midlifeflyer

No, but I'd say perceiving a nonexistent threat is.

I'll go with yours, not rear-ended, but he's blocking the 10 cars behind him. behind him. Safe? Perhaps. So is staying home in both cases. But I don't think I questioned the "safety" of blocking the runway or a taxiway or a road, and I think we're now back to unprofessional and foolish, aren't we?

We might just be disagreeing on the semantic use of "objectively." I don't think of a decision based on a mistaken belief to be "objective." IOW, "Well, I thought the light was green so I went into the intersection" is not an objective decision in my book.

I dunno @MikeOH. Sure, there’s gonna be the “whatta jerk” vitriol. Just this past year or so we’ve discussed a Mooney pilot flying into a tower while on an instrument approach, a Mooney pilot or two who seems to be clueless how to load and fly an IAP and indeed even how to fly headings and altitudes. Now we have a Mooney pilot who stops dead in the middle of a busy runway for no objective reason. (Doing what one thinks is safe because they don’t know how it works is subjective.) These kinds of events reflect badly on pilots. They reflect badly on GA. Worse yet, they reflect badly on Mooney pilots. So, yeah, I understand your feelings about it but I understand the human need to vent, especially in a Mooney forum, especially since it’s pretty harmless. None of us have the authority to take his certificate away, The controller tongue-lashing? Meh. A bit unprofessional but understandable and pretty mild. The Bozo go-around pilot piling it on? Uncalled for. But I think both are pretty irrelevant to the pilot knowledge /error discussion.

Agreed.

Agree. Not only unprofessional or foolish but the exact opposite of "Exit the runway without delay at the first available taxiway or on a taxiway as instructed by ATC."

I do it All. The. Time.

I was chewed out by another pilot. I was approaching on a 45 to my non-towered home base. Another aircraft called “right downwind.” I keyed the mic and said, “Raleigh Exec is left traffic.” Then “right base,” so I repeated. “Shut the f#$@%k up!” came the reply. “I didn’t want to declare an emergency.” I’ll let you folks decide whether it was deserved. Maybe I was wrongfully “playing cop.” I later captured the audio from LiveATC because it was pretty soon after the Watsonville mid-air and we are a little busier, so I was going to use it in an airport communications program. (I captured it mostly because of another communication with a different airplane once I was in downwind.) By a controller, no. Not even when I’ve made a mistake. Not even at a Bravo.

Question for you. Would they even issue a LAHSO clearance for that runway? Looks like only about 2500’. Yes, that Mooney was able to hold short, and lots of folks could too, but I don’t see that as being in the comfort zone for enough aircraft for it to be in Tower’s comfort zone either, especially at a busy place like FRG (yes, been there a few times). But to the second point. I made the comment about the pilot error in not clearing the runway on the video. Got a quick reply saying, but he wasn’t cleared to cross it.” So, apparently there is way and not just for the pilot in the video.

“LAHSO operations in effect” is generally broadcast on the ATIS but either way, the requirement for a specific airplane to “land and shod short of runway XX” needs to be part of the landing clearance. Otherwise the runway you were cleared to land on is yours from end to end, although subject to the requirement to exit without delay. “Without delay” in this situation without a specific taxiway designated would have been to cross the runway and turn off at the first available taxiway. Don’t confuse crossing a crossing runway with turning on to it. Turning onto a crossing runway requires a clearance. Sure, Tower “coulda” said to turn onto it - if it was empty and being used as a taxiway that day but they didn’t need to, so no absolution was necessary.

Pretty sure you mean “Farmingdale.” “Framingham” is in Massachusetts.

I agree he was just being cautions. The problem was he was being unnecessarily cautious due to a lack of knowledge and caused problems for others. That doesn't excuse either the controller's barking or the snarky other pilot, but it is the pilot's fault. Or, the pilot can chalk it up to a nasty controller and figure he did everything just fine and do it again next time.

Based on the video, I'd say there probably was more than enough. When they show both aircraft, the Bo is further away from the Mooney than the full length of the runway. I am going to disagree with the use of the term "expedite" here. This wasn't about not "expediting" exiting the runway. It was about coming to a dead stop on the active runway instead of exiting "normally."

I don’t know what if anything was edited, but all I saw was a pilot stopping in the middle of a runway for no reason instead of exiting the runway without delay (AIM 4-3-21.). With another airplane in short final, I can understand the controller’s annoyance (without condoning the harshness). Apparently, the pilot incorrectly thought they had to stop for a crossing runway or receive a clearance to cross it. If it goes beyond the phone discussion with Tower, looks like a good Compliance Program candidate.

They were. My first KNS 80 experience was entering waypoints for mountain passes in Colorado. Had to be high enough for VOR line of sight, but, having not that long before flown nothing more sophisticated than two VOR receivers, it was better than sliced bread!

That may be true for larger aircraft but for most of the 30+ piston singles I've flown, the highest published flap speed is within the "normal" range of final approach submergent speeds and, in retracts, below Vlo. I'm including Pipers (Arrows, Comanches), Cessnas (Cutlass), Bonanzas (C33 series 145 vs 117. In a few (Cessna 182RG; later Bonanza A36 models), they are higher but no higher than Vlo. I don't think any I've seen have higher Vfe than Vlo.

Two techniques I’ve seen fairly regularly. Some pilots choose to deploy approach flaps before gear on instrument approaches. It’s also common to drop gear will drop both gear and approach flaps at the same time and use that technique regardless of approach speed, so long as within Vlo. (I think we had an example of this earlier in the thread)

I was hoping you would step into the discussion. Thank you for confirming that.

Based on....? I don't get the regulatory connection between the max "smooth air" speed and a flap limitation unless the air is not smooth. Is there one?

So, according to your read, T/O flaps are ok up to 194 KIAS?

I sure don't. Some Mooney models do have the dual flap limitation. This is from a J (KCAS in left column' KIAS in right). "A" J because only some years have it. Others don't. There's also no dual Vfe in the K or E or C models I've looked at.

I've been in the 10 KIAS below VLO with most airplanes I fly including the Ovation. I've also been surprised to not see two flap limitations. but when an airplane has only one, I treat is as an overall limitation to the use of flaps. The alternative is that you can deploy takeoff flaps at any speed. That may be true, 10 degrees flaps doesn't do much in any Mooney I've flown, but I'd have to be convinced. Fortunately, in my case, the addition of any flaps waits until already on the FAS, I'm already below 110 KIAS, so it's not an issue.

Not once in the almost 14 years I’ve used one. My strategies. Mount in a way that allows airflow around it. Keep the screen brightness low while still readable (bright screen = heat) Turn screen off when not actively used. Have it already charged so you don’t have to charge while using. Don’t leave it in the airplane when you land for lunch (and in a shaded spot during preflight).

In the beginning there were only ForeFlight and WingX in the iOS space. They ran neck and neck for several years, leapfrogging each other with new features, with the usual zealous arguments between their users. The two interfaces were different from the beginning; two developers coming at the same issue from different directions. At some point. ForeFlight pulled way ahead in market share and WingX development pretty much stagnated. We can speculate on the reasons, but I think you are right about the interface being the general issue.

I run it on my Android phone too.