David_H

The oil was changed. Log book entries state that the engine was run-up and inspected for leaks. It was a toasty 30 degrees when I went out to the airport this evening to perform the Cleveland Brake lining break-in procedures and static brake check. It took a little time to let the engine oil temps come up before cycling the Prop for the run-up. I was told they didn't have a pilot available to perform the Brake Lining break-in and that they just forgot to mention it. The Tach properly recorded time during yesterday's flight as well as today's time on the engine just as it always does... making sure every second is assigned a dollar value.

That's a snazzy "CB Country Club MFD holder" you have installed.

That is a very good question.

I agree.

New right-side brake linings were also billed. Time for bedding the brake linings was also expected.

The oil and filter was changed. A rocker cover gasket and an oil fill tube lower gasket was also billed. I couldn't imagine an AI running an engine up before letting the CHTs warm up. It's been cold here in the Mid West. I sat on the ground for some time yesterday to allow the temperatures to come up before I taxied to do the preflight Runup.

I picked the Mooney up from it's Annual yesterday. Before startup and after shutdown, I always snap a photo of the Tach time from the EI digital Tach to keep track of the hours and oil consumption. When entering the Tach times for yesterday's flight, I noticed the starting Tach time for yesterday's flight was the same as the ending Tach time when it was dropped off for Annual Inspection. How is it possible for a plane make it through an Annual Inspection without recording any time on the Tach? I expect the Prop would have needed to make it through an engine warm up and prop cycle in addition to checking RPM... am I wrong? I'm perplexed.

By pulling back to 26-square, one has the potential to catch a misbehaving prop before getting too far away from the airport without sacrificing very much performance.

How has he not commented on this thread? Has someone hidden this thread from him? Is this the Twilight Zone?

I'm also in the camp that pulls back to 26 squared after obstacles are clear, flaps are cleaned up for the climb, and the trim is largely settled in. This seems to be quieter, pulls the prop off the stops, and burns less fuel with very little performance degradation. That said, I wouldn't be hesitant at all to climb out with the prop full forward if the situation called for it. I cannot think of a good reason to start the climb at less that 26 squared.

Those front seat pockets are very nice as well. It would be nice to have those sewn in.

^... Prune Juice?

...^ Having that top back seat pockets is slick. I currently have one back seat pocket on each side sewn into the bottom back of each front seat. I generally don't put items I reach for often in those pockets because I'm unable to reach the seat pocket without unbuckling (if the right seat is slid back.) That said, if I could reach it... whatever I wanted would automatically be the last thing I dug out.

Having the Anonymous Mode seems like the one option that makes the UAT-978 more attractive than the 1030ES solution. I'm under the impression that 1090ES units have no option for Anonymous Mode... but could be wrong. I have a slot reserved with the local Avionics shop for a Stratus ESG install in the Mooney. The only tangible benefit I can see in doing the ESG instead of the GDL-82 is replacing the older KT76A transponder.

I've only managed a first post a few times... those few times must have been during a shift change or bathroom breaks.

I'm considering mounting a visor pocket with the 3M Command Hook-and-Loop system for pictures. Mounting it overhead could be the best option. I'll be able to tell more about where I can potentially mount something once the plane is back from Annual.

If I were to install the GDL-82, I'd opt to install the Annunciator Light and Anonymous Mode. I can't see any drawback to having them. Will you be doing the install under A&P supervision? If so, snapping a few photos during the install and sharing how well it went would be interesting.

Hmm... Trickle-down government Math?

The whole Parachute argument makes very little sense. It's my understanding that it can only be deployed in certain situations. If you're IMC and lose control while in the soup... you're likely too fast for the parachute to survive. Is this true? If you stall close to the ground for any number of reasons...you're now likely slow enough but too close to the ground for it to be effective.

15 hrs over the course of 2 years after the last Prop Strike... yikes.

Lets say: Your close friend pays for an increase in your annual premium to be added as a "Named Pilot" to your policy to help keep your plane flying regularly and in good flying condition for you. Since all insurance policies are all written differently, the "Named Pilot" is likely unaware of his liability exposures. The Insurance Company has absolutely no incentive to inform him of this. This close friend who is properly rated for the flight and "Named Insured" bounces it in on the nose, resulting in a prop strike. Your friend must now write a very large check or prepare for a very uncomfortable legal battle.

Thanks for the details Navi. It's much appreciated. It'll be interesting to find out how the install times will differ for for a Mooney. Everyone is looking forward to finding out. No disrespect was meant is questioning your observed install time. That said, your Cherokee installation time goes contrary to what's been stated earlier in this thread by some Avionics Shops.

OK, let's use a a gear-up incident as an example: In a case where there are no injuries, the "Named Pilot" is now on the hook for the Hull Value and Additional Damages. The Insurance company can potentially (and likely choose to) go after the "Named Pilot" to minimize or eliminate their losses. In this case, being a "Named Pilot" carries very little value and intentionally provides a very false sense of security. I truly hope I never make the mistake of flying with someone with the mindset that I should hedge their liabilities so that they don't ever have a gear-up on their policy record.

I'd like to make sure I read and understood what you wrote correctly. I'll also say that I'm in no way doubting your word. Did you just state that you're able to do the TT install within the "TT quoted" install time... without having the experience of a seasoned Avionics Installer?

I'm curious: What is the value of broad language that leaves the option of subrogation open? Every time I've asked for a Waiver of Subrogation, the person on the other end of the phone has acted as if I just placed the phone to my backside and started talking through my pants.