ShuRugal

Supporter
  • Content count

    191
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

90 Excellent

About ShuRugal

  • Rank
    Full Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Virginia
  • Reg #
    ***5WT
  • Model
    M20C (1964)

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. ShuRugal

    Prefer the Right Seat?

    But if you can participate in the modifications, it might be more fun.
  2. ShuRugal

    lawsuit in Philly

    Thank you for pointing out these facts.... This particular topic is a pet peeve of mine. Quick summary of the details for those who are aware of them. The woman suffered 3rd degree burns to 6% of her body, and lesser burns to %16 of her body These burns completely destroyed her external genitals: Her clitoris and both sets of labia were not existent after this incident She was hospitalized for eight days She required a further 3 weeks of medical attention during her recovery She received significant permanent disfigurement McDonalds had conducted an internal study of their policy on coffee temperature as the result of numerous smaller cases their findings were Customers were overwhelmingly drinking the coffee immediately, rather than after arriving at their destination None of their competitors were keeping coffee this hot These temperatures were resulting in numerous complaints of burn injuries to the mouth and lips The conclusion of this study was that keeping the coffee at this temperature served no profitable purpose, and was likely to seriously injure someone Despite the results of this internal study, McDonald's leadership made the decision to continue keeping the coffee as close to boiling as possible Further, during the trial one of McDonald's executives testified that, despite having received over 700 reports of customers receiving third-degree burns from their coffee, and having previously paid out as much as $500,000 in individual settlements, McDonald's had no intention of altering their coffee policies in the interests of safety. This demonstrated such a clear reckless and malicious disregard for the safety of their patrons that the Jury decided to award two days worth of coffee sales revenue as punitive damages, which was justified by finding that McDonald's was aware of the hazard for burns, that burns were happening, and that the willfully chose to pursue a course of action which would result in more burns. Unfortunately, McDonald's PR team has done a fantastic job of spin-doctoring this to look like the case was the complete opposite: The general public largely and genuinely believes that McDonald's was serving coffee at normal temperatures (they weren't), that the cup was adequately labeled (it wasn't), that the woman's injuries were minor (they were severe), or even that the woman somehow deliberately spilled it on herself (she didn't).
  3. I'm amazed that a debate about copyright has gone on so long without bringing up the fair-use clause... https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 Distributing copies of equipment operations manuals amongst equipment operators seems to me to pretty easily covered by Teaching, Scholarship, or Research.
  4. ShuRugal

    Mooney covers?

    The cover comes with a safety strap to hold the ends of the straps together in the event that the snaps let go. I pass mine through the nose gear - underneath the tube your towbar goes in, and cinch it up just enough to take the slack out. The position of the snaps makes them letting go extremely unlikely: they are "around the corner" of the cowl from the cover, so that tension on the strap pulls perpendicular to the snaps, rather than in-line with them. As far as aerodynamic drag goes.... there are two of them, and they have a surface area of less than half a square inch between them. Unless you're pushing transonic, their added drag force will be measured in millinewtons.
  5. ShuRugal

    Mooney covers?

    I have a Bruce fuselage cover, tailcone cover, cowl plugs, and pitot cover. They are all excellently made, and they fit perfectly. I imagine that if you asked for a zipper aligned with the TE of the door, they'd sew one in. The snaps are completely trivial to install, they just replace one screw adjacent to each cowl flap, and they secure the front of the cover without a strap binding on your gear doors.
  6. ShuRugal

    Gear Up Alarm fail at annual

    Okay, looks like the diode going FROM the horn leads to the gear up limit switch - I would guess that is a normally-closed switch, which opens when gear is retracted. I don't see where it goes from that switch, but i would expect ground. The Diode TO the horn is fed from the gear safety switch, which should be the one on the back of your ASI. This should also be a normally-closed switch, which is opened by sufficient pressure to indicate safe flying speed. As jack stated, the gear-safety switch is probably gonna be the culprit here. You can test it with surgical tubing as he suggested, or if your A&P has a pitot/static tester, it can be tested that way as well. Just run the pitot pressure up until the horn stops, and note the indicated speed.
  7. ShuRugal

    Gear Up Alarm fail at annual

    Like Andy said, Looks like the horn is grounded along 3 different paths (21LC14F20, 21LC25F20, and 21WE15G20), with no switch on ground Looking at this Diagram, I dont see the switches on the + legs (must be on another page - find them please?) but here is what i think is going on: 21WE31D22 and 21WE14D22 are both capable of energizing the horn if + voltage is applied to the other end. 31D22 looks like it is intended to be used with an AC supply to give a half-wave rectification, which would be adequate to drive a buzzer. 21WE16D22 appears to be set up so that it can ground out the + terminal to kill the buzzer - the way that diode is oriented, applying + voltage to that lead will not energize the horn. Without seeing where the other end of those 3 leads go, it's hard to say for certain, but if my guess is correct, the switch logic should look like this: (21WE31D22 OR 21WE14D22 closed) AND (21WE16D22 open) == Buzzer ON (21WE31D22 AND 21WE14D22 OPEN) OR (21WE16D22 CLOSED) == Buzzer OFF If you can provide the portions of the wiring diagram showing where those leads go after passing through the connector at the lower right, we can confirm if this is correct, and I can tell you what the circuit is doing.
  8. When you say "by the battery", I assume you mean "by the radio tray in the tail"? Or should there be a tap in front of the firewall? Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
  9. Mine hasn't got those buttons, unfortunately. 64 model. Lines are gonna have to be opened. Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
  10. Which, unfortunately, still leaves me with an unreliable ASI until the shop can take a closer look at it. I will have to catch the next one. Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
  11. ShuRugal

    GPS Spoofing.

    yes, and much more easily. All you need to do to spoof a VOR is broadcast a CW beacon and and omni antenna spamming the phase-shifted beacon for the radial you wish to spoof.
  12. Wish I could come up and join you, Brian, but between thunderstorms forecast down here from Tomorrow until Tuesday or Wedensday, and a newly-developed ASI issue, looks like i'm grounded this weekend.
  13. Fun day... started my takeoff roll, noticed ASI wasn't moving... continued to rotate speed, wheels off the ground (4,500' of a 5,000' runway in front of me still) the needle jumped a bit and started moving... decided to err on the side of caution, aborted the takeoff and returned to the ramp. Mechanic put the pitot-static tester on it, and airspeed is all over the place: first test was 100 mph, reading 105, second test for 100, reading 80, test for 80, read 60, test 100 again, read 100.... I'm hoping that these symptoms are indicative of water in the system - had thunderstorms all last week and most of this week, and the thing was fine when I last flew it on the 14th... The shop is gonna look at it in more detail Tuesday - fingers crossed for a simple problem...
  14. ShuRugal

    Porpoising leads to gear collapse accident

    Well, it seems that your definition for "flare" is at odds with the common usage of the term. It is clear and obvious that everyone in this thread is using the word "flare" to mean "a gradual and steady increase of AoA to maintain lift in ground effect as airspeed is reduced in preparation to landing." Considering that, in low-speed/high-AoA flight, AoA primarily determines speed, while power primarily determines sink rate, this definition is neither incorrect nor unclear. It is also consistent with your description of "transition". In short, we're all talking about the same thing, proper technique for final phase of landing, but you're insisting that everyone else is wrong, because you are insisting on a different use of terminology than everyone else. Which is silly. Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
  15. ShuRugal

    Porpoising leads to gear collapse accident

    During which, a high angle of attack is assumed placing the aircraft into a landing posture. This is an extremely broadly accepted definition. If you have a different definition for flare, share it. Otherwise, all you are doing is being contrary. Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk