Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/10/2021 in all areas

  1. In general, I’d say just participating in MS means most of us are trying to reduce our rate from 1:100,000 hours. Safety protocols, knowledge and judgment(risk mgmt) going up all help our rate to go down. All 3 can be gleaned from the limitless posts scattered throughout MS relating to each individuals need for information specific to their situation. I’d say just having a place like MS for us all to read about others experiences reduces our odds from the general 1:100,000. As aviatoreb and aggiepilot said, there are conditions that can affect each individuals odds both higher and lower than 1:100,000. More of those who take actions to reduce their risk will in more cases than not lower their chances of a fatal accident while others who go out of their way to take riskier actions will increase their chances of a fatal accident. Averaged out those two groups may well end up at about a 1:100,000 rate. Which group do you want to be a part of??
    5 points
  2. I did so twice today! My trusty steed took me two whole thousand feet into the dim, overcast sky and we streaked thirty whole nautical miles above the trees and ponds to my EAA chapter meeting with lunch. After which, the temperature not having risen measurably since I arose at 0700, we shivered on the ramp and added fluid and bled my right brake. Skies not having cleared or warmed per forecast, I then returned home via direct GPS routing at the same illustrious altitude. Temperature of 2°C does not give one confidence to enter the overcast a few hundred feet above; indeed, I had to run almost half Carb Heat to make the obstinate needle rise to the top of the orange stripe (10°C) on my trusty Carb Temp Gage. Almost a full hour in the logbook . . . Two safe landings, both gentle and smooth, one a greaser followed by a poor-to-middling rollout. But I cheated death twice!
    4 points
  3. Survived another one today. I must be lucky. Beautiful MVFR flight flown IFR to exercise the TKS and live up to my commitment to fly at least every 10 days (WX permitting) in 2021. The views down through the thin 2500 broken ceiling of snow-covered northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin were something else. And Bessie’s Diner was, as always, there to keep my caloric intake in the green. https://www.bessiesdiner.com
    4 points
  4. My youngest finally got a chance to finish his check ride. I was listening on liveatc and watching on FlightAware my heart was flipping.
    3 points
  5. I picked up 25 lbs useful load in my C by reducing the size if the pilot's belly . . . . Time to do it again!
    3 points
  6. One point that I have not seen discussed that I think is a huge advantage is cadence timing in regard to sink rate. I fly the Airbus 320 series and I don't know what the FAA was referencing about only going below 20 ft because I have heard both 10ft and sometimes 5ft if the landing is a floater and the system has time to say it before going through it. The cadence of hearing 50 40 30 20 10 is invaluable to avoiding smacking it in on landing and helping to identify when to flare for the touchdown. I.E. if she is barking out the numbers rapid fire you know to rotate the flare early (before 20 is called) and help slow down the sink rate not pull back the power yet and slowdown the sink rate. If on the other hand you hear the cadence in a slow even pace you will rotate to flare after the 20 callout and start pulling the power after 30. At night it's very valuable to backup what you think your eyes are seeing but some airport runways have the black hole effect and this just confirms where you are. When I got my mooney I was excited to see it had a radar altimeter but soon realized it was worthless to help me in the flare regime as there is no voice commands from the device I had to be looking outside at that time. Thus the invaluable and required insurance to have an instructor for my first 1 hour of transition training to help reset my pitch picture and not try to flare at 20 ft off the runway was money well spent. I still sometimes flare 1 to 2 ft off the runway when I have not flown in a while thinking I'm right there when in reality I'm still high. This would help in that regard immensely and I can see why airline pilots have been flocking to install this into their GA aircraft.
    3 points
  7. EXACTLY! Sadly, I only fly with immediate family for just this reason. Look at your policy; most are only $100K sub-limits for passengers. IIRC, Avemco has only $100K limits for people ON THE GROUND, too! Frankly, if the industry continues to jack up premiums, I'm going cancel hull coverage and risk eating the value of the plane. I want the $1M liability coverage and, almost more importantly, the legal defense. While it will suck to lose the plane, a PI lawsuit can do FAR more damage to my family's financial well-being.
    3 points
  8. I know that some people like @mike_elliotthave experienced this on a personal level like nobody else. We honor all the pilots who lost their lives and sympathize with anyone who has felt their loss. We appreciate the tremendous efforts to reduce accidents being done by groups like FAA Safety, Air Safety Institute, Wings, Mooney Summit, Mooneyspace, and others. I sincerely wish that the Bill Gilliland Foundation would never need to send another check again, but until fatal accidents can be entirely prevented (without eliminating aviation), we really appreciate you being there for pilots and their families. Thank you.
    2 points
  9. I have to agree with this. It was my own closest call. Plans to stay overnight were rapidly changed to an immediate late afternoon departure, to beat incoming weather the next morning. My destination was beyond impending bad weather at the time, but would be clear in the morning. So I set out, intending to see what it was like. Took off tired without a planned stop. ATC advised me again of weather ahead, and darkness was approaching--all I saw was a layer of clouds. Too tired, and 2+ hours at 10,500, I just soldiered on and asked for vectors between two large storms. Should have landed short . . . . Anyway, after pursuing the lightest-looking clouds for a while, I stumbled into a thin spot, saw ground lights and spiraled down, letting the friendly controller know what I was doing. Went the last half hour below the clouds with great visibility, had the airport all to myself for a strong, gusty, direct crosswind landing and awkward taxi to the hangar. Had a stiff drink at home, and learned a lot the next few days thinking about that flight and looking at my course tracks on my EFB. Managed to make a local VFR flight again in only a few weeks . . . . Aviation Decision Making is complex and dynamic, and must be evaluated more than just before takeoff. If unsure or uncertain of what you should do, land and think it over. I don't ever want to be in the situation I was in that night, ever again.
    2 points
  10. It's sad and depressing as I think of some of the people I have known who didn't respect the weather and it did them in. Two were former Instrument students who got their ratings with me. Both accidents occurred many years after the training. Both were aeronautical decision making judgment errors, and both fell under the categories I discussed with each of these individuals. After flying with someone for 40 hours of more in getting that rating, as an instructor, you have a pretty good idea of a person's personality. So, one of the last things I extensively go over with a person before sending them to take the test are the 5 hazardous attitudes. I'll tell them I'm not judging them (and I'm not), but we go over all of them and I put special emphasis on the ones I think may apply to their personality. Many times people will agree, and sometimes they don't. The first one has been written about extensively. It was the Cirrus that took off from Reno one dark and later stormy night on a flight back to Oakland. The plane was not turbocharged, but did have inadvertent TKS. The plane picked up ice and went down by Donner Lake. The pilot pulled the chute way beyond the airspeed permitted for pulling the chute. His last words, casually said, were, "I'm picking up ice and I'm going down." His main issue was Resignation, so when he let things get bad, he let it happen to him. The second one was equally troubling and occurred a number of years after the training. This one involved a well known attorney who was doing a night flight to his second home at Pine Mountain Lake. He wasn't instrument current, but that wouldn't have made a difference to the outcome because the field was way below minimums, like it was totally fogged in. He tried to get in VFR--unsuccessfully. He was the nicest person you could ever meet. You would never know about his anti-authority, invulnerability attitude. We had discussed it. It cost him and his soon to be wife their lives. Then there was the accident that occurred over the Tehachapis in a thunderstorm that took the wings off of a Rocket a few days after I had met and talked with the pilot at a high altitude seminar in Sacramento organized by my good friend Dr. Bob Achtel. (I remember that seminar particularly well because that was and to this date the lowest IFR landing I have made. Adam Fineberg was in the right seat going to the seminar with me. At 200 feet we saw the red approach lights that allowed us to go down to 100 feet where I saw the runway threshold and landed. You couldn't see the top of the Control Tower). Anyway, I digress. He was a software engineer who just had to get to LA. I remember the day. The weather was just terrible. He left a wife and 2 month old baby. And then there was the accident of the Acclaim Ultra near Deer Valley 1½ years ago. Several days earlier Mark had flown me over to Minden to pick up my plane after the GFC 500 installation. OK, that's enough.
