Ibra

Funny enough, I just come across a British friend who told me that Guy Ritchie bought his airfield in UK, saving a historical aviation heritage (that would have gone to property developers), now he is running it with such enthusiasm, well done Ritchie, GA is a small world as they say https://flyer.co.uk/guy-ritchie-confirms-flying-to-continue-at-compton-abbas/

I know he was here in M20J, I did not catch him, the aircraft in hangar and flies regularly, yet he manages to get in and have fun ! I had one in a K6cr that was in the trailer the whole winter, we are glad he loved pneumatics rather than wood & fabric or control cables... I need a cat in the hangar now

"LA centre, Mooney XXX request speed check" Now I wonder how G430W calculates ground speeds? I recall one has 3 choices: position differential, doopler redshift in L1 frequency and statistical methods (kallman/markov filters) https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog862/node/1786 The other thing, I get puzzled when I see +/-3kts differences between ground speed in G5 and ground speed in G430W, they always catch each other overtime in cruise, however, I get to see some differences here and there Not as far as 1146kts, sounds like afterburner STC

I only read it through another forum and here that between the lines GAMI believes it’s something to do with detonation (taken with pinch of salt) George Braly did not make his coming out yet (I understand they are sharing data and finding with UND first), I hope there is more substance to it than octane/detonation in 94UL, go for G100UL and problem solved ! We will surely get to the end of this duel Swift vs GAMI soon…

Yes Lycoming aromatics explanation is a shot against G100UL whereas the GAMI detonation explanation seems more like promotion of G100UL UL94 in those aircraft should not be a problem, assuming people keep CHT where they should... Yes this explanation sounds highly chirurgical and very unlikely I expect some engine mismanagement to be at play with some false signals that comes from maintaining a school fleet, however, this UL94 fuel trial by UND is far from being crystal clear They sell "G100UL right"

I would add GAMI as interested party here as well, no need to seek their expertise: they will now claim that any alternative fuel (from a competitor) on lower octane than their G100UL will cause detonation and bend cylinders all over the place...

I used to respect GAMI opinions on piston engines, however, they seem to have lost the track on this one? they mentioned detonation with UL94 that caused valve problems, I fail to see how this happens in 180hp NA engine like on the one in the Archer? even in their words unless you have 500F CHT with monkey holding mixture you won't get ICP that high even on UL94...I think the only "scientific reason" why they come up with this handy and predictible explanation: well now they sell G100UL right, which obviously has higher Octane rating than UL94, so we expect to hear more and more about detonation problems anytime an alternative fuel is mentioned, as always, it seems once you throw some business interest, you start to get dumb engineers Lycoming are not in the bright spot neither they claim it's the additives, which honestly does not add up unless UL94 used by UND comes from dodgy batch... In the meantime Pettersen STC for auto-fuel allow to run Pipers on EN228 where the only modifications are fuel lines and dual fuel pumps, I can't imagine auto-fuels having higher octane and less aromatics than Swift UL94?

You need to get an STC for these I get lot of poop on the propeller, never understood why until I saw this ! To clean warm water and wait a bit then clean later, that will do the job...also put ccovers if leaving it more than one day

Not as much as Americans, here is a 5 seconds summary Cousin Avi (Snatch film, Guy Ritchie)

Flew Rouen (LFOP), France to OldWarden (EGTH), UK for the Easter Bunny Flying and visit the museum collection Propper British grass root flying: soggy, wet, grey with greasy food…the Mooney hates it, the kids love it

You can plant and fence some parts (near runway edges), grow tall grass around perimeter, then leave it uncut whole year, then plant few windsocks with aircraft sign It can’t prevent (unconscious) people who know that aircraft are operating on runway to cross an active runway (at their own risks), however, it will help informing others who care about maximising their life expectancy I am not sure how it works in US or WA, however, I think there is no need to bring it to regulators or mayors (you will not like the answer unless you own the land), however, pilots operating around need to be aware (we have a similar arrangements at one small grass airfield nearby, it still does not prevent some hikers, deers, rabbits, foxes…from crossing the runway)

