midlifeflyer

I once looked up a Comanche I used to fly by tail number and found an ADS-B track for a Cessna 152. No, the registration number had not been reassigned.

No need to. We have enough regulations. The AIM and other “guidance” is the FAA’s explanation how to best comply. The problem is pilots who thing “not regulatory” means “can be ignored.” FWIW, my views in the subject: AIM is Non-Regulatory

"I sometimes call it the Utopia book. If everybody did what the AIM says they should do, all of us would be out of jobs. None of us would ever be in any trouble. Because everybody would do everything they were supposed to do….” — Comment by the Administrative Law Judge in FAA v. Scheltema (1990)

I’m a fan of two comms. Like a number of pilots, I organize them based on whom I’m communicating with. And I like the convenience of being able to listen to AWOS/ATIS without going off comm frequency. But I really like the ability to monitor the CTAF at my nontowered destination while still talking to ATC (both IFR and when getting flight following). I like the extra situational awareness that gives me.

AFAIK, only the big Continental ones take off with boost pump off. The Lycoming- equipped have boot pump on for takeoff.

I know it’s been lower but 29.9¢ is the lowest I can remember seeing as a kid.

Agreed. Medical qualification issues is something that CFIs should always have been speaking with their student pilot clients about. My favorite medical strategy story was someone who (before BasicMed) limited himself to sport privileges for three years and them applied for a third class again. The reason was simple. The pilot did some testing for a possible condition. Fortunately, the tests turned out to be negative. But the pilot didn't want to have to list the "visited to health care professionals in the past three years" and possibly open up a can of worms.

Actually, the rationale is irrelevant at this point. It’s embodied in the regulations.

That rationale is why a CFI does not require a second class medical or, for that matter, any medical if not acting as PIC or crew.

You are right about there being not more than a handful. There are probably far more consulting physicians than lawyers who are truly competent at this. Lawyers are better when the medical problem becomes a legal problem, but that's the thing we want to avoid if possible. But I agree - if it's important, get some professional advice. A good senior AME leading the way is worth their weight in gold, but we don't always have that.

At least at the beginning, the FAA's often revolving door of expensive and repeated testing for SIs probably sent more people to BasicMed than any other single factor.

BasicMed since 2018. Easy to get. I asked my PCP before my next annual checkup and sent some information on what it was. “Sure. No problem.” No regrets. I guess it precludes me from flying to Canada and potential ferrying, but I hadn’t been doing either anyway, so, it hasn’t made any difference in my flying or teaching. Reasons were multiple.

In my case, it's coordination and keeping ahead of the game. I have to do the online course every two years anyway. Since I'm getting my annual checkup anyway, why not sync the two? I don't see a downside. And if I need to change docs, I have the extra buffer.

Nope. And I don't expect them to. Not even sure I want them to.

The exact same way I know it's time for a flight review and other time-limited requirements.

I do the same as you.

Just to clarify, you are saying when you engage MET, (1) it takes 3-5 seconds to do anything and (2) once it starts, it won't stop? The only time I've seen something similar, it's been with a KAP 140 and it was a servo issue. I've flown with the KAP 150 but have not come across this, so I'm not sure how similar they are. As an aside, I no longer do AP overpowering tests beyond holding the yoke in place for the brief time it takes to disconnect. I picked up the rationale from the more recent Garmins. In the case of real runaway trim it will fight you and make the out of trim condition worse, and I can't help but think that overpowering when not necessary can't be all that good for the system.

This has got to be the number 1 question I have seen since BasicMed started. Perhaps says something about where our heads are at

It's identical to the requirement for your old Class II medical. It's a check for the possibility of other diseases such as colorectal cancer and can be answered based on medical history alone. I knew that my PCP would question it so I brought her the discussion from the AME Guide. I tell people all the time: your PCP understand medicine; it's your job to educate them on the FAA.

The newest Pipers have push button ignition.

Maybe someone did, but I don't recall anyone arguing to lift flaps first if you limit your final flap setting to the T/O (or partial) position. I think the discussion has been about full flaps and whether to raise them to the T/O position before raising the gear. And I think you use of the word "technique" is just right.

I’ve been curious about this too.

Good point, but treating the GA the same way as a takeoff doesn't necessarily mean gear then flaps. The way the GA is written up in many POH is flaps (T/O) - gear -flaps (remaining). Since we don't takeoff with full flaps, when that's the recommended sequence, I thinks the purpose is to move us from the landing configuration to the takeoff/climb configuration. At least I don't think people are suggesting that flaps before gear means flaps to zero before gear.

Which is exactly why

That's a good point. It hasn't been clearly stated, but I would expect a discussion on a subject like this to be focused on the most critical situation. That's definitely where my thoughts lie.