    2 points
  11. Before. Certainly you'll note the RMI and state of the art LORAN. During: After will be once the GFC 500 is installed!
    2 points
  12. I wonder if he tires of hearing that..? Probably depends on the forum he is hanging out in... I’d have to go look in MathSpace... Best regards, -a-
    2 points
  13. AP for the win! Today’s Flying Logic Prize is awarded early, to aggiepilot! We are much safer to be flying a Mooney... The math just got more complex... it is a study of related rates... Get off the couch, go fly! It eliminates the sedentary lifestyle... Riding the bike to the airport is too dangerous... time to get that hangar home! Pretzel logic.... The hangar home would be perfect for Erik... a perfect place for all those bikes... Best regards, -a-
    2 points
  14. Yep, anything that large and powerful, with a brain the size of a peanut frightens me !!
    2 points
  15. True, in fact there could be times when you'd decide not to file a claim to avoid the knock on effect of getting dropped or an increase in premiums. Certain items have to be considered normal wear and tear. And if that is of concern, don't let anyone fly your airplane. For damage that falls in between insurance claims and the normal wear and tear, I stand by my original statement. If I didn't think the "partner" would immediately reach into his own pocket to cover any such damage immediately and without asking... he wouldn't be my partner.
    2 points
  16. Your mathematics is not correct. The data stated is a death rate of p=1 per 100,000 hrs, so take p=.00001 The probabilities don't add lilac that - Just to point out your error. Suppose a person flies 200,000 hrs in their lifetime. Then your calculation would say they have a 200% chance of dying. Or more sobering - if they fly 99,999 hrs then since 100,000 is a 100% certainty of death, then they will die in the next hour. There are a few pilots running around with 50,000 hrs. The proper way of dealing with a specific (but dubious) assumption that p=0.00001 and they are independent and independently distributed (each hour has the same probability - they don't change over time - and also those probabilities don't effect each other), is P(death in n hours of flying)=1-(1-p)^n, which says 1-p is the probability you don't die in 1 hour. (1-p)^n is you don't die in n hours. 1-(1-p)^n is you do die in n hours. (but this isn't right either since a) clearly probabilities are changing over time, like maybe you lower your probability in time due to experience? Or maybe you become more bold? Or maybe you eventually become an old and crappy pilot who should hang it up? ...ie challenging the independence and identical concept - AND what we really want is the probability that you might die in any one of the previous hours, so some kind of sum should be involve, but lets skip this since the complication is not important here - what I stated is the first thing I said, 1-(1-p)^n. 1-(1-.00001)^1000=0.009950215753607. which is very close to 0.01 but it is difference, and the difference grows with n. 1-(1-.00001)^10000=0.095163034385241 (so that is not 0.1) 1-(1-.00001)^100000=0.632122398231753 (so that is not 1=100%). 1-(1-.00001)^200000=0.864666070117244 (so that is 86% and not 200%). But then I very much also doubt the independence. Plus that 1.e-5 initial number is across the pilot population. I very much doubt it is uniform - that said we do not know which kind we are individually. That is a critique of the math only. The message is correct. Flying is dangerous. However, we are a certain kind of people. I argue that many of us may well have taken up another dangerous activity if not flying - with comparable or worse stats. E.g. sailing, canoeing (yes stats are worse than flying), bicycle riding, or couch sitting (I read once but lost the stats of those who sit on the couch more than a certain number of hours per day - like 8 - are horrific due to diseases of sloth). So what is really relevant - is how do these stats for flying compare to something else we might be doing instead. I ride bicycles. knock on wood. Its worse than flying.
