Schllc

Pretty sure it’s just data.cvs its not just engine data, it’s air temp, speed, heading, altitude etc

I don’t have an explanation for this and I suspect Brian is correct because he has likely forgotten more than I will ever know. This upgrade was pretty early in my journey. I bought my ovation in the early hours of my ppl training so the vernacular was pretty foreign to me. I owned 456gx which was a2004/05 ovation with an stec AP and did not have waas. the first chance I got, I added a 345 transponder and was told I had to upgrade the software to install the transponder. I know I had data logging after this because I used savvy and got gami’s. I suppose it’s possible it had waas and no one knew, but I was told it did not have it, and the historical listings on aircraft.com says it’s non waas as well.

I would talk to Paul Maxwell or Brian Kendrick. Those are the only two people I would want to do this. I do not know if something with garmin changed, but when I upgraded my g1000 in my first Mooney WAAS was available but I did not have it, and I ordered .37. The avionics shop fought this thing for days until they figured out I could not go to .37 without WAAS. Once they understood this and got .34 it was done in a few hours. at that time you could buy the gia63w’s from garmin, and I was not aware that they were discontinuing production. I also had the stec 55x and not the gfc so not sure if that was a factor or not. but I know I got data logging without WAAS with the .34 upgrade.

My understanding is that it comes directly from Garmin because a dealer has to request or sell.

wow, that has to be a bearing, or a bearing race.

The tail doesn’t even show up in flight aware. faa shows it current with mode S, but absence on flight aware is curious.

I agree with this 1,000%. The real sweet spot of the acclaim is 13-18k. I have been higher than that many times, but usually it was an atc directive, or a weather imperative. The vast majority of time the best economy and speed to be had is between those altitudes. That isn’t to say that more speed couldn’t be had higher, just that the risk vs reward isn’t really there, be it safety or efficiency. My opinion is predicated on close to 1,000 hours over five years of flying all over the country at all times of year. I would be interested in hearing others opinions on this topic.

.34 supports data logging. to install .37 you must have waas

Not really a disagreement with this statement but context is important. would you rather be mildly cramped in a plane for three hours, or in a car for 14 hours. that is the choice myself, wire and two daughters have. so is it spacious and plush, no.. is it worth avoiding a 14 hour drive? YES!!!

Yeah…. But the 172 doesn’t have an option…. it isn’t always a panacea, it’s a trade off, but I enjoy it. I’m sure the guys in the 172’s feel the exact same way for their own reasons. I love all planes, just some more than others.

That is about what I saw. The offending example was 15+

That may well be true. I have never tried it, but it stands to reason both making sea level MP, one is lighter with 30 more hp. I think even with the 310 the acclaim may still lose there because it is heavier. But it would not be by much at all. I was thinking of a typical flight profile where the turbo starts beating the MP on a naturally aspirated engine pretty quickly. No cowl flaps on any acclaim. The type S had some modifications to the interior of the cowling, but I would have to look at two side by side to see what those are. The main differences on the S model was a different prop, flap gap seals, and the inner cowling. There may be a few other items I forgot about but those three are the big speed mods. FIKI in my experience is a pretty large speed penalty. One of the ultras i owned was a real dog. I even flew it to the factory because I was certain there was a rigging issue. It was a good 5 knots slower than my other ones with FIKI. I never did figure out what it was but it bothered the heck out of me. AC is less of a penalty that FIKI, but given the nature of parasitic drag, having both doesn't add the two penalties, but one with both still has to be kind of a dog comparatively.

I have had the storm scope, but never really used it to be honest. XM shows you where the activity is, and I do not poke around violent convective activity so I cannot speak to its efficacy. XM weather is great, you just have to be mindful of the delays or lags in information. I have gone back and forth over the years with turbo/NA, and I like the trade offs the turbo affords. The beauty of most turbos, is that you can fly them exactly like their NA analogs if you choose and get about the same efficiency, but the power is available if you want or need.

A factory poh won’t have many of those answers because most are modifications or implications of… overhauls are definitely more and you have turbos and exhaust maintenance, but if you divide that over a tbo and all other costs of ownership it is probably 5-10%. hangar, insurance, basic maintenance, upgrades, fuel etc. yes appointments are options, AC, FIKI ect Mooneys, at least long bodies will always be flying at or near gross, but with an ovation you can keep more fuel and it’s a little more efficient. I have had long range tanks in two of my planes. I did not need it enough to pay for the modification myself, but wouldn’t mind the option. It requires more attention to managing fuel because of how the gauges read as the tank empties, but more fuel is always a desirable option. My point was that everything in aviation is a trade off, and your mission, personality and budget will all play a role in your priorities. If you can own and maintain an airplane you could justify the extra for a turbo if you wanted to, it isn’t an order of magnitude more to own. If performance and speed is really important to you, you will probably always long for a turbo. It may only save 20-30min over a 3+ hour trip and for me that’s big, but in the grand scheme of things isn’t as important to others. I like the climb, the versatility to take advantage of favorable headwinds, getting through bad layers, and love seeing the 200+tas. There are lots of good arguments for either perspective, but they usually boil down to the trade offs that make sense to you.

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2024-11-03/faa-rescinds-burdensome-maintenance-interpretation