MikeOH

Plus one for Paul Kortopates! I spent an enjoyable day flying with him earlier this year Just PM him; that's how I made contact.

Wait...I think I can hear the lawyers baying!

I think you're confusing supersonic FUEL FLOW with TAS

Be careful with that Kalifornia visit...you may well get a tax bill from our corrupt state Then, YOU get to prove you don't have to pay it!

Unwillingness to pay free-market price <> market does not make sense.

That's exactly what I do. Much simpler and easier then using my watch!

Depends...I wasn't clear on what your poll was trying to accomplish. That is, you used "bad430," NOT 430 or 430W, so I wasn't sure if you meant that someone had their NON WAAS 430 die, would they buy a used 430W to replace it. If you were being generic, then, yes, you should add repair 430W (I don't think Garmin will repair non-WAAS 430s).

That's exactly what I did last year when my 430W died. $1200 flat-rate is Garmin's going rate.

LOL! My record is SIX at SBD (10,000 feet and before they had a tower). In a C-172, though. NOT a Mooney

Just saying selling a plane 22 hours after spending the money on an OH raises some questions, don't you think? I don't think the person is selling a 'questionable' OH; just one that wasn't done to new limits by a big name shop if the intention was to sell immediately after OH. That's all. Yes, one would like to think no one would try to pass off a plane with corrosion...but, it certainly has happened, unfortunately And, I too hope there's a logical story that surfaces to explain the history.

Only 22 hours SMOH strikes me as concerning for two reasons: 1) High time engine preventing sale so owner does the lowest possible cost "overhaul" 2) Something else wrong with the plane found right after overhaul? (Corrosion?)

Oh, I completely agree with that! Changing the metal used would be a seriously big deal to justify to the FAA, IMHO. More from your link on that point: "However, the mechanic still needs to ensure that the owner-produced part conforms to the aircraft type design, which may be easy or difficult depending on what kind of part is involved." I'd think making new gears could present a pretty difficult challenge; how do you even know what kind of steel was used without the factory drawing? Heat treating? Case or through hardened? Gear profiles and tolerances, end play, ...all kinds of critical stuff to properly duplicate. Sure, you can theoretically reverse engineer, but at what cost to provide adequate data that your work is accurate and complete? This isn't duplicating a wing skin where the proper material is clearly called out in the parts manual.

From your link, I believe the concerning part is the following excerpt: "In completing the Form 337, the A&P/IA must cer- tify that the owner-produced part conforms to FAA-approved data. As a general rule, this means either the owner-produced part was made from a manufacturer-approved drawing, or it was made by duplicating an existing approved part and therefore all materials and dimensions can be determined from the existing part. If the A&P/IA has any doubts about whether or not the part conforms to approved data, he may choose to ask the local flight standards dis- trict office for a field approval of the repair (which could delay return of the aircraft to service) or require that a designated engineering representative be hired to generate the necessary approved data."

Is that really true? I honestly thought you needed to have some kind of backup technical data to support the owner produced part??

I like the way you think! However, (there's always a 'however')...my understanding is that there needs to be acceptable data to back up the owner produced parts; in this case precision gears. How are you planning to satisfy the FAA on that one? (I'm pretty sure Mooney isn't going to release their engineering drawings to you so that you can reproduce their criminally overpriced ones!) I have no doubt that you can produce adequate gears but without the proper paperwork I'd be concerned about my insurance coverage in the event there is EVER a problem with the gear extending. Say, the next owner has an accident with injuries after he is forced to land gear up/partially extended? How is that going to play out? I'm just paranoid enough of our sadly litigious society that I'm going to buy the 20:1 approved gears like you just did.

Only you can know the real reason you want to own, but buying a 50ish year old airplane is NOT an investment, IMHO. IOW, this is NOT a purchase that buy low/sell high even remotely applies...again, IMHO. IF you want to own an airplane then NOW is the right time to buy! ZERO point in worrying about 'market timing.' How much money you are going to lose when you sell (note carefully that you are NOT going to make money!) is much more dependent on the condition of the plane when you buy it; i.e., how many more AMUs to bring it up to YOUR level of condition and repair stuff NOT found at pre-buy. Upgrades are your discretion, but plan on losing 50% when you go to sell. Try to buy with what you want already installed, especially the avionics. In my case, I'm just over two years in, and I've spent nearly the price of the plane on maintenance and upgrades. And, I still think I got a good deal! (Maybe I'm delusional, but after passing on countless planes in much worse condition when I was shopping, I doubt it). Again, in our price range ($50K) we are buying "vintage" for sure; nothing wrong with that, but when it comes to upkeep you have to be realistic that those costs are going to be closer to newer airframes. Point being, once again, that buying at a 'market low' is really and truly lost in the rounding. Good luck!

There were a couple of small plastic zip-lock bags with other stuff; the placard was mixed in one of them.

Interesting. I bought mine at the beginning of December through Aircraft Spruce. And, not that it should matter, mine is a TailBeacon not a SkyBeacon.

The placard was included with my TailBeacon. Have you opened the box??

As someone who wrecked two cards (the Nav and Terrain), IF you can reprogram without errors using your PC then the cards are probably okay. After they were destroyed, the PC would NOT program them. (The cards ain't cheap; even used!). Good luck!

That's what I've got in my F and I don't see them becoming obsolete until GPS is changed to where the 430W can't interpret the satellite data! Heck, I still shoot ILS approaches...seems that technology goes back to 1929, IIRC

I think he's referring to the waviness BEFORE about the 0:09 minute mark in #3

Thanks guys!

SWEET! That had to be only a couple hundred feet AGL (or, AWL)!!

Background: Installed and configured TailBeacon without issue a week ago, but previous flight ATC complained about my transponder! So, naturally my test flight barely got off the ground; ATC couldn't see my transponder at all. Fast forward to last Saturday...installed used KT76A ($100). But, no time to do a test flight. So, yesterday (Sunday) I had to fly the plane a short distance for its annual. Flight was to be about 15 minutes but tower had me maneuvering all over prior to landing; flight ended up being 25 minutes. I never got above 4000. Anyway, I thought, "what the heck" I'll run a PAPR. Much to my surprise it came back with 0 errors of any kind. Is that all I need, even though I didn't follow the flight profile protocol? I've never been quite sure what constitutes a completely 'approved' install past the log entry and 337. IOW, am I good to go for Jan. 1?