    2 points
  17. I just spoke to Jack on a referral from Parker. After talking to him and reviewing this advertisement, I advised him that he should drop his price from $49,900 to $44,900. At $44,900 I think it represents a good value with the low total time, the Bladders, the new Top Prop and some of the nice maintenance items he has incorporated and will give the new buyer a nice platform to build a good first Mooney on. We discussed me selling it for him but after commission and transportation to TX, I advised Jack that he would be better off to keep it up there, reduce the price and get it sold locally. Jack's number is above on the advertisement. Please give him a call if you a looking for a well kept early Model Mooney. For the record, I am not receiving anything for this referral. Just want to see a good Mooney go from on good owner to the next. Jimmy
    2 points
  18. Dear all, I had a similar problem with my O2 when I bought it last summer: Whenever I applied full power (e.g. takeoff run) the alternate-air annunciator got engaged. Because I experienced some problems with the flap micro-switches just before, I focussed on the associated micro-switch in first place - however it worked fine. Inspecting the air-filter came next. Looking at its date of manufacturing (12'2005) it still seemed to be the original install from Kerrville - 15years old. Intensive cleaning only gave little improve, if any. So I ordered & installed a K&N filter (and filed the 337 form, of course). However - the symptom of flashing alternate-air annunciator at full power (caused by opening of the alternate-air door) resumed to exist. At slightly higher MAP/RPM settings than before, though. The resolution was quite simple in the end: There was a significant air gap between the magnet and the alternate-air door. This air gap reduced the magnetic flux and thus the magnetic force significantly (compared to the value given in the service manual). Adjusting the position of the magnet in relation to the door easily solved the problem (there are two screws holding the magnet in place). As a result I have a brand new air-filter with low flow resistance installed I have slightly better power during take-off (ram air instead of warm air) and up in flight levels (lower flow resistance) I got rid of an irritating indication during take-off while still being able to open the alternate door manually if necessary.. Best regards, Matthias
    2 points
  19. HI MS, We just closed on N9150V and would like to publicly thank the forum for all your wonderful support!!!!! I am sure the new owners will pop up here somewhere and can look forward to participating in the extremely high-value community. My software deal fell through ("Time kills all deals") so my wife and I are aiming some of our proceeds at some recently occurring medical expenses (our youngest son was in a very serious car wreck but is now out of the woods and healing quickly ) ....and on the lighter side learning to sail! We are looking for an entry level trailer sailboat (Catalina? O'Day etc??? 22-27 ft) that we can use to have fun and learn as a step to eventually becoming semi-full time catamaran cruisers in a few years. To supplement that activity, I am planning on taking sailing classes and looking for daysail/passage crew opportunities in the coming year or two. Anyway, thank you again for all your contributions, encouragement and support and I'm off to those blue-er pastures, although being water not skies (for now). That said, BLUE SKIES and Tailwinds to you all! Kind regards, Stephen Holcomb Formerly KHAE
    1 point
  20. I recently purchased an M20K. It has a Garmin 600 PFD/MFD but also still has the vacuum system intact with an artificial horizon. How much weight would I save by removing the vacuum system?
    1 point
  21. I have Progressive lenses due to an astigmatism and also some close vision issues. I think they're great for flying, though no where in the price range of readers. IMPORTANT NOTE: I went for years to one place for my glasses, but they closed. Eventually had to go to a new place and HATED the glasses they made. Apparently the lenses I originally was getting had a very wide MID RANGE (Progressive lenses have an hour glass shape in the view area). Once they fixed that I was very happy again with them. Not sure if it is a lens manufacturer difference or just how they make them. But be sure to discuss this with the Eye Doc and whomever is actually selling you the glasses.
    1 point
  22. A GNS530 will have the same support as a 430W. Navdata supported, but unknown how long Garmin will support them with parts/maintenance. They are good units. They work well. They can do almost anything the newer ones can. The problem is the installation cost for a 430 or 530 is similar to a Garmin GTN 650 or 750. Yes, purchase price was less for the 20 year old 430/530 technology, but you paid a lot either way, and then you’re left with old technology at the end of its supported life. If you currently had a 430 and it died, slapping in another 430 probably makes sense because there’s no install cost.
    1 point
  23. My hangar is equipped with the old T8 fluorescent lights (4 tubes per fixture X 16 fixtures). As the fluorescent tubes fail, I've been replacing them with ballast compatible LED tubes. What a difference! What an up-grade! LED tubes are instantly bright in cold weather and seem to last many times longer than the fluorescent tubes.
    1 point
  24. Agree. Probably good to raise to @Jonny to cascade internally as appropriate. I'd suggest the OP follow up with at least a call and/or note to the appropriate folks at Mooney. There's no way the corporation will prosper if things like this aren't addressed and remediated now and going forward.
    1 point
  25. The cheapest is Android tablet (has GPS) for about $100 and a Stratux.me for about $100 and droidefb or Avare. It has worked great for me for 5 years. I could buy the $1000 box for the Skyview, But there is some chance I may make a format converter to do GDL55 to GDL99 but other project are in the way.
    1 point
  26. I find this to be interesting and relevant. https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/overview/key_data.html It is the rate of accident and unintentional injury deaths including violence. I asserted on here, that increased risk do to aviation as an activity may not disappear for many of us if we would stop aviation, but rather we would likely end up taking up another comparable activity, like sailing, hunting, canoeing, and so on. In other words - if we quite flying but then take up sailing as a decision to mitigate risk, we may have done nothing, or maybe even made it worse. If we quite flying and take up sailing for other reasons, then great. So that cdc page describes 214,000 unintentional deaths in a year vs 323 million population ( I am not researching that for real so I am just taking these numbers off hand as a for instance, so please forgive me). That would then be a roughly p=6.5 e -4=0.00065 mortality rate per year by all accident causes, from cars, to falling off ladders and so on. (Btw ladders scare me - I don't climb ladders - its not a rational decision thing but I get afraid of heights on ladders which is weird because I am not at all afraid of heights flying. Or even on the balcony of tall buildings). Note that this is bigger than the rate by flying 100 hrs per year which is roughly 1.e-5. By roughly a factor of 6.5. Because on average most people have some kind of "flying like" risk built into their routine. So asking what is the chance of dying by accidental death in a 75 year period (under the absurd assumption that the rate stays constant and also that it is independent) would compute to be, 1-(1-.00065)^75=.048 so call it 5%. 5% chance of dying in your lifetime by some tragic accident of some sort. 1 in 20 people.
    1 point
  27. What goes around comes around. The same 25 need to go again. Two layoffs, three job changes and a 600 mile relocation caused many lifestyle changes, not all for the better.
    1 point
  28. Yeah, I take it back. That looks ok. get rid of that mud dobber nest though!
    1 point
  29. I feel the same way. But I personally knew two others, one was a fixed wing and balloon pilot of note who died in a balloon accident, the other in a fixed wing. The first was the fellow who got me into flying to begin with, long time ago. From those I learned the most important rule of flying, it comes even before "always fly the plane." The rule is "do your own shit." It means that no matter how busy, important, entitled, or rich you are, if you are going to pilot an aircraft, you care for it yourself, you don't rely on others to do anything related to the safety of the craft, ever. You will have to pardon the language, in this case it is meant for emphasis. Amend that. My number is three. The third was a lifelong bush pilot, former Delta captain with umpteen thousand hours who died checking a guy out in his new Kodiak. I flew with him personally several times, one of the best pilots I have ever flown with. It occurred to me that, between the three guys I knew, they had over 20,000 hours, none were low-time pilots.
