• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


DXB last won the day on May 19 2016

DXB had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

769 Excellent

About DXB

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Model

Recent Profile Visitors

3,071 profile views
  1. Thanks but I can terrify myself on my own just fine
  2. Dang I logged my battery replacement in the wrong place. I would be a hot mess as an owner without Mooneyspace.
  3. Thanks - Good discussion though it's clearly a split opinion on the immediate future of this particular tire. I'm gonna order a new tire and tube and keep an eye on the spot for now. If the spot doesn't progress rapidly, I'll get it swapped when it has to go to the shop for another reason. I'd love to learn how to change it myself, but the added cost of buying my own jacks and a tail weight seems a little impractical at this point. BTW this thin spot is likely my own dang fault and likely resulted from an incident that is a bit of a wake up call after getting increasingly confident in my short field skills. It turns out that being on speed 95% of the time is not good enough. And not going around at a short field after finding oneself at 85mph over the threshold comes with far greater liability than the cost of a tire and tube replacement - I depleted some luck reserve on that one.
  4. Pardon another noob question. On pre-flight today I noticed an unevenly worn spot on my 2.5 year old left main Goodyear (pic below). The central grooves are nearly gone at a single spot, but not entirely gone. I have mostly broken my habit of hitting the brakes too early on landing - but obviously i could do better. I checked the Goodyear tire maintenance manual on replacement criteria: https://www.goodyearaviation.com/resources/pdf/aviation_tire_care_3_2017.pdf But I'm still confused. Quoting from the manual: "Inspect treads visually and check remaining tread. Tires should be removed when tread has worn to the base of any groove at any spot, or up to 1/8 of the tire circumference." These seem like conflicting criteria. It's pretty close to the base at a single spot, but not for 1/8 the circumference. Other places in the manual emphasize fabric exposed as a criteria, which is certainly not the case here. Questions: 1. Is it cool to just keep an eye on this spot for now? 2. If so, would it be wise to replace the tire the next time it has to go in for other maintenance, with so little tread remaining, or if I'm careful can I expect much more life out of this tire? 3. Should the tire be changed urgently when the groove disappears at that one spot or only if fabric is visible?
  5. On the surface, it looks like a good value for the price. Some discount for no airframe logs may already be included. Given no air frame log before 2008, an extra careful prebuy inspection from a real Mooney expert may be particularly worth it here - Doing so is pretty effective at ferreting out corrosion, prior damage history, and quality of repairs. If you like the plane, I would pursue.
  6. 30-40 hrs or 3-4 months, whichever comes first, along with new filter. For me they usually coincide pretty well.
  7. Exactly how many people here have been voluntarily opting in for the digital rectal exam versus mere "direct observation" of one's anus? An anonymous poll might provide new insight into the demographics of the Mooney community.
  8. I just had a beer - otherwise I'd fly to Wisconsin right now to park outside your hanger and get in line.
  9. This is an interesting scenario - thanks for sharing, and I certainly hope it works out well for you. I wonder if your old AME, who already knows your situation well, would also be willing to sign you off under Basic Med. I asked my AME the same thing last week while renewing my 3rd class, but he was still trying to figure out how to handle requests for Basic Med in lieu of 3rd class. It's working out with your primary MD here because of your longstanding relationship, which assures her that you're not as high risk as you might look on paper and also motivates her to take the extra time and effort to figure out how to deal with the form. Someone "physician shopping" who shows up one time to get a form signed off is a very different scenario from a physician perspective. As an aside, one of the reasons I think physicians dislike this category of request is that it forces them into the less familiar role of balancing the interests of society with those of the patient. It's way easier and more fun to simply try to serve the patient without other considerations. Going to AMEs to sign off basic med may actually a good way to prevent this tension and extract potential benefits of the new regulation. With an AME, there is no ambiguity that the physician is primarily serving a regulatory role for the FAA and not necessarily there to help the pilot. Thus AMEs would be much more comfortable from the outset in evaluating a someone under Basic Med while also understanding the potential liabilities of signing the form. I may try to go this route again when my current two years is up.
  10. No disagreement here - your example highlights the absurdity of the previous system with AMEs mandated to enforce a BP standard based on a single office measurement and creating a mountain of effort for you to circumvent the issue. I certainly encourage folks to take whatever paths of least resistance emerge for them with Basic Med. It's just unfortunate that the new system does not contain a more rational medical standard but simply offers "unofficial" new ways to circumvent the ridiculous old standards to get ones paperwork in order.
  11. No doubt many will sign. But I'd be curious to know why a primary MD was willing to sign the basic med document in any situation where someone might not pass a 3rd class medical. The requirements are essentially the same, and if you were declined a 3rd class medical, you are still SOL - getting a Basic Med signature doesn't help you one bit.
  12. As a private pilot, it's my opinion that basic med is a sorry excuse for progress. As a physician, I am already advising colleagues to steer clear of it. The MDs signing off on it either don't realize the liability they are accepting for no reason or are of the same category of professional who run pill mills to keep opiate addicts happy. Dick Collins nails it here: http://airfactsjournal.com/2017/05/basicmed-cruel-hoax/ I have admiration for many things that AOPA advocates, but in this case they have mistaken activity for accomplishment - the modus operandi of the regulatory bureaucrat.
  13. Ah right- basic plumbing. I was thinking of a different hose.
  14. Sucks for Alex for sure - Sorry! But this is an interesting thread for folks like me to learn something. It's fortunate that this muffler leak showed up during run up rather than by causing unconsciousness upon turning on the cabin heat. I can't say that I've payed much attention to the exact amount of rpm drop with carb heat on, but this thread might be a good reason to start. My POH says nothing about checking carb heat at runup, although that's when I do it because it seems to have the added advantage of clearing any ice accumulated during taxi. In the POH, the check is only performed in the starting checklist and doesn't specify an expected amount of rpm drop. My questions: 1. Should one check carb heat at start (per POH) or run-up or both? I do it at runup at 1700rpm, and see a drop around 100-200 but never paid close attention. How much of a drop is too much? Every few runups, I also pull throttle to idle to make sure it doesn't doesn't quit with carb heat on - I guess this would be a more sensitive way to catch a problem. 2. I understand how a collapsed scat hose from the doghouse to the shroud could cause the symptom Alex describes, but I'm less sure I understand how a muffler leak did it. Did Alex get the big rpm drop because the muffler leak makes the gas going through the shroud hotter than normal, thus leading to an even richer mixture? Also I suppose the leaking exhaust gas is O2 depleted, thus making the fuel excess in the mixture leaving the carb richer still? 3. If that is the case, then I don't understand why the problem goes away when Alex unhooks the scat hose to the shroud - wouldn't that suggest that the problem was with the hose itself? Then the air source to the muffler shroud is directly from the cowl and not the back of the doghouse. I don't get how this fixes the problem with exhaust gas entering the intake air stream with carb heat on. Alex's problem also makes me recall this wonderful old Don Maxwell article that gave me a basic understanding of the carb heat system in my plane: http://www.donmaxwell.com/publications/MAPA_TEXT/Carb Heat Maintenance/CARB_HEAT_CARE.HTM He talks about how the bypass valve system for the carb heat box is prone to malfunction and potentially cause damage to the muffler, so it might be worth taking a close look at the system while replacing the muffler. I am fortunate to have one of the first planes off the line with the newer system that lacks the valve on the carb heat box.
  15. That's the PERFECT location for a JPI EDM900. Or at least that's where I have mine mounted