MikeOH

@Shadrach I just downloaded this. Are you sure they are discontinued?

Oh, that's just great! So, I have no choice but to make the Kelly POS work???

1970 M20F, TCM/Bendix mags: S4LN-200/204, 3/4"-20 RHM38E plugs. Ordered a new Kelly Aerospace harness P/N: KA12630. The attached photo shows the problem between my old and new: the insulators in the cap are too high and prevent the cover from closing flush with the mag housing. I called Kelly Aero this morning and spoke the their tech service guy who told me he answers this question all the time! His answer: The mag design was changed in the early seventies, so use as is, just put some RTV on the gap between the cover and mag housing This doesn't sound right to me. BWTHDIK? I ordered from Kelly because I could not find the Champion M2360 in stock. Does anyone KNOW if the Champion harness looks like my old one, or will I have the same issue? And, just 'cause I'm a glutton for punishment...is Spruce going to take the harness back? (I know auto parts stores will NOT take electrical items back)

HUH?? Now you've got me worried. Need to go read my policy, but I always thought the duty to defend was ENTIRELY separate from the amount they were on the hook to pay out in a judgement. Just to be clear: You are saying that if I have $100K limits, and my insurance lawyers spend $100K defending me, the plaintiff wins $100K, then I am on the hook to pay out the $100K??? That just doesn't seem rational. For example what rate does the insurance company get to apply to THEIR OWN LAWYERS? $500/hr, $1,000/hr, ?? So sorry, we spent 100 hours on your case and it's almost ready for trial...good luck, buddy!!

I see what you mean, that one had the same asymmetry. Good luck with adjusting the exhaust pipe; hopefully no cutting & welding involved!

HOLY CRAP! $990 Damn, I thought California was bad, but it's a fixed 1% on assessed value regardless of how much you fly.

Maybe, but do you not see the door asymmetry? I'm not saying it's wrong, it just seems odd.

To my untrained eye, there looks to be a major asymmetry of the two doors. Note how the right door front edge is angeled inward whereas the right side is significantly angled outward; even accounting for some parallax. I'm with PT20J, I'd check as something looks like it's out of adjustment.

But are 401ks FULLY protected? As in, can the courts order some of what you withdraw to be garnished even if they can't directly raid the 401k itself to satisfy a judgement?

Ah, yes, you are correct. I suspect California may be a bit different than Florida! (I'd move but can't stand the humidity)

Hmm, so they 'voluntarily' remove cylinders and rework valves (kinda of a 1/2 TOH IMHO) on a brand new engine so that they don't have to do it later. Okey dokey. I agree it makes sense if you are REPLACING a jug...but on a new engine???

Maybe it varies state by state, but I was under the impression that the court CAN come after your retirement accounts and home. Maybe not take it all but, in effect, garnish your retirement income and force you to move to a smaller home (i.e. you live in a $10 million McMansion...I didn't think the court would let you continue to live there.). IOW, you can't bankruptcy your way out of it. Maybe I'm wrong... I hope so!

Thermocouple or thermistor? I would think a shorted thermocouple would read 0 (BWTHDIK)

My only experience with tower enroute is SoCal. I really like it. I can just call ground/CD and ask for tower enroute to where I want (within SoCal TRACON's airspace, of course). In a few minutes I get a clearance and squawk. No need to file or even use the route name. But, as midlifeflyer says, you will be talking to approach (TRACON).

Very true, and troubling as it is really an uncovered risk above the $1 million policy limit. But, if you are going to fly at all, that is a risk that you have to accept or find higher limits. While it happens, it is pretty rare for a small GA plane accident to injure those on the ground. The low price of liability only policies is my evidence for the low level or risk.

Back when I asked it wasn't double; about 50% more, as I recall. I wasn't going to pay that just to fly friends!

Another thing to consider is that even if passengers sign some kind of 'iron clad' waiver (yeah, no such thing anyway), that does NOT stop their spouse/family from suing you!

I flew a rental B for many years before buying my F, and I loved its simplicity. I really liked the mechanical flaps over the hydraulic of my F. I'd definitely consider a B model. While the purchase price may be a tad less, just keep in mind that they are both likely to be the same cost/risk to keep, feed, and water. Good luck!

Respectfully, I think that is a poor analogy. The jury is NOT going to view an aircraft accident (painted as a RICH aircraft owner) in no where near the same way that they view an auto accident. And, with my umbrella policy I'm covered for way more than my aircraft. (Note well that umbrella polices specifically EXCLUDE any liability for GA accidents). I do NOT fly anyone but family members on trips and pleasure flights... my wife and I have worked too long and hard to put our net worth at risk for a HOBBY. I looked at a smooth policy and the squeeze wasn't worth the juice of taking friends for rides. The old 'life is too short to worry about such things' just doesn't cut it with me. YMMV

Read your policy carefully, oftentimes that $1 million liability is ONLY for those on the ground; per seat in the plane may only be $100K. A smooth policy for $1 mill is going to be more.

You want Aeroshell 5. As Ross said, the shop did you a favor as the new Aeroshell 6 is crap. I had my prop OHed and it leaked past the seals within a month. Also, if you read the latest SL you are allowed to MIX the Aeroshell 5 in with Aeroshell 6. No need to disassemble and purge out the #6. That's what I've been doing and the leaking has gone down. I saw the NYCO option but know zip about its characteristics. But, if it was me, I'd fly with the Aeroshell 5 and be happy. I'm skeptical that our M20Fs are ever going to see -40, even at altitude.

Damn, that's what we call BER! (Beyond Economic Repair)

I have a GNS430W and have always believed that I can fly RNP approaches with it. The problem is that nearly all RNP approaches are labelled "AR" so I can't fly those. Perhaps that scarcity is responsible for the belief that you can't fly them with a lowly GNS430W. Here's a chart that seems to provide back up (sorry, it already had the non-WAAS models highlighted. You need to look at the GNS4xxW/5xxW line):

Hmm, if it is hot and I'm taxiing around, I just put out my left hand; If my name was Luke I could call it the Kool Hand Luke....

Well, if the wings really are attached then how would they be moving at a different rate? If they are moving at a different rate, then that's tantamount to them failing! The only other possibility would be a very high roll rate. Two problems I see with that theory: 1) the two images show the fuselage without any detectable roll difference. 2) One wing would be moving up and the other down. Hard to imagine both would cause the same apparent artifact; i.e. appearing as both moving upwards relative to the fuselage.