the cheap maintenance nightmare I expected it to be. just as an FYI.

I do from a 63 but I’m in Newfoundland Canada, if you don’t have any luck closer to you let me know. Brian

I get it perfectly. as usual, you do not. I don’t know if your problems are some sort of mental deficiency or just a general reduction in capacity due to age. In order for there to be a lawsuit there needs to be damages. In this case, the stated damages were for a product that didn’t do what was advertised. In this case the product was an STC to allow the use of a specific fuel. unless the other poster has been blocked or prevented from using the fuel, there are no damages. He/she got exactly what they paid for. it’s REALLY not that complicated for most, but for you, I’m sure it is.

I worked in an industry that relied, to some extent, on ratings in "independent" publications. We could usually get the top spot if we "donated" enough. One year, we provided a car for the conference organizers to give away. Got the top pick.

This was shared a while back when we were talking about the Flying Ultimate Issue …. But it has some interesting insight into the new ownership.

Like a joke that you don't get, it's pointless to explain it to you.

No, you paid 400$ for an STC allowing you to use the fuel covered under the STC. are you saying Gami or someone prevented you from using the fuel? how much of the STC’d fuel have you run through your engine?

Understood. Yes. the IFR portion of Flying s not a whole magazine. Perhaps interesting, I recently had a conversation with one of the current Flying editors about this. The y seemed much more upset about it than I am. Yes, it's cheesy. If you're looking for dumbing down, AvWeb currently has a "Great Pick" for a CO detector (scroll down). The cardboard "Spot" that Aviation Safety described as almost worthless about two decades ago.

Yes. And Tim Vasquez was credited this month and Doug Boyd last month. So far, I have not seen one from IFR Magazine that wasn't credited to the author.

The whole thing is a complete Mystery to me.....................I do like the way it smells...............................

Sent me your email address and I’ll email it to you.

Thanks, interesting observations. I will say, in the small Continental we don’t add aggressively…so not as much as instructed. We also generally run it rich mixture. Very different engines for sure. I do suspect it might alter the octane rating and fuel burn rate a little. That might explain exhaust color. Would be really interesting for someone with a test stand to do testing, but I suspect little motivation to spend the money…

I've never used it, but I've never been in a position where it's been recommended either.

You just have to get the silanes to bond to the surface. A smooth surface will give better results. A porous oxidized surface will produce poor results.

I also didn’t vote because my use didn’t fit the poll. But I did notice a negative result. There was a period about 10-15 years ago that I used it consistently on a Continental IO-550A every tankful, mixing per the instructions on the can. I noticed a couple things: - It changed the color of the exhaust deposits in the tail pipe. * In variable throttle position shorter flights the deposits were less charcoal black and more a soft dark grey color. These are flights where you are generally running rich producing more carbon deposits. * On long flights where I leaned out, the typical light grey lead color deposits were slightly darker soft grey color. •• So it seems to change how the carbon forms and deposits. - My electric fuel pump would run quieter. - On my wing walk, which is older weathered black, I could start to see discolored spots that were getting darker. There were screw head “halos” appearing. I immediately stopped using it for fear of damage to the fuel tank sealant. BTW - I never was able to direct, measure or notice any change in engine performance or reliability before using, while using or after discontinuing use.

I wonder what the real difference is between inexpensive products available to consumers and the more expensive products only sold to professionals and if the extra cost of professional application is really worth it. If the consumer products are easy to apply in a couple of hours and last a year, that seems pretty reasonable to me unless the paint is in bad shape and needs professional correction first.

Paid $400 for a product that wasn't as promised.

Paul, as a journalist was a rare breed. He is a master story teller. He knows how to make fun as well as having fun. He loves adventure and has many diverse experiences that allow him to be intelligent and interesting. He knows bullshit when he see's it. He alerts you to said B.S. in a fun and often self depricating way so you don't have to step in it. Paul likes to fly slow AND fly fast. He jumps out of perfectly good airplanes. He knows the difference between sarcasm and being acerbic. He gets me. I like to think I get him. I definitely enjoy picking up whatever he is laying down in the aviation world. When he writes a story like the one shared it makes me less optimistic about my remaining days searching in the void.

You missed my point. Those single articles, in this case only 3 columns of print, comprise the sum total contribution of what used to be IFR. And now you tell us that they are just reprints. Historically, reputable publications would attribute it as a reprint with the original date. Just another case of dumbing down.

Hi all, With so many people upgrading to glass, does anyone have a 1968 M20C manifold pressure gauge lying around they’re looking to get rid off? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk