StinkBug

I'm sure there are lots of people better qualified to answer this than I am, but this clinic was setup to train people for the mass arrival into Oshkosh for air venture. The primary gain there is getting a large number of aircraft on the ground safely as efficiently as possible. The numbers I heard discussed were around 45 aircraft landing in roughly 4 minutes. In a general sense, flying like this really teaches you how to use all the controls of your aircraft in a precise manner. It's definitely a lot of fun, and very rewarding when everything works how you want it to. Of course there are risks, but throughout the weekend I felt like everyone took those risks very seriously and everyone was very conscious and deliberate about the planning of every flight. Every maneuver was planned and discussed beforehand (on the ground) and contingencies were planned for if/when things don't go as planned. The formation is close, but not so close that you don't have an exit.

Got the first video clip up on the youtubes https://youtu.be/5wJfnvq7-rE

All of you who didn't make it to this event really missed out. It was a really awesome weekend and it sounds like everyone had a great time and there was a ton of flying goin on. I was a total newbie to formation flying coming into this weekend and decided to get there a day early and got a right seat for a couple of the advanced 4-ship flights which was a total blast. First time seeing this stuff from anywhere but the ground and it was really cool. I highly recommend standing at the runup area with your thumb out if you ever see a group getting ready to go out. Saturday and Sunday they even let me fly! Definitely some intense mental workout and a whole new way of flying an airplane. Big thanks to all the guys that let me ride along and who helped teach me the way. I'll definitely be doing more of this, especially since kmyfm20s was there as well and lives nearby. We ended up getting to fly formation home together! Here are some pics from the weekend, and I'm working on getting some video up as well.

This is a timely thread for me. Looks like one of my mains has a pretty good flat spot in it (oops). Spruce has a bunch of tires in the right size, ranging from $68-$200+ with really no description of the difference between them. My C is a fair bit lighter than a Rocket, and I'm never spinning the tires at over 70kts so what's the extra $130 going to?

They shouldn't need to measure any distances, as there is only one empty CG. 3 scales, one under each tire. Take total weight, and figure the difference between the main and nose gear to figure where that CG is. Don't think anything needs to be submitted to FAA, but they do need to figure the new empty weight, arm, moment, and usable load and put that on paper. It's not terribly complex math, and each manufacturer has a published procedure. Depending on the manufacturers instructions jacking may not be necessary either. I'll ask how they did mine when I'm back at the airport again.

Hey Russ, glad you made it! You said you're over at French Valley right? I'm at CRQ and fly in there fairly regularly. Nice quiet place to do pattern work.

I'm having my plane weighed tomorrow. Looking through the past logs I find that the last W&B was when a 3 blade prop was installed in 2009. It has a 2 blade prop on it now. There was also no entry for weight change when the 430 and other panel items were installed. Personally I care less about what my useful load is on paper, than what my actual weight is on takeoff. For as much work as you're doing to the interior, and how difficult it will be to figure out weight and station on each piece, I'd definitely just have the whole plane weighed. I didn't get a precise quote from my A&P but when I first asked him about putting the thing on scales he threw out a number a lot closer to $100 than $450. I'll let you know exactly after I get the bill.

The battery is tiny, just bring it home when it needs a charge.

I just got a cover for my C from Jim at www.planecover.com. Super super nice guy, and the cover fits like a glove. I'm really impressed with it. Even more, I was surprised when he sent me the cover before accepting payment. I like the rounded corners. I've seen a plane that had that done with actual aluminum patches riveted in place and painted and thought that was a bit extreme, but I hadn't thought about vinyl even though I've used it a bunch for similar things.

"flies itself" and "crashed and burned up" in one post about the same aircraft. Well played.

Getting excited for this! Got the hotel booked, planning to be there on thursday!

That only helps when you're actually close to the destination. I'm talking about making the AP track more accurately while enroute. I found my answer on the 430 simulator though. AUX page, 3rd box over in the CDI menu you can select the sensitivity .3, 1.0, 2.0, or Auto.

