GeeBee

Thank you!

If you want to understand the value of TIS on ADS-B see this cockpit view from a C-150 as it collides with a ANG F-16. The F-16 is under control of Charleston approach control and they still collided.

Yes one can say "I say" to anything you want. When the FAA comes a knocking because you got an altitude bust (remember too that ADS-B is a much stronger surveillance system if your GPS altitude and mode C don't match you'll get a letter). However if you have an accident or incident and your insurance company denies coverage because your rendered your aircraft legally unairworthy (read your policy), you won't be fighting the FAA, you'll be fighting the insurance company. Even if the the item was not the cause of the loss. When it comes to saving "Airplane Units" of money, they are more cheap than any of us. Yes one can say "I say" but that don't make you right when the question is adjudicated by a third party. I come from the PA-18 community which given its Alaskan population, stretches things pretty far, but even they are out on this kind of limb As to replacing a O-ring or gasket is not a repair, the simple question will be asked. "Why did you believe it needed replacing". The act of replacement creates its own facts.

Have you read Part 43?

Why would you open it if you were not repairing it or calibrating it? Replace the fitting on the back? That's a repair. Opening it for cleaning? That's a repair. I guess you could open it because you want to learn how it works, but a manual is easier and cheaper. Further is you open most things it usually requires a gasket or seal of some type, which makes it a repair.

If you buy stuff from Spruce that is subject to FAR 43 major component or appliance rule such as a magneto, new or built and I guarantee it comes with an airworthiness release. I have a stack of them. Some recent purchases include magnetos, wet compass, ELT. For unregulated items such as hardware, you can get documentation if you "check the box" and pay.

Under FAR 43 Appendix A (b)4 repair or calibration of an instrument is defined as a major repair. As such FAR 43.5 requires a record of such work to be documented per FAR 43.9 and 43.11 and recorded in accordance with FAR 43 Appendix B. (Which means an 8130 has to follow the unit)

"OK. I get lowering the flaps in order to lower the stall speed and increase your safety margins if caught behind slow traffic on Fisk arrival procedure. But why also lower the gear? Does the gear hanging down also lower the stall speed?" It can have depending on the type of aircraft. In the Mooney I would guess little on span wise flow. Lowering the gear slows span wise flow (Think of it as strakes pointing down) but more important it acts as a pendulum to stabilize the aircraft in a regime where you are working the ailerons and rudder very hard. So gear allows you to work just a little less and any pickup in stability makes things easier. It also makes the throttle less sensitive for speed adjustments.

Exactly Skates, work on slow flight is important. I really disagree with the FAA's recent standards on MCA flight as it does not build the skills and confidence needed to control the airplane at low speeds.

A couple of years ago, a friend of mine who is a dispatcher sat on a jump seat and watched as a crew on a departing 767 lost center system hydraulics (the big one) and skillfully executed the checklists, performed a manual gear extension, electric flap extension, and returned for landing. He commented to the crew, "Wow you guys must fly a lot together". They responded that this flight was the first time they ever met. When you fly formation, you are no longer "single pilot". Yes, your airplane is, but you are a crew. The airline crew, the military pilot are all trained in multi-pilot operations in a highly standardized curriculum that demands their adherence to the crew or squadron concept under pain of being dismissed. There are few weaknesses in adherence. Ever play doubles tennis with a player you never played with before? While you both know the rules, you still do not function at 100% because you do not know your fellow player's strengths and weaknesses. Which is why training formation with the group is so very important especially where the training lacks consequences for inadherence.

Who am I? One thing I am not is a "low time pilot" trolling. Besides 28K hours and 50 years experience, a BS degree in Aero and a Masters in Aviation Safety and Security, I have been a DPE and an LCA. Now I am retired. I bought the Mooney to support my transport needs in support some familial health issues. Thank you MO1676 for clarifying for people who think a Mooney is maneuverable compared to a jet fighter. Guys I've flown a jet fighter that MO1676 would consider a "dog" (Israeli Super Phantom, the F-15 cleaned our clock by the way). The Mooney is not even close. Look guys I am not against formation flying! I am not against practicing formation flying. I am against unproficient formation flying in situations that demand more of the pilot than normal operations such as arriving as KOSH. If you and your mates can formation fly proficiently, go for it! If you have little to no knowledge about the other guy you need to reconsider the operation, until you are confident in the entire formation's skill level. From the very low level preps that I have seen most these "caravans" do I walk away shaking my head. I see verbal briefings substitute for what should be actual practice a lot, and that scares the bujeesus out of me. " This reasoning borders on incoherence. If you continue to have good flying habits the odds on you crashing are actually fairly low. If you actually follow the NOTAM at Oshkosh your chances of being in a midair are also quite low. I'm just allow time screwball pilot probably flying too much airplane and I've made it in safely 18 times. My guess is you've never done it, have never read the NOTAM, and really don't know a damn thing about it. Let me ask you a simple question. How do you assess and mitigate risk in your flying operation or do you consider "good habits" enough? (and yes I have flown into KOSH three times during Air Venture so I know a few things about it)

I think you all need to go back and re-read what I wrote. Look, yes your local chapter has embraced formation flying. You practice and train with the same guys, in the same airplanes. As I said in my OP, that is the way you do it. What we have right now in these "caravan arrivals" is a group of people who have briefed, but not flown much together very much but know "the rules of the road" so to speak. Knowing is not execution and execution is not proficiency when you don't do it over and over again. Further is the practice relevant? Sure you can fly formation but now add the stress of a NOTAM'd arrival procedure and you got more plates in the air. It is like how often airline pilots come to grief on their retirement flight. Sure you can fly the airplane, sure you can do a low approach gear up, sure you can, but add the emotion of the moment and things go wrong, fast. Point is this, formation flight, with unfamiliar squadron mates into a high threat environment requires a higher level of formation flying skill that I don't see in a lot of these "caravans" which is why I won't participate. Because it has not yet happened? I don't know what to say to that in a safety forum. That is just really flawed in the world of safety. I haven't crashed in 28,000 hours and 50 years of flying, but tomorrow is a whole new day with its own risks and threats. Closing the barn door safety, is not my idea of safety. Safety is pro-active not reactive. What WAS the catastrophic result? That is not the question. The question is what COULD have been the result and how do you minimize that risk. Just because you tickled the tiger's tail does not mean it won't eat you next time, ask Roy Horn.

Nothing wrong with the Fly-In. Heck I am President of my local chapter. The issue is risk and exposure. The risk is high, the exposure level is low. Once a year. The outcome? Two airplanes that collide with catastrophic results. Graph that on the risk management scale.

Some people are not going to like what I say, but I'll say it anyway. This formation arrival stuff as presently constituted is just plain nuts. I don't fly formation with people I barely know and have not trained VIGOROUSLY with and I mean not briefings, not flying formation with someone else, not "I know the ground rules". I mean hours of practice. Sure they do it in the military after lots of training, very high standardization and lets face it a Mooney is not maneuverable like an F-16.

The report said the airplane had a "normal runup". There is no way mags mistimed by 8 degrees had a "normal runup". The pilot likely ignored poor mag performance. I am surprised the investigator took that testimony on face value.

The cite says you need "assistance" from a certificated mechanic. Actually you need his signature because under FAR 43 calibrating an instrument is a "major" repair. It needs to be documented in the logs. Further if you have a blind encoder you are setting yourself up for an altitude bust if you fly IFR or VFR in class B or C unless you correctly correlate the altimeter to the output of the blind encoder.