From data/profile and radio doubt it was down because door open? On pax/bag doors open, the aircraft is well certified to fly with it’s doors open while in white arc (say halfway between VS0 and VFE), I don’t think it’s worth closing in flight 1/ passenger door will get ripped off or twisted and 2/ one can’t close bags doors and 3/ lot of distraction I doubt errors on ASI/ALT are that large (200ft & 10kts) in white arc, there is not much asymmetry or ram pressure? however, one will have to fly according to pitch & power (stall warner will fade away with all cockpit noise) For bag door, it can be closed from inside anyway, there is an SB/AD on Mooneys and it may get ripped off and sent to the elevator at 150kias cruise (see an accident report), at takeoff & landing speeds it should stay around (like it did in hundreds of occurrences) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5f7ed012e90e07740f167109/Mooney_M20K_G-OSUS_11-20.pdf For passenger door, it can be closed from inside with the right steps (speed at mid of white arc, sideslip and open storm window), there is a risk of loosing all of it if it jerks I think doors should be closed in parking space, ideally before flight or after I had passenger door open twice, - On final in bumpy conditions in a friend aircraft: it made an interesting go-around, however, landed with door open and zero issues - On takeoff in my aircraft: I heard straps on airframe as I rolled then door opened exactly as I rotate, I climbed to cruise altitude and I close, I had one ATC who could not stop talking as he was supposed to hand me cross-border to London controller (I had no clue what he was saying and he could not just get it: should have declared mayday or set 7600), It seems that it the pax door is likely to go open as configuration changes or at takeoff rotation due to airflow, this is likely to happen at critical moments, however, it’s non-event to fly with both open I used to carry huge lithium battery for my bike in a fire proof bag, however, I was never comfortable as there was no guarantee that toxic smokes can be avoided: my plan was throw it out of the pax door if that happens and fly the aircraft…

That would be neat I think historically, these radial/radial were never coded as official waypoints (or even as internal computational navigation fix, CNF) because they do require “dual magnetic variation” inputs and handling which is not supported in TSO146 (in US, this is moot as VOR magnetic lines are frozen anyway, the better word is “magnetic declination”: original variation at the time the VOR was last aligned or installed) The GPS will naturally handle, VOR-VOR legs and VOR-DME legs on VOR airway as these can be coded as track-to-fix (TF) or along-track-distance (ATD) irrespective of magnetic variation: one flies the true line between two fixes that happen to be VOR… The older GPS TSO129, did not specify which magnetic variation (airport, vor, internal, published…) has to be used to get magnetic course although most of them use VOR published one on VOR radial or tack legs, in TSO146 like GTN, it’s explicit that you need to use the published VOR magnetic variation, however, it’s a issue when you have two VOR radials (it’s theoretical one: they could interpolate or use the closest one and likely it does not matter that much) * Direct-to-VOR+OBS or Course-To-VOR will use published VOR variation or declination * Direct-To-Waypoint use internal magnetic model when it shows magnetic course * Radial/Radial, well you can see a debate with 3 choices to pick from, it seems ForeFlight does solve this quietly and easily behind the scenes for you (*) See 2.2.1.3.12 Magnetic Course, RTCA DO 229D specs for WAAS GPS, it’s a shame we have to pay for this document but here is some info https://www.euroga.org/forums/flying/2784-gnss-approach-availability-in-europe?page=3#post_44004 (*) None of this is relevant or matters in practice, especially, when flying departures or terminal procedures (30nm around airport ARP?), however, someone was concerned about errors on 1000nm radial/radial that cross the North Pole …

Yes, ATC could disable GS with flip of button in tower or pilot can tune on CDI/VOR without slope, the catch is that LOC procedures here tend to require DME/ADF (at least when examiners are around ) for FAF/MAPT: it’s more efficient to enable & disable glide from WAAS navigator (*), do LPV then LNAV without having to go into a big airport that has an ILS/LOC The funny part is that for non precision approach some examiners accept “timed NDB” or “timed VOR” where you fly vertical speed on dead reckoning with stopwatch, however, they can’t get along with “LNAV+V” and want +V disabled, go figure ! (*) You still need to plan for non-GPS or have good weather at alternates

