alexz

Probably because it’s the easiest sensor to live without. One will not loose orientation in space if fuel flow is gone. On top of that shadin fuel flow sensor was always gumming up for me, even replacement become sticky after about a year.

Infinity is good and serving a lot of Mooneys. Hard to schedule though due to number of planes that go there.

I use similar devices on the drones and never needed lens cleaning for laser powered device. Lenses usually protected by front filter for expected wavelength which seems to be done in LHS as well. And that surface is clean on my install. System does work most of the time so i don’t want to spend time/money on figuring what is wrong when it does not work. Typically on a systems like that we have a recorded log of data for the last 30 minutes but it adds to the cost of the system to do the logging reliably and/or not to wear flash storage too quickly.

Mine does the same. About 1/3 of the landings I don’t hear count until last 10 or 5 announcement. System was installed by very good shop.

Installed SureFly year ago. Hot start problems completely gone. Smooth starts every time. Works great so far.

Bravo is awesome airplane, depending on your ability to learn motor and mental tasks it will take you from 25 to 70 hours to get comfortable with the plane and then some. If you did not have any complex time I’ll advise getting at least 25-50 hours in something like a Piper arrow. Then there is always a question of insurance. Look for turbo age (usually requires overhaul around 1000 hours), turbo couplings, gear rigging, gear actuator, fuel tank sealing. Otherwise they don’t have many problems if been flown properly. Properly meaning NOT by POH power settings. On avionics side, G3X touch with GFC500 - light years ahead better than any KFC-xxx rotary phone GTN750xi + G3X + GFC500 + some attitude backup and some kind of digital engine state monitor is a go.

A And only if you fly above 12500 ft

Given the price of current M20 disks, wonder if your process can be efficient replacement for those crazy priced parts?

Sounds like a perfect application for AI to monitor the feeds.

You are right about almost everything except that currently making transistors smaller only leads to smaller package and faster operations. There is such a thing as leakage current and it’s gets larger as transistors get smaller so saving energy and keeping cool becomes a real problem (just look at massive heatsink on you intel cpu or GPU). There is also quantum effects starts to play where you transistors can switch without a command as well cosmic ray particles with lower energy can cause switch, which leads to more circuitry to guard agains it which defeats making transistors smaller…. Limits of current technology is very near and getting closer and closer to them is more and more expensive.

They work great on my Bravo.

I'm all rooting for more performance, but sad truth is that tasks that require performance - like FPGA place&route algorithms got only marginally bit faster over last 5-7 years. Last 5-7 (2016-2023) years amount of performance improvement in computing that can't be done in parallel computation was much less than in preceeding 5-7 years (2009-2015)

I stand corrected about performance, but even transistor counts per unit of the volume is reaching close to the allowed by nature, couple more iterations and we will be dealing with quantum effects that will preclude deterministic operation the switching element known as "transistor" since the switching mechanism itself will be comparable in size with an atom... perhaps some some new principles will be discovered... who knows.. state might be stored in quarks... or we will start using non-binary switches (aka "neuron")

Btw, here is exchange where "AI" fails horribly bad and then double downs on the mistake: "describe Boston class B airspace" Chat GPT: Boston Class B airspace is an area of controlled airspace that surrounds the Boston Logan International Airport (KBOS) and extends from the surface up to 10,000 feet mean sea level (MSL) in a radius of approximately 30 nautical miles from the airport. The airspace is designed to provide a safe and efficient flow of air traffic into and out of the airport, as well as for transit through the airspace. Within the Boston Class B airspace, all aircraft must obtain clearance from air traffic control (ATC) before entering. Pilots must also have a two-way radio communication with ATC and must operate with a transponder that is capable of automatic altitude reporting. The airspace is divided into several layers, each with its own altitude limits and communication requirements. The innermost layer, called the "Core," extends from the surface to 3,000 feet MSL and has the strictest communication requirements. The next layer, called the "Bravo," extends from 3,000 feet MSL to 10,000 feet MSL and has less strict communication requirements. To operate within the Boston Class B airspace, pilots must receive proper training and have a thorough understanding of the airspace requirements and procedures. It is important for pilots to closely monitor their altitude and location to ensure compliance with the airspace restrictions and to maintain safety for all aircraft operating within the airspace. "where did you get 10000 feet MSL value ?" I apologize for any confusion. Upon double-checking, the top altitude of Boston Class B airspace is actually 12,000 feet MSL, not 10,000 feet MSL as I mentioned earlier. The airspace extends from the surface up to 12,000 feet MSL within a 30 nautical mile radius of Boston Logan International Airport. I obtained this information from the FAA's Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) section 3-2-3, which provides details on the characteristics and requirements of Class B airspace. Thank you for bringing this to my attention, and please let me know if you have any further questions.

Curious, can you provide more details on it ? Thank you.

That's is not correct statement. None of the currently developed "AI" can run though all possiblilites. All they repsent currently is a bunch of nonlinear equations with coefficients and step functions ajdusted by training. The chance that is covers all possibillites is close to nil. AI can help in some tasks where human expert is still involved, but won’t be running unsupervised for long time to come. Moore “hypothesis” stopped being true in high performance computing for well over 10 years already. Chips are not becoming faster, they are becoming larger but there