Mine seems to work very well on longer trips. When you first turn it on if you're not perfectly centered it will overcorrect, overshoot, then correct back, and it will take a while to stabilize. After about 10 minutes my track is almost perfectly straight. I dont seem to notice any difference between hi and lo though. This is all on GPS. If I hit the button to switch over to VLOC it's very responsive to the needle, but when tracking a VOR the needle also moves quite a bit more than the GPS. Where do I find this CDI sensitivity setting in a 430? I'd like to see what mine is set at.

I noticed a similar issue yesterday, though in a pretty different situation. I was flying up around 11,000' and decided that since I needed to descend anyways I'd test out the glide performance, so that I'd be familiar if I ever need it (hope not). Anyways, if I pulled the throttle ALL the way out I got quite a bit of coughing and backfiring, even while still leaned. Since this isn't a normal situation, and I wasn't doing it for long I'm not worried about it, but it was interesting. As a side note, it's pretty amazing how much of a difference the prop setting has on glide. At 100mph with the prop all the way in I was dropping almost 1000fpm. With the prop all the way out I was around half that. Could have gone pretty dang far gliding from that altitude!

Well after 40 years of wet and dry conditions I'm not all that surprised that the senders are kinda flakey. I've replaced plenty of senders in cars a quarter of that age. I've never seen a way to calibrate any of those either. Those of you with the little gauges in the wings, can you see those gauges from inside the plane? Those I believe are straight mechanical, where the ones in the panel are electrical. If you can see the wing gauges out the window I'd consider adding them to my plane just to make me feel better.

I'm not positive on the mechanism used in our planes, but I suspect it's not much different than an automotive fuel sender. Essentially a potentiometer that gives a varying resistance to the gauge. In the case of my C I don't even bother to look at the gauges because they are nowhere near accurate. They almost always show close to full even when they are under half. I did discover today that they will show empty when you run a tank dry (well the left one anyways). I just measure before flying, plan carefully, and also have a fuel flow meter that is quite accurate as long as you tell it how much is in the tank to start with.

Do you still get METAR's, TAF's, TFR's etc? I dont see those listed on the marine services.

Which XM packages are you guys using? I have a 496 in my C, but the weather wasn't activated when I got the plane so I have no experience with what info it gives. Trying to make a decision on what to get for when I start doing more long distance flying.

Mine is really hard to move, even after trying to lube it. On my trip home from Texas I made the mistake of exploring my new plane and decided to try opening it.....then couldn't get it to shut. Thankfully I was able to block most of the cold air by closing the ceiling vents, otherwise I would have been making an unplanned stop LOL!

I've noticed the same thing while driving down I-10 west of Palm Springs. All the windmills lighting up mostly in sequence. It's kinda freaky looking on the ground even.

The several inches thick part I can see an issue with. The OP just talked about slipping though, which is why I suggested pushing from inside the hangar. Baggage door is one spot, Tail cone under the rudder is another that comes to mind. Anything solid that isn't a control surface?

I do a lot of metal fabrication for a living (read: loud freaking power tools). When my Boxer was a puppy I made a point of having her around the shop when I was working. She is probably one of the only dogs I've ever seen who doesn't even look up from her bed when you fire off a grinder or start hammering on something. Get em used to the plane early and you'll probably have a happy flier forever.

If it's just one strip across the entry to the hangar, why not just push the plane from behind until the nose wheel is past the ice? Not like you're gonna be doing much steering in that few feet anyways.

If mine had that tab it would be a little useless since they are 26 gallon tanks

So far this seems to be the only solution, but probably not one that I'll actually adhere to. I generally dip the tanks after any longer flights just to keep an eye on fuel burn, but don't write it down. I also rarely do it after a shorter training flight or burger run. My C has enough useful load that I doubt this will be a real issue very often, but I'm sure it will come up at some point. I am thinking about making a couple little aluminum pieces that hang in the filler neck with tabs on them, just so I can tell the fuel guy to fill to the tabs and not have to measure before, during and after. I'll still need to be there to pull the caps and drop the tabs into place though.