Yes I see the menu in simulator/trainer, it was missing in aircraft when flying* (I will get a screenshot) *I do see it in older GTN and GNS, it’s on 650XI v20. where it’s no longer there

Thanks for this, I will give it a try next time using ForeFlight (seems quicker than using websites)

This sounds like a good deal of one day they plug it to NA Mooneys? I flew on AE300 with 170hp, it gets 25mpg at 150mph in fixed gear DA40NG. In a slick Mooney airframe, I would say 40mpg is possible ! There is the CD300 that runs on JetA, I am sure some competition in the "300hp corner" is very healthy as well

If it's not broken don't fix it I can't see why on earth flying +V while above MDA (or 2D MDAs) is problematic? I get it's advisory, it does not mean he should disable it Looking at recent mannual for latest units, it seems impossible and avionics won't let hime do it...I think my friend is going to get fried next week on NDB or VOR/LOC with distance and timer, let's hope he will not get to disable ground speed, wind vector, flight path vector, track diamond as they make flying non-precision easier (aka safer)

It seems to be a requirement for IFR exams here: - You have to fly 2D CDFA without any slope and 3D precision on official slopes (ILS/LPV) - You have to do RAIM computation at ETA in case SBAS is not available (it's a piece of theatre, I don’t think anyone has died because of lack of sattelites ) GTN XI seems to prevent both possibilities

In G430W to an airport that has LPV & LNAV: - If you disable SBAS 2nm before FAF while in TERM, you get LNAV+V using NAVSTAR only, as you said it's computed on GPS only - If you disable SBAS after LPV annunciation, it treats the lack of SBAS as integrity loss for an LPV, then fallback to LNAV without advisory glideslope In GTN XI, it seems one can't do RAIM, SBAS = OFF and can't disable official/advisory slopes

Yes all the steps above work in GTN NXI/TXI simulator, I was referring to the steps in navigator while flying the aircraft, those menus just vanish whole airborne, I will do a screenshot next time I fly my friend aircraft...then they re-appeared inside the hangar The examiner wanted to disable +V in LNAV+V so that his student can fly 2D procedures like in the old days: counting distances & altitudes, he also wanted RAIM prediction... I am not sure why one would disable augmentation or advisory glide in real life? I was told one need to tick EGNOS and untick WAAS while flying RNP in Greenland, honestly, if one need LPV minima there they are pretty much dead LOL

I use it regularly in Europe: for 20$/yer one gets regular updates of ECMWF model every 4h, which is gold standard down here... It's a bit of "kitchen sink" with load of functionalities and light documentation, however, it's the best tool one can have to benchmark against GFS or compare to BBC weather

Hello, In GTN XI, does anyone know how one checks GPS status? selects SBAS provider? get RAIM prediction? disable +V? I would have expected these to work, Home -> System -> GPS status -> SBAS Home -> Utilities -> RAIM prediction -> “compute RAIM” However, I can't find these in the menu? I was scratching my head in the hold trying to disable +V vertical guidance with no luck (it seems these options are not available when one receives WAAS augmentation)

Does Canada/US allow GA to Tech-Stop (like airliners when you land and get fuel while staying airside in H24 international airport with permanent staff), can one get fuel while stretching their legs airside? assuming, one complies with eAPIS, CANPASS, CBP…and sends back-to-back flight plans in big airports Just personal curiosity, I am based in Europe and not planing to fly to Alaska anytime soon: it’s still in the dream phase (I did NYC-Canada and Florida-Caribbean with Mrs). In France/UK, GA is not allowed to Tech-Stop like airliners, however, some airports are relaxed with it, especially, for regular pilots getting fuel without passengers

We went down to Spain to chill and eat some paella Found it, it’s the new clouds factory over the Loire river !