Rick Junkin

What year did you attend the Cirrus training course?

Excellent. I'm looking forward to hearing if this resolves your issues.

I thought this was interesting and enlightening. Some of you may already know this but it was new learning for me. A good friend of mine is an instructor at the Cirrus Training Center in Knoxville. He explained to me why he would almost never attempt an off-field landing in a Cirrus. He said there is a very high probability of nose gear collapse and flip-over on a rough field landing, which would likely trap the occupants inside. According to Jeff: The Cirrus CAPS system is designed to descend the airplane in a slightly nose down attitude. In addition to the honeycomb seat structure that absorbs an amazing number of Gs on ground impact, the nose gear structure is designed to fail in such a way as to also absorb impact energy. Because of this the nose gear is not as robust as one might think. Anecdotally I recalled hearing about quite a number of nose gear collapses on Cirrus aircraft as a result of bounced landings, which now makes more sense to me. Jeff then showed me some pictures of Cirrus airplanes upside down in pastures where an emergency landing had been attempted. Now, I know you're probably thinking the same thing I was, that any airplane could flip over on an emergency landing in a soft or rough pasture. But according to Jeff the odds are way against you in a Cirrus, and the risk of getting trapped in the airplane if it flips is exceedingly high. If an unknown open field were his only option in an emergency he would definitely use the CAPS. So that's why the Cirrus training emphasizes (insists?) that the CAPS is the answer to an engine failure over anything but a suitable/designated landing strip. In optimizing the airplane for the survival of the occupants after a CAPS deployment the nose gear was developed with a shock-absorbing collapse as a design feature. That explained a lot for me.

I think there is a good chance you'll see the spread narrow back to 0.5gph once you get the other issues sorted. Good luck! And yes, please do share the feedback you get from Savvy. Another opportunity for me to learn something.

Ok, looking at the data here https://apps.savvyaviation.com/flights/shared/flight/10135421/f4cb8108-85d3-4a47-adf0-32b33235bc85 Caveat emptor - I'm not a mechanic, so this analysis is based on my own self-education and limited experience assessing engine data. You will definitely want to run anything I come up with by an expert for validation. That's what I do with my analysis of my own data. Bottom line up front: What I see in the data shows issues with the ignition system and indications of an intake leak on the even side of your engine, most likely at the #6 intake port. EDIT: However, all of these things can affect each other. So it's often best to make one change, reassess performance, and then proceed to the next change if things haven't resolved. The easiest check is the soapy water check for an intake leak, so I'd start there. Here are my observations. 1. Induction check - The even cylinder EGTs dropped less than the odd cylinders, with #6 dropping the least. The even side drops were 160/160/135 for #2/#4/#6, and the odd side were 190/210/190 for #1/#3/#5. Less of a drop indicates a leaner mixture which means more air, hence an intake leak on on the even side. A single leak on one cylinder could be bad enough to affect the whole bank. From the data #6 looks to be the worst, so that's where I'd start with a physical inspection using soapy water and intake pressurization. But I'd look at the whole even side. If you look at the tail end of the data trace for #6 you'll notice a "bounce" in the EGT that isn't present on the other cylinders, further nominating #6 as the source of the problem. 2. GAMI sweeps - These indicate your cylinders are not well balanced for LOP ops. There are 3 available data sets here. The first, moving from rich to lean, yields a spread of 0.8gph; the second, moving from lean to rich, is 1.1gph; and the third, moving from rich to lean, is 1.2gph. Here's the sampling of the best case, but you can see the other two sets of peaks as well. There's some work to be done here, but not before you take a look at your ignition. Which leads us to... 3. LOP Mag check - The first mag you checked looks to be a little weak, especially on the even side of the engine. #4 and #6 in particular. And then #3 on the second mag is a bit erratic, which may be a weak plug or wire, and #4 & #6 are again weaker than #2. You'll want to get this figured out first and then look at your GAMI spread again. EDIT: Disregard the comparison of #4 & #6 to #2. Minor differences between EGTs are expected and dependent more on probe placement and other flow factors that vary between cylinders. Comparing EGT behavior across multiple cylinders at different conditions is valid. Comparing absolute EGT values in most cases is not. My bad. Once again, I'm not a mechanic and this is an analysis of your data based on my own learning and limited experience. Get an expert's assessment before spending any money.

