cnoe

It surprises me that they're okay with reimbursing you for fuel at $6.55/g when the retail price at DWH is only $4.49/g (and they likely get a discount off that). At either KEDC or KGTU the tie-down fee is only $10/nt with no other fees assessed or purchases required. As a proud member of the CB Club the high fees and exorbitant fuel pricing keep me from patronizing these mega-FBOs. I frequent the FBOs that support GA and have I no issue paying a reasonable fuel premium at them. The drive to downtown from KEDC is the same at 20 minutes and only 10 minutes more from KGTU (in my experience and also according to Google maps). Just sayin'. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Lots of factors to consider including hose diameter, length, and pump pressure. It could be a gallon or more to recharge the hose I'd guess. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Because it would cut into their G500/G600 sales? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Don I believe that once energized, the pump/read-out apparatus will push and meter fuel unabated until the flow is stopped by the nozzle/valve. The flow will stop at the point where the air pressure in the line equalizes with the pump's pressure setting. If the hose remained full after the previous use (i.e. the nozzle closed then pump switched off) there would be very little volume measured on the read-out prior to actually dispensing fuel. But if the hose was completely drained before the pump is energized then a sizable volume would register on the read-out prior to any fuel actually being dispensed. The $0.81 of fuel Richard paid for but didn't receive was likely caused by someone turning off the pump and then holding the nozzle open until the trickle subsided (but not actually draining the hose). Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If Aspen can drive an AP why can't a G5. And if not that then surely TruTrak or Trio see the need to take a GPS source and use it. Even the FAA can't be dense enough to think my vacuum-driven Century II-B is safer than these new solid-state systems! Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm not sure if this has been posted already but... it looks like they're going to let us use a G5 as a certified HSI or DG now. They're also quoting a dual system with reversionary capabilities. All I need now is for TruTrak or Trio to get their digital AP approved for the M20 and I'll be able to ditch my vac system as well as the Century IIB AP. That's putting two displays plus a new digital autopilot in my panel for ~$10AMU + installation. We're getting really close to making avionics more affordable here. https://generalaviationnews.com/2017/06/06/garmin-g5-stcd-as-dghsi/

JK of course. I'll apologize in advance. Still that system would not work here in the good old US of ME.[emoji846] Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

But seriously, you record your own fuel purchases on a PIECE OF PAPER?!! And then I suppose you take it to the wench at the FBO to give her the requisite number of chickens for your purchase?[emoji15] Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Or [mention=9886]Marauder[/mention]. I haven't seen any hot chick pics lately.[emoji7] Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If you know the i.d. it's a simple calculation. I'll get hose specs next time I fill up. For a 1" hose it's 1 gallon for each 24.5' of hose length. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

At the risk of becoming a pariah for defending our AOA guru I didn't find his comments to be offensive at all. In fact, I'd say that if you're self-confident enough to stand in front of a waiting aircraft draining the fuel hose of its last 1.5 gallons of fuel then you likely won't be offended by what some guy with a parrot on his shoulder says about you on the internet. From our current unscientific poll results 85% of us operate in this manner, but as I recently discovered there are a fair number who are gaining a slight advantage over the rest of us (the FBO comes out even no matter what). There are 2 ways of dispensing fuel. 1) program the pump to shut off after a fixed amount/value of fuel passes the metering device. 2) program the pump to continue running until you physically turn it off. I'm in group 2 and either fill to the neck, or to the tabs. I have nothing to gain and everything to lose by draining the hose. You'll notice that when the pump first starts (before any fuel is dispensed) the pump-display will often indicate that some fuel has been purchased as Richard points out. This amount can vary greatly depending on what kind of pilot preceded you. If you follow a true hose drainer that number can be well above the 1 gallon mark which can be a source of aggravation. But I can guarantee you the FBO isn't going give a rat's ass if you complain about it. But for all our woes pity the poor Cessna CB who has to move his/her ladder the entire length of the hose to attain the level of cheapness that a Mooney driver can accomplish with both feet planted firmly on the ground.

It's a skill/habit he picked up while working for FedEx.[emoji846] Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Do you also drag it to the run-up area before firing it up? [emoji23] Sorry, I couldn't help but ask. Considering your sense of humor I don't mind "donating" (as BHFlyer suggested). Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Okay, I just ran some numbers (somebody please verify) and it looks like a hose with an i.d. of 1" would contain 1 gallon of fuel for every 24.5 feet of hose length. That's more than I imagined. I often have 35'-40' of hose laying out when I fill up so I guess I'm losing about a gallon-and-a-half every time I fill up after Raptor05121. And of course we all drain the nozzle after releasing the handle. You hopefully only make that mistake once.

While filling the plane the other day I discovered the reason why it sometimes takes a moment for the fuel to get from the pump to the nozzle. I'm not judging anyone here; I'm just wondering if I'm the only naive member of the CB club who's missing an opportunity to save even MORE. * Sorry Tapatalk users, the poll likely isn't visible to you.

Like the NASA ASRS program, but without having to even send in the report? Is this documented somewhere? I just scanned the "Team Rewards" webpage, the Wings Manual" pdf, the "Learn More" webpage, plus AC 61-91J and can find no mention of this benefit. Perhaps I missed it in all the mumbo jumbo. In the Advisory Circular it states... Incentive Awards. Airmen who participate in the program and satisfactorily complete a current phase of WINGS will not have to complete the flight review requirements of 14 CFR part 61, § 61.56. Section 61.56(e) states that participating airmen do not need to accomplish the flight review requirements of part 61 if, since the beginning of the 24th calendar-month before the month in which that pilot acts as pilot-in-command (PIC), he or she has satisfactorily accomplished one or more phases of an FAA-sponsored pilot proficiency award program. Each time a pilot earns a new phase of WINGS, it satisfies the flight review requirement regardless of how frequently or closely spaced the phase or award. ... but that doesn't address any forgiveness benefit. I guess that's one of the issues many of us have; there are dozens of pages and tens-of-thousands of words to describe what should be a fairly simple program. Thanks to MS I'm learning more about it with each post. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It wasn't clear to me that 3 phases of flight could be signed off on one flight (assuming the pilot was proficient/adequate in the skills). That certainly would help. Thanks for that clarification. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Don, I admire and respect what you're doing with regards to the Wings program. And getting new student pilots involved with these online courses is great. OTOH, I don't understand any great benefit for an active pilot (flying 3-4 hrs/wk) who's simply trying to keep current. As I understand it, in addition to the online courses I still have to hire an instructor to fly with me 3 times to complete a phase. I'm truly not trying to be argumentative but how is that simpler than hiring that instructor only once every 2 years to conduct the flight review? I'll admit that I'm no perfect pilot and always gain something from the flight review, but IMO it's certainly more complicated to go the Wings route. Please tell me if I'm missing something. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Also keep in mind that the "hottest" cylinder (EGT) isn't necessarily the 1st to peak when leaning. The "actual" EGT value isn't important unless it's indicative of a non-firing plug which would cause it to read significantly higher than the others. If you're curious, measure your probes' distances from the flanges in the exhaust risers and see if they're the same (which still won't necessarily equalize the temps). Also [mention=11970]gsxrpilot[/mention] has good experience running the C LOP; check his posts. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

12 minutes of meditation and it came to me. "Spaghetti tubing". A.S. sells a vinyl version. I see McMaster has several varieties under the listing for cable sleeving. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

My tired brain is searching for an answer. A thin plastic tubing is commonly used to insulate electrical connections on our birds such as the knife-connectors on my landing-light leads. Tubing slides over the connectors and is held in place with a tie-wrap. It's just like heat-shrink tubing but doesn't shrink when heated. I swear I've seen it sold on Aircraft Spruce but cannot find it now. Can somebody tell me what it's called or provide a link to it? Thanks. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Assuming you are referring to the LAST cylinder to peak when leaning you were then running ~44F LOP which is pretty dang lean at 22" MP and decreases power significantly. Necessarily the other 3 cylinders are running even more lean and providing even less power. Remember the power curve slopes continually downward as you lean beyond ~80F ROP. You might regain substantial power by enriching to 10F-15F LOP (or even peak EGT at that power setting) as long as your CHTs stay below 380. That might give you 150 KTAS or close to it. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I believe the constant most commonly referenced for computing HP in a normally-aspirated engine (with a CR of 8.5:1) is "14.9".* For the IO360s with a CR of 8.7:1 the constant "14.95" seems to be more prevalent. * Ref. John Deakin - https://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/pelicans_perch_84_mixture_cht_194816-1.html Older Js are indeed slower than newer ones, but not by that much. Mine is a stock 1978 model that I consider to be middle-of-the-pack in terms of speed. When moderately loaded running LOP I routinely see right at 150 KTAS w/ fuel flow of ~9 gph. My last speed check running 80F. ROP (GPS 3-direction confirmed) showed 163 KTAS at 75% power and 11.1 gph FF. Jetdriven's '77 J is a few knots faster than mine, and @Mike_Elliott routinely flies a J (N984VW) that puts us all to shame. As others have said, something's not right with those numbers. Good question. I'd start by looking out the window to see how the ailerons, flaps, and elevators are positioned in level flight.

Damn! I didn't know you get an actual set of WINGS for your hat! I'm gonna have to try harder I guess. Or attend a MAPA PPP.

I just learned something!