Ibra

It’s much easier with NDB procedures flown with GPS and ADF, it lacks legal guidance on when to make “GPS/VLOC switch”

If you don't have LOC equipment you can't fly LOC on final guidance for the reason you mentioned... I meant you already have GPS equipment and LOC equipment: you can legally have GPS from NAV1 displayed on HSI1 and LOC from NAV2 displayed on CDI2, there is nothing in regulation that says you should auto-switch here and there, display loc on nav1, disable gps... As long as CDI2 is within loc protected angles, you can fly on magenta LNAV guidance on HSI1 The same can be said on use DTK & TRK to set wind corrected heading and stay on LOC? or use GPS ground speed data to calculate rate of descente on LOC finale with CDFA?

You can use anything you wish to fly a procedure, the rules are about equipment carriage and procedure monitoring(not having stopwatch for timed VOR is illegal), the rules are not about the actual usage of equipment These questions are moot for single pilot in Part91 You can fly the whole procedure in GPS with magenta (as long as you monitor stopwatch for turn and you stay within LOC scale deviations), there is nothing in the regulation that says what you should display and when to switch ! Checkride & DPE practices is a different matter as the goal is to test the ability to fly on raw data (GPS failure is one scenario to test)

Two C47: “Placid Lassie” ( N74589) and “That’s All, Brother” (N47TB) were in NorthWeald (EGSX) today, we are planning to visit them at OldWarden (EGTH) this weekend @IFLYIFR hope you had a nice time in France !

Worth going with somone on O2 and removing own O2 to see personalised symptoms and reactions, I did this with someone in his Bravo: up and down between 8kft-22kft on various profiles (auto-pilot, hand-flying, cruise...) It's interesting that he was +25 years older, heavy smoker, lived his whole life in flat land, yet he coped very well I would not trust my abilities to notice hypoxia alone without O2 alarm or someone else nearby to lose it first or to weak me up

It seems to be the idea from POH, they recommend 95kts which is a good “safe speed” to do anything with the aircraft (stable, white arc…), however, in practice it’s easier to close at slower speeds (80kts), airspeed wiggles with open window and open door while slipping with limited risk to ripping the door off if it pops out, in any case, it’s worth having some height and extra speed to the stall…

Yes I exepct they should help, however, they are likely optimised to prevent pressure differential with airflow when doors are closed? One has to look at full airflow as you have both sauction effect (near window or door) as well as overall internal pressure of cabin It will be good to understand how airflow and pressure gets distributed, let say electrical cabin fire?

I had door open twice, first case, I flew with it open and second case I close it All details are in POH/AFM, you will notice it's tough to close without opening stormwindow, slipping and having someone not scared in right hand seat The reason why people close it because the prioritise radio with ATC, after all, you need to hear ATC clearly on radio to safely land an aircraft If one applies "Communicate and latter Aviate", then they are likely to be bothered and try to close it in the air If one does not give a cent about two-way comms, they will just ignore and land with door open

I think you have plenty of jokes there: - Cat3 approche? - NVG vision for night operations? - Backup gyro that works for upset recovery (they always land on their legs)

I am really keen to hear what GAMI has to say (whatever, they found with UL94, if something real, it will delay 100R STC by Swift)

That is the right way to do it, For insurance, it's non-event really: the first year premium will be expensive however, it won't last as you will be clocking 100h on aircraft to get a good deal on 2nd year Second, your first annual maintenance will dwarf your first insurance, the only way to lower these is to fly a lot hours on your first year it's important to buy an aircraft that can fly your mission on day one, not some project...

He did established something and he is now selling every +1h at marginal cost to himself, genius !

They may go on fire after a drop, I had a case with portable battery that went crazy in car parking after it hit the ground... Happens to phones as well,

Lycoming thinks nothing to see or new under the sun, maybe it's open-ended work in progress: https://aviationweek.com/business-aviation/safety-ops-regulation/no-smoking-gun-found-und-engine-wear-issue Between the lines they don't expect this to be a problem for other operators (any valve problems, real or seatingd, seems to be with UND) Savvy also questioned "dry tappet clearance" way to monitor VSR by UND https://www.savvyaviation.com/unleaded-avgas-cure-or-curse/

Yes this year sounds epic, worth another trip (we are spending whole day at Vierville-Sur-Mer City Hall on 4th June) Let's keep in touch next week,

Sounds like a nice trip, you should stay an extra month in the region for D-Day80 https://en.normandie-tourisme.fr/highlight/80th-anniversary-of-d-day/ Unfortunately, I am stuck at work in Paris this week, however, I am staying near Rouen this weekend and next week (8 & 9 May I am free full day) You are more than welcome to visit us if you fancy barbecue or flight from Rouen (LFOP), otherwise, I may fly M20J to Caen (LFRK) or Deauville (LFRG) for meetup on 8/9 if you have nothing planned, I will send you a PM, enjoy London and have a nice trip in Eurostar !

We had plans to visit Guernsey or Shoreham (UK), however, weather was not motivated, so we flew to Châteaudun AirBase (LFOC) to see another museum...

Sadly, I won't be to offer a flight during the week, I will ask two Mooney flyers in London if they have any short notice plans for France this week? Weather in UK was atrocious these months (we cancelled weekend trip in favour of going South on Sunday) If you are staying in Normandie this weekend let me know?

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?