-
Posts
4,145 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
14
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Store
Everything posted by midlifeflyer
-
Non-Towered Pattern Entry from Upwind Side (Poll)
midlifeflyer replied to 201er's topic in General Mooney Talk
That's probably the reason for the term "teardrop" instead of "crossing midfield at [altitude] to return on a 45." The problem I have with the term is the number of pilots who treat is as a teardrop. They say "words mean somehing," but the way we phrase things often leads of mirroring behavior. I notice, for example, that @201er's teardrop depiction actually looks like a teardrop and is the way I see pilots do it all the time. But that is not what the FAA recommends for that entry. Here's the FAA's graphic for comparison. I think there's quite a bit of difference between: (1) flying "clear of the pattern" - 2 miles beyond the patten which may be wider and possibly higher than normal that day (i.e, at least 3+ miles past the runway), then descending to pattern altitude (which will put you another 0.5 to 1 mile away from traffic in the pattern, then turning around for what is basically a 45° entry 3-4 miles from the airport; and (2) a descending teardrop turn into a pattern that has pilots in 152s doing 737 downwinds. -
Paranoia is definitely one of mine. So's a consistent point in time when I deploy it (habits are hard to break), although IFR and VFR and different. But one is actually a bit counterintuitive. I fly a number of different airplanes. Some fixed gear, some retract but, what they have in common is different target landing speeds. As a result, I pretty much always have to use the before landing checklist as a pre-landing briefing. That acts as a big reminder and is the trigger for the later multiple flow/memory confirmations.
-
Just a little of that FAA "invulnerability" hazardous attitude mixed in? There's really no guarantee about this, just ways to mitigate the risk. All most of us do is choose the methods we think will do the job for us. I can guarantee one thing: no one who ever landed unintentional gear up thought they would.
-
Don't forget the twin and Part 135 guys, including even with a crew of two. Out of curiosity, I went to the NTSB accident database and input Part 135 flights landing accidents with the word "gear" in the narrative. I wasn't sure what I would find because many gear-ups are not reported and others are going to involve mechanical failures or other factors (the second hit was a pilot who hit an Elk). But by sheer coincidence, of the 138 hits I got, the third one involved a 15,000 hour scheduled air taxi pilot landing a Baron gear up simply because he forgot to put it down. Obviously one of those junior old farts who rarely flies
-
Non-Towered Pattern Entry from Upwind Side (Poll)
midlifeflyer replied to 201er's topic in General Mooney Talk
I couldn’t answer the first question since whether I do a crosswind to downwind at pattern altitude vs cross the airport above the pattern and return on a 45 (I will not say “teardrop”) depends on traffic flow. As Mr Miyagi might say, “there is no typically.” On the other, I fly approved procedures which pretty much cover everything other than violating the regs, so that was an easy one. -
If I were still living on the extended final to 17R at KAPA, I’d give you a call.
-
Flying by the numbers - Prop/RPM
midlifeflyer replied to Max Clark's topic in Modern Mooney Discussion
I’m in the simplification school of thought. When I do constant speed transition training, I teach there are only three prop positions. Full forward, the optional enroute climb (mostly for noise and vibration)! And whatever cruise setting prop position you choose for that flight. Sure, you are welcome to choose a full forward prop for cruise, but you might consider other combinations for best power or best economy at your cruise altitude. -
And if it is a separate business entity with good value, there’s always your share of it. that’s an asset as much as any investment account or stock ownership in a public company. (Well almost. State laws differ on this.) The real point here is that when we personally cause an accident, we are personally liable. None of the devices we are discussing shield us from that liability. Rather, they are attempts to either (a) shield us from someone else’s liability, as in the aircraft co-ownership LLC, or (b) shield our assets from being applied to that liability. We’ve been mostly discussing (b) asset protection here. And none, from the family revocable trust which provides pretty much none, to an offshore trust on the Isle of Man, which can provide a lot, is perfect or will do the job the right way for everyone. That’s why it a one-in-one issue with a professional. And why we buy insurance.
-
We're seeing things differently. For example, I would not suggest that a Part 135 private charter certificate holder do some public charters.