It does really happen fast in a jet, but most jets are FAR 25 beasts and FAR 25 gives you a world of difference performance in performance calculations, even to the point that after Amendment 54, you have actual wet runway numbers based upon both grooved and non-grooved surfaces with real world testing such as brakes and tires worn to the limits. You also have different climb segments and a balanced field requirements. I can't tell you how many times I have set at places like HNL and FCO burning off fuel to "make weight". Equally so, there are indeed differing techniques such as a reduced flap "Improved takeoff" which basically keeps the airplane on the ground to a higher Vr speed then take that excess energy into the following two climb segments to improve obstacle clearance. When you are on a balanced field keeping that nose down when you see the end approaching takes a lot of intestinal fortitude but it is a case where technique is important and to fail to properly fly the jet will result in the airplane failing to clear the obstacles should an engine failure occur. Not so with FAR 23 and even less with CAR 3 aircraft (which are required to have no numbers). You are pretty much weapons free and unlike FAR 25 there is little in the way of requirements to make "real world" adjustments. For instance how is that number determined reference engine condition? Is that engine they tested with at the bottom or top of its life? How is it leaned? The fact is most the numbers are determined with a brand new airplane in flight test at a set of conditions and everything else is extrapolated by math from that point. Thus things get a little more sloppy and at the same time less room for error if you are relying upon manufacturer numbers. When it comes to winds, if you are counting on that wind, a good rule of thumb (there we go again) is to count on 1/2 the stated head wind and 1.5 times the stated tailwind. That is what the FAA requires the airlines to margin in their automated performance data and it leaves you a good margin.

That looks very much like the 72041 ice light. If it is they make a 24 volt version.

AKA, measure with a micrometer, cut with an axe. That is true of most General Aviation because CAR 3 and FAR 23 numbers are not that good.

Better re-read that CAR 3 thing again. Yes, as long as it is part 91. Someone wants to buy your airplane and put in on a Part 135 certificate, you got a big problem. Easier to get approved materials and if they are not approved, a burn cert is really cheap.

Power to weight merely expresses the delivered horsepower but not the thrust. We got into this with PA18's and different propeller STC's. The amount of hp converted into thrust can vary markedly with a given propeller. All these examples have the same power, 180hp on the same airplane. Yet they have markedly different thrust ratings. https://www.propilotsinc.com/questions-answers/#faq-2

The effects of runway slope cannot be easily canned because the net effect is dependent upon acceleration and that is a factor of thrust. The number is somewhere between 2 and 4 per 1 % of slope.Thus thrust to weight ratio becomes relevant. Very high thrust aircraft will be less affected than low thrust aircraft. Obviously this means, turbo vs non-turbo etc. and even an inch off the prop blade can have an effect. In order to get a really accurate number you really have to flight test to get an acceleration factor unless you can get a net thrust number of the particular power plant and propeller combination. My source is Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators. If you don't have a copy I suggest it, which is in print and Axioms of Flight, which is out of print but often available on Amazon. All that said, PT20J's suggestion of the 70/50 rule is very sound advice.

So is the map states you have landed in or states you have landed in with your Mooney?

Very sound advice. Here is the thing about engines. It does not matter if it has 50 SMOH or 5000. When you buy a used airplane, be prepared to drop an engine in it unless it is a fresh factory reman or new and has a warranty. I've seen some very low time engines be POS because of corrosion, poor overhaul, poor break in etc. I've seen some high timers run and run. Sure you inspect, compression check, oil analysis, borescope but the reality is you don't know until you run it for a while. There is a C-182 on my field that was purchased with 100 SMOH. After another 50 hours it shook like a wet dog and you couldn't fly it without the cowl flaps fully open. Case bolts were coming loose. The owner threw in the towel and sent it out for overhaul. Bad hardware, questionable torque work etc. and this was by a well known and supposedly reputable shop. As far as avionics, paint and upholstery go, you got two choices, what can you live with or what you want and when. Then budget accordingly. Bottom line to a used airplane. Make sure it has good "bones" i.e. no corrosion or bends, be in a position to drop in an engine and if you don't consider yourself lucky, budget for everything else now or in the future. Price accordingly. The price you come up with may not buy that airplane.

We have a winner! And the Vso of a Ovation or Acclaim is 59, so add another 5 to the problem.