EricJ

That looks like a nice radio, especially for the money!

One transmits 4W more than the other. It just increases your transmit range a bit.

That's correct. Polarization can be view from multiple angles, though. The one we care about is relative to horizontal, so putting a bend in a vertical rod antenna tilts the polarization in the direction of the bend. For example, tilt a vertical rod antenna toward the tail. The polarization tilts toward the tail, too, but view from the front of the airplane there's no change in polarization and it's still vertical. Tilting the VOR cat's whiskers forward from the vertical stab makes no difference in the polarization in any horizontal viewpoint, but looking down at it the polarization from each whisker is tilted toward the front of the airplane (and that's a dipole compared to the comm antennas, which are monopole). Bending or tilting the polarization of the comm antennas a bit isn't a big deal, though, as at the ground antenna reflections off everything nearby will have random polarizations and only the direct ray will maintain the transmitted polarization. It doesn't make a big difference. There is some difference, but it isn't a big deal.

Well, bummer. That was a nice feature while it lasted, but the CARES site now sends you back to the old site where you can select CD or paper for the aircraft records. You can get all the registration history records online at the CARES site for download, but for the rest of the records it looks like we're back to the old way. :'(

I'm a comm guy, but not strictly RF, and I've wondered the same. It shouldn't affect power output, but would probably alter the pattern and polarization a bit. That said, it'll probably get rid of the end null that most rod antennas have. It's really not any different than the bent rod antennas that are out there, especially the ones bent flat for use on the belly. Like a cat whisker VOR antenna, too.

You can't get new ones any more, so if one gets broken or the base corrodes, there isn't much choice. I've wondered whether one is any faster than the other.

Looks expensive.

Still not anything near a $300k airplane imho.

There's a 2014 memo saying that if they're temporary they're fine. "Temporary" isn't defined. The use of suction cups or other temporary methods are not considered a modification. Lots of people use adhesive mounts that can be removed with fishing line. The screw-on mount shown in this thread might be a little more subject to someone interpreting it as a "permanent mechanical attachment", but it's all arguable. In general, the idea is that these don't seem to be something that the FAA is getting bothered about. They do include the little caveat that if it falls off and causes a problem, it's a problem. https://bruceair.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/faa-camera-memo.pdf

That's another hint that a good thing to do is just run it and see what it does. If it is doing something stupid at the 60 hour mark, then contact them as instructed. When I bought my airplane my engine only had forty hours on it since an IRAN which included rehoning the cylinders, new rings, etc. I don't think a good break-in was followed because oil consumption was completely inconsistent, and could go from 1qt/8hours to 1qt/1.5hrs and back and you never knew what it was going to do. The rebuilder and the local Lycoming rep both said to just keep running it. It did eventually calm down, but it took quite a while. I didn't do anything special, it just settled down on its own. I've put about 850 hours on it since then and it's been very consistent for a long time.

There was a Bonanza crash in Flagstaff several years ago that ended in a double fatality and fire. It was a hot summer day, so very high DA, and it was a transient couple that just stopped for fuel, so they weren't necessarily familiar with Flagstaff or potentially with high DA issues. There wasn't enough of the airplane left to make any conclusive determinations, but some of the locals thought it may have just been the difference of not leaning for takeoff.

I made my own GPU (I'm an EE), and in the end it wasn't much cheaper than just buying one.

As mentioned, both of those are access panels for the fuel tank, so the screws are sealed to prevent tank leaks. All of the access panels on the top of the wings are fuel tank access and so will have sealed screws.

You can get it free if you're a CAP pilot. 6. What ForeFlight service level is being provided? 6.1. ForeFlight Military Electronic Flight Bag with Performance. 6.2. This is ForeFlight’s highest level subscription. 6.3. CAP licenses funded by the Air Force are limited to one iPad and one iPhone. 6.3.1. The primary navigation data base is the avionics in the aircraft and is kept current. 6.3.2. The iPad (same as a sectional would be) is your backup to the avionics in the aircraft. 6.3.3. The iPhone is your tertiary device. 6.4. Please note that Jeppesen charts / plates an add service in the ForeFlight application is not a funded option with this Air Force paid account.

+1 that I think flap hinge spar cracks come from repeated stress, not a single event. You can find pics here somewhere of where the cracks happen, and just inspect those spots if you're sufficiently worried to take the relevant belly panel off. I think there has been a few cases where the cracks were hiding behind the mounting hardware, so it just means a fairly close inspection may be required. FWIW, it's the sort of thing that should be looked at every annual, anyway, but many IAs may not or may not even be aware to do so. In any case, annual inspection is a good time to check the spar, service the flap actuator, etc.

It's much farther out of reach as a hobby or pastime than it has been in the past, and it's never been great that way. I took thirty years off from flying because it just wasn't worth the expense compared to other interesting things I could be doing. So I think you're probably right that now it's pretty much either a career choice or nothing, and it's a big investment to pursue as a career choice. Compared to how much it would cost to get into other interesting and rewarding careers, the same issues come to bear. Plus the considerations of the downsides of the industry, like the boom and bust characteristics where you may just be out of work and potentially have to find a different career somewhere along the way. So it's just not going to be attractive to a lot of people, especially given the other potentially less expensive and less risky options that may present themselves. It's just the normal ebb and flow and evolution of society. It is not static, and changes are often large and sweeping. Look at the distribution of careers fifty years ago and now; the economies and workforces are barely comparable.

In case you're still looking, or if anyone else cares, the little plate below the leading edge of the stabilizer has the serial number.

We have a lot fewer blacksmiths, too.

Historically the decline is generally in the older generation's ability to adapt and understand the context of the culture of the younger generation, often called the generation gap. It's been consistent over history. Every generation is declined in the eyes of the previous for pretty much all of history, and yet here we are. If the decline were real then we're the worst of all before us. In reality we're all pretty much the same, we just deal with the cultural context we grew up in and the perspectives and biases it gives us. Go volunteer for some youth organizations, like FIRST robotics or something like that, and come away amazed and in awe of the new generations.

Every generation says something similar about those who follow. It was TV and rock music, drugs, whatever.

A piece of threaded standoff nut (basically a long nut) would make an easy temporary fix (maybe even a permanent one).

You just have to hope that when your doc does the prostate exam he doesn't have both hands on your shoulders.

Do you still have one? I think it's just an inventory check box.

I had to fly home with the gear down once, and departed an airport at about 5000' field elevation. It didn't climb for crap at speeds appropriate for cooling at that altitude in AZ. It was a highly notable difference compared to having the gear up. I didn't try lower speeds because I wasn't trying to optimize climb, I was just trying to get home without stressing anything more than necessary, including engine temps.

TT put the pitch servo under the cargo floor for some reason, which is apparently where the construction differences arise. Century put the pitch servo in the tail a little behind the avionics shelf, where there's an easy reach to one of the elevator pushrod swing couplers that's right there at the shelf. There's a hole in the swing arm coupler that appears to have been made to couple a pushrod to a servo, and that's what Century used. A small bracket holds the servo in place. It's a very clean and simple installation, but I don't know if it is universal across the short and mid-bodies. The TT installation under the floor uses a heftier bracket and piggybacks the pushrod connection onto the rod end of a nearby joint in the elevator pushrod. It's also a reasonably clean installation, just not as simple as the Century and apparently subject to the differences in construction that affect the servo bracket. Yes, the AeroCruze is approved for the J but still subject to the bracket differences that are affecting installations.