    1 point
  30. Yes, it does leak out at the sump drain but doesn't seem to be originating from there. The browner stain farther outboard is the first indication of fuel leaking along the wing - the lighting isn't good in this photo, but that is basically goo that flowed with leaking fuel. It seems to flow downhill from there inside the wing and drip out at the opening around the sump drain...and past that down to seams in belly panels. As it happens, the cover plate at the sump drain has a cutout that allows one to see the nipple and the hose clamp...and would allow any leaks to drip out immediate at the drain rather than build up. Also, any leaks that originate elsewhere are likely to make their way down to that point and drip. The drip isn't constant or even evident, though. I think that the leak stops after the fuel level drops by 3 or 4 gallons, so that would also rule out the sump connection itself. I do know the mechanic who installed it for the previous owner. I talked with the previous owner just yesterday and he recalled that there was some leaking just after the bladders were installed, and that the mechanic had to add some clamps to interconnects. Unknown which side or which cells. So there's that anecdote. I also have met the gents at Griggs (current STC holders) and 76N is not far from my usual routes. But they are very busy and my local mechanic thought it would be good experience for me to work on this one and report back to him. Now that I have emptied the cells, I will pull access panels and check for any evidence of exterior seeping. I hope to see something but failing that, will just retorque interconnect clamps and clean everything prior to refilling to check for leaks. Cliff
    1 point
  31. I had more or less the same issue years ago. See Replacing the mechanical fuel pump did the trick. The engine runs fine because the RSA 5 fuel servo works across a wide range of pressure by design.
    1 point
  32. Good news friends! I made one more successful flight. AND the pi-plane is in the avionics shopping receiving some lovely avionics. My wife drove me home - and here I am. Hello Canada! That's Toronto in the distance as I fly just over Oswego, NY on my way south.
    1 point
  33. Flip a coin. It's 1:2 you'll get heads. If you get tails the first time, does that guarantee heads on the second flip? No, the odds are still 1:2 on every flip, regardless of how many times you flip it. As a young college freshman, uneducated about statistics but possessing a scientific calculator with statistical functions, I rolled one die about 40-50 times, punching the number into my calculator. Sure enough, it all averaged to 3.5, which rounds to 4 because I don't have six-sided dice with decimal displays.
    1 point
  34. @aviatoreb's math is more correct, in general, but yes, if the per-hour risk and hours flown are small, multiplying hours by risk is a good approximation. It's when the risk is large or the hours flown is large that this becomes less accurate and his calculation is the broadly correct approach. To put it in perspective, if you flew 100,000 hours in your career, you would not have a 100% chance of dying.
    1 point
  35. And- defend your position as the Dean of MooneySpace.
    1 point
  36. 1 point
  37. Sometimes you will hear somebody say... ‘it wasn’t his time to go...’ I was hassling a work friend about his smoking... it was killing him slowly... he reminded/gave me... ‘we all have to die from something...’ To find memories of Patrick... @pjsny78.... (RIP) Best regards, -a-
    1 point
  38. I barely knew Patrick, but his infectious love of Mooney aviation was all it took to make him memorable... I met Patrick by telephone while I was having difficulty with phone calls... Patrick was working closely with 201er organizing a big NJ Mooney fly-in... Patrick’s lasting memory is a reminder to know your DA before departure... and when close, use every foot of runway available... @patrickf’s handy method of doing T/O calculations is a great solution for the traditional paper / calculation challenges... So... as difficult of a topic it is to cover... there are lessons that are best to be known... to better not repeat... The biggest lesson to be gained from knowing MSers... at least two highly flight-educated Mooney pilots have miscalculated the amount of runway and climb capability of their planes... resulting in the tangling with trees... The really cool part... As terrible as aviation accidents are... they are a very small percentage of the rest of real life’s challenges... Don’t give up flying a Mooney because it is perceived as dangerous... training, tools, and recency are a really good defense. For really dangerous activities... eating French fries, rice, breads and drinking a big soda, while sitting on a sofa for hours at a time.... can be really hazardous for some... Fly On, Go Mooney! Best regards, -a-
    1 point
  39. You can separate questions 2 from 1/3 if it is about the same person. For example, I personally knew Patrick. We met a bunch of times and flew together in each other's airplanes. Also, one of my flight instructor's flight instructor fatally crashed a skyhawk full of passengers just prior to signing my instructor for his checkride. This is why my instructor has a thing about not delaying sign offs. These things really hit close to home. I am getting teary eyed and can't think about it too much more.