Perfect, I'll take a look and get back to you in a bit. Hopefully other folks will be looking as well

@Ragsf15e You'll need to share the link from the Savvy page, not the copied link address you have in your browser. You'll find it on the right side of the Savvy page when you have the flight data displayed. The link will look like this https://apps.savvyaviation.com/flights/shared/flight/8944398/75270480-f077-4e40-9c9d-5b70f51d9a31

How do you make the change? What’s the menu/selection flow?

Your best bet, if you’re planning to do this yourself, may be to enter config mode and look for a coordinate format setting option. But I’m guessing you’re trying to avoid entering that mode unless you know it will get you the result you want, which is a prudent move. There is sure to be a Garmin guru along shortly who can offer more info. Have you talked to an avionics shop with a Garmin dealership? Configuration changes are typically frowned upon by Garmin unless one of their dealers make the change. @Garmin Aviation Team

The whole pitch feels premature to me. My impression after reading through what LASAR has released is that they are still at the "back of a napkin" stage in this project but decided to put it out where people can see it to garner interest. Unfortunately they haven't presented anything detailed enough that we would regard as tangible value in which to be interested. There have been a number of threads here about pooling resources to do group orders of high demand parts in quantity but I can't recall that I've seen any of them be successful. I'm happy to stand corrected if folks have done it. LASAR apparently did it with the no-back springs on their own dime (as far as I know). If that is what this scheme is really all about, generating the up-front cash for more cost effective parts production, it would be nice if they were able to just state it clearly that way. Still, I would want to see a stronger value proposition than solely parts availability to warrant the annual subscription fee. Does LASAR have a presence here on MS? EDIT: I answered my own question (duh) @LASAR

I’ve been the steward of airplanes in North Carolina, California, Missouri and now Tennessee. NC and CA were tiedowns for practically free back in the late 80’s. In MO I leased hangars ranging from $130/month for a ratty bare bones bare bulb gravel floor manual door t-hangar to $280 for a nice newer t-hangar with good lighting and electric door that included utilities. The land lease for my current hangar in TN is ~$165/month. The hangar itself and utilities are my responsibility. I’m happy to have use of it. Yes, you’re correct, location makes a difference and I’ve always been a stone’s throw from a recreation destination or a “major metropolitan area”, if that applies to Knoxville . I was surprised by how out of touch I am with rural airport economics and how relatively affordable they are. Had I broadened my search, my retirement location selection may have been swayed. I guess it’s never too late for a change.

This article was in today's AOPA SmartBrief email. I must be missing something here, but they're talking about lowering the monthly hangar lease rate from $150/mo to $75/mo, UTILITIES INCLUDED. And the tenants are saying that's in line with other local airports. Have I just been living in the wrong places? https://www.kalb.com/2025/10/14/pineville-city-council-discuss-new-airport-hangar-rates-pafford-expansion/

The Foreflight checklist function.

With an induction leak on a turbo, the leaking cylinder will run richer than the other cylinders in cruise at altitude. You identified lower EGT and higher CHT running LOP, which I’d correlate with #6 possibly running ROP, potentially due to an intake leak. EDIT: What you’re seeing on the ground at 1000RPM also correlates with a #6 induction leak, where #6 would now be running leaner than the the other cylinders. A GAMI sweep could show you what’s happening, but there is a comparative check you can do specifically driven by setting two discrete manifold pressures and comparing the EGT changes across the cylinders. They should all be about the same. The complete details for performing this check are on the Savvy site. ANOTHER EDIT: I couldn’t find the check on the Savvy site, so here’s what I use. As for looking at general engine data and trying to identify it, that’s more difficult without comparing a recent flight to an historical flight before you noticed a change. It can be done but you have to look for very minute EGT deviations in the data when moving from one power setting to another. You can also check for intake leaks on the ground with a spray bottle of soapy water and a buddy to move the prop for you.

I have an automobile trash container that hangs from the back of the right seat that I use to hold things I might need in flight. That’s where my X3 and boom cannula wind up when I’m traveling alone. My wife’s will fit in there too. i’ll find a pic or link. EDIT: Here’s the one I have https://a.co/d/6jS7TUQ