Andy95W

@FlyingDude just changed his generator for that alternator. (I recommended he keep the generator.) Hopefully he will give a report?

I have always advised against wearing a headset while starting, and when I was actively instructing, would say the same to my students. When the engine starts at idle, it really isn’t making enough noise to damage your hearing and this is your opportunity to listen for anomalies- which isn’t possible if you’re wearing a headset. Also, it keeps you from blowing out your microphone when you yell “Clear prop!” and you don’t have to hear the loud squealing in your headset when you start the engine (which is pretty common, BTW).

Technically speaking, only the Airframe gets an Annual inspection. Other components are inspected as necessary to ensure the Airframe is airworthy with those components installed on it. For an engine or propeller, that normally entails conducting a 100 hour inspection. The problem is, not everyone agrees with that rationale. I’ve redone Annual Inspection sign offs when owners insisted that I’d signed the engine and propeller logbooks incorrectly. So now, right or wrong, I just sign off everything as an Annual. I wonder what @N201MKTurbo has heard from his FSDO and what he thinks about it.

It’s a common problem that’s been around a long time. Here are a Service Bulletin and a Service Instruction that address the issue. Both documents have been around since the 1960s. https://www.mooney.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SBM20-150A.pdf https://www.mooney.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SIM20-23A.pdf

@hammdo owns that airplane now. The last he reported, it was still working well. He will likely check in with an update soon.

Those now cost about $20,000.

An interesting new article came out today about Aspen Avionics partnering with Trio autopilots (currently experimental only). They are looking to roll out an approved autopilot solution for certificates airplanes. https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/aspen-teams-with-trio-to-offer-affordable-autopilot-options/?MailingID=1455 So the cheapest solution is to get your Brittain system working correctly (usually just a cheap hose or two to replace) and wait for the Trio or the AeroCruz to be certified.

TravelPro makes nice stuff. Just FYI- most Flight Attendants use TravelPro, but most airline pilots use Luggage Works bags. https://luggageworks.com

The cowling. Turns out, the old cowling is not only worse for cooling, but contributes a ton of drag that the J cowling doesn’t.

What part of the Air Force do the submarines belong to?

I think most people here will appreciate your two recent posts, and we all see that communicating in a forum type atmosphere like this can quickly escalate in ways that would never happen face-to-face. The hurt feelings recently are because we lost a contributor who provided thousands of posts to answer people’s questions, free of charge. He didn’t provide his time to generate business for his shop, he already serves as the primary MSC for a huge region in Canada and gets plenty of business. Frankly, most of us couldn’t understand why Clarence (M20Doc) would spend so much time helping others for no benefit to himself. But we were all glad he did. I myself have been an A&P/IA for more than 20 years, and I learned a lot from him. I’ll be the first to admit it: 98% of his posts were good and helpful, 1% extolled the virtues of the Piper Comanche, and 1% could be off putting when he got annoyed. Unfortunately, you experienced that last 1% before seeing the 98%.

No, he did ignore you, but since Echo quoted your post, Lance can see that you were a part of the conversation. Your response above is reinforcing our opinion of you, however.

Contact the STC holder. They should have a record that your N# had the STCed modification installed. They can reissue the STC paperwork with the N# annotated on it.

After flying last month in the 172, it sounds like you’re at least legal- 3 takeoffs and landings in category and class (airplane single engine land) in the last 90 days. I’d say be careful, have fun, and probably review your POH, speeds, etc. before going.

Please make sure you’re current with at least 3 takeoffs and landings in the last 90 days before taking him up.

I’ve been using the McFarlane PropGuard for over 25 years. I’ve never had a problem with it if applied properly. And with the nicks and cuts it accumulates over time, I’m incredibly happy I didn’t get that damage to my prop blades. EDIT- a friend tried it on his Hartzell scimitar prop and it didn’t do as well. The curvature on the leading edge was too great. On my standard Hartzell it stays put nicely.

The trim system can be significantly out of rig, to the extent it can kill you. And even if it is rigged within non-lethal limits, the indicator can still be significantly off.

This must be some sort of record for thread drift. From missing belly screws on a vintage Mooney to Maule tundra tires in less than 1 page.

@EricShr- please listen to M20Doc. He knows what he’s talking about. If you adjust your aileron the way you describe, your ailerons will still find their aerodynamic balance, you’ll still have a right roll tendency, but now your yokes will be crooked also.

I just installed a Trig NAV/COM that has a continuous readout of the radial from the VOR, so it kind of has what Pinecone is talking about. But from a “legal” standpoint, could I compare my VOR indicator to that digital readout and count that as my VOR check? I don’t have an FAA sanctioned VOR checkpoint near me.

Makes me want to name mine “Marvin”.

I have absolutely no desire to lose the redundancy and readability of my old airspeed indicator and altimeter. That fact on its own supports my desire to have G5s. Lower price, better battery life and greater screen size make them even better to me. I saw a guy who installed 2x GI-275s and nothing else. It looked ridiculous.

As a commercial pilot, it’s 100% legal for me to be reimbursed as a ferry pilot and fly someone else’s airplane. But when you are being paid by someone else to fly your own airplane, it gets hinky. I was just wondering if Paul could provide some info from his end (if he had any). But yeah, like @hubcap said, these questions are usually resolved without issues.

Basically, are you allowed to be reimbursed for flight and ground time without being a part 135 or other type of commercial operation?