-
Sorry I don’t follow. Why does only having only one or a few customers make something a sham. Owners often place airplanes in LLCs as an addition layer when they enter a leaseback, a contract with a single entity (and the entity managing the airplane might well be a private club. Corporations sometimes have a wholly-owned separately incorporated subdivision handling aviation for only the parent. They even have Part 135 private charter certificates. If you are saying that in many cases, individual owner place their airplanes in LLCs with no real benefit, I’ll agree. But my experience with LLCs of many types seems different than yours,
-
That depends on a few things. I was in two of those relationships in which the checkout was not logged as dual or not charged for the instruction. In another, And why would an owner be required to offer the airplane to all comers?
-
Just a point of information, 100 hour inspections are not required for rentals.
-
You are right that it's not difficult to sue an LLC and find out who are the people behind it. But it's not always as easy to "pierce the corporate veil" as many people think. The the way I see many single-member or family-only LLCs work, most of the elements of piercing, which come down to, "the member didn't treat the LLC as a separate person, so why should we?" can be discovered right away. Co-ownership LLCs, which do provide some degree of protection to the member who is not flying and to the asset itself, are often just as bad. Except for the fact that I've been seeing it for about 50 years, I would find the amount of misinformation on this subject amazing. I actually had a client once who wanted an LLC for "liability" reasons but refused to do anything to treat it as one, not even something as basic as a separate checking account.
-
Unfortunately, it's not just about WAAS. Being an OEM product has other effects. Some are differences in presentation which is no big deal, but other are substance. I haven't flown with the Mooney flavor but, for example, it you compare the same vintage G1000 from a DA40 and a Cessna, you'll find the Cessna has more capability. The reason is software updates Cessna OK'd which Diamond didn't. I'll try not to rant but while I very much enjoy flying G1000, I'd hesitate buying an airplane with one.
-
Exactly the problem. The lack of an upgrade (and in many cases even an update) path because it’s controlled by an airframe manufacturer that can’t or won’t approve it. As mentioned, it’s not limited to Mooney. And it’s not even limited to replacement. It’s not something I’ve ever looked into from a regulatory perspective, but can one, for example, trash the G1000 altogether and put in something that is STC’d for the equivalent non-G1000 model? Something that only involves money and can be upgraded as one wishes.
-
In this area, we are typically talking about revocable family trusts in which the “settlor’ (the person who creates the trust and adds property to it) is also the beneficiary and can undo the trust at any time while alive. Like any revocable family trust, its two major functions are (1) avoiding probate and (2) providing for assert management if you are incapacitated. I’m not aware of any state in which it provides any liability protection. I suspect that, kind of like LLCs, lots of people think it provides personal liability protection for bad things we do, but it doesn’t. Whether this or any other estate/financial planning mechanism provide you any benefit at all is a discussion between you and a legal professional.
-
What kind of clouds do you refuse to enter? Poll
midlifeflyer replied to 201er's topic in General Mooney Talk
It's part of the data derived from the Skew-T soundings. Since the NOAA site closed, my go to is https://www.flytheweather.com/ but any Skew-T source should provide it. -
What kind of clouds do you refuse to enter? Poll
midlifeflyer replied to 201er's topic in General Mooney Talk
I know it when I see it. -
One of the big differences is what I bolded. For all practical purposes there isn’t any navigable Golf airspace in the US lower 48. You are correct. Except for some small pockets in the mountain west, Class E begins at 1200 AGL, but even that is declining because airports which have instrument approaches start at 700. AGL or at the surface. Head over to SkyVector and pull up a US VOR chart and you can see that. All those magenta vignettes around airport represent Class E beginning at 700 AGL. The rest of the area, 1200 AGL. Higher Class G is relegated to places like this
-
I can't speak to ICAO requirements, but with the possible exception of search and rescue, the services mentioned in your first paragraph are all functions handled by ATC. in the US. Alaska is excepted in the notice because it is different in that respect. Large and remote areas where ATC communication may be sporadic. FSS has zero involvement with radio contact and flight following except in areas without ATC communication coverage. In your second group - opening VFR flight plans is purely an FSS issue and I am concerned about that in a few areas other than Alaska, but the reality is that VFR flight plans in the lower 48 are the exception rather than a rule. On the search and rescue end, there is no need for pilot-FSS air-to-ground or ground-to-ground radio communication required. With a VFR flight plan, automatic search and rescue is based on being overdue. Manual initiation is a communication to FSS by ATC that they've lost contact with no explanation or a phone call. UFOs reports by flight crew would definitely be to ATC in the US.