    1 point
  40. Thanks Oscar.... The first song is Sweet Disposition (The Temper Trap Cover) by SEAWAVES The rest of the mix is from a producer called Ideal Noise on Sound Cloud. This mix title is "From Russia with Love - Vol. 4."
    1 point
  41. Which installation manual are you looking for?
    1 point
  42. Couple of things to note when the system is doing the PFT test. Closely watch the trim annunciation during the PFT, the trim annunciator should flash 4 times. This indicates the unit is sending 2 up pulses and 2 down pulses to the trim servo and looking for feedback. If you have no trim flashes this normally indicates that the unit is not seeing the regulated trim voltage from the trim servo. After a successful test the system will flash the AP annunciation approximately 12 times. If you don't see a flashing AP annunciation after the PFT, the system could be stuck in the PFT mode. There are some relays used internally to the unit for a attitude ramp test. If these relays fail the unit will not be able to finish the PFT. As others have mentioned always note the position of the MET switch on the yoke, specifically the left side of the split rocker. As the MET switch assemblies age the return springs can get weak or break and will not fully return the switch to a neutral position. If the computer sees that the command for MET is present it will not engage even if it has passed PFT. There are some other issues with the KFC-150 that will cause a PFT test fail like capacitor leakage but it is limited to a manufacture date range of the unit (1993-1998).
    1 point
  43. I’d keep the Hartzell 2 -blade with the B hub.
    1 point
  44. I'd be interested to see what the NTSB final report says. Like most accidents, there is a chain of events that led to this. From what is available, here are the things for us to think about without knowing all the details of this specific accident: 1. Avoid wx that exceeds your capability or the plane's. 2. Don't fly into IMC without an IFR rating. This may seem obvious, but "get-thereits" can drive decisions that put pilots into wx they are not able to handle. 3. Continue practicing and understanding your plane's avionics so that you can use them to shed pilot loading when situations arise. I think of John F. Kennedy Jr's spatial D crash when there was a working autopilot which he never engaged. https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2010/july/pilot/10-mistakes-jfk-jr-made 4. For those of us who are IFR-rated, practice hand-flown approaches down to mins under with a view-limiting device. Also practice it with your coupled autopilot to ensure you know which gates to look for (when the RNAV switches from enroute to terminal, etc.). 5. Circling at mins is a perishable skill. Especially, when executing missed during the circle. Either practice circling enough so that you are comfortable with doing so at mins, or file to a destination that doesn't require it if you are uncomfortable. Circling right under an overcast ceiling with great vis isn't bad, but doing so right at the vis approach limit is much more difficult. 5. If you fly in IMC there are two types of pilots: those who have diverted to a wx alternate and those who will. When mission planning, walk through what you'll need to do to get to your original destination (does that airport have Uber service, or will family come to get you). When I was weekly commuting to see my family, I had my wife get the notifications on FlightAware and she'd track me to see if I was going to my original destination or going to the nearby regional airport with an ILS. We always had a backup plan and a GO/NO-GO decision. This helps fight the "get-thereits". 6. Lastly, have a solid GO/NO-GO decision that you've thought through BEFORE your big family ski trip, or your trip to X destination.
    1 point
  45. I'd like to finish -- or get close to finishing -- my goal of landing at all public airports in California. I figure I've already done more than half (and most of the fun ones, but a few cool ones remain), why not collect them all? 4 trips ought to do it, but there is a seasonal element to it. We'll see how it works out with this covid situation for this winter. 138 down, 110 to go....maybe more than 4 trips.
    1 point
  46. That method works fantastically here on Mooneyspace to rotate pictures and generally fix problems here. So I figured it might work more broadly. -This year I wrote @ carusoam on my taxes hoping my taxes would get done by Anthony. That didn't work. -I am writing a boring government report right now. I try tried the @carusoam method on it but so far no good. -I need to mow the lawn. @ carusoam. No dice. Anthony is not nearly as helpful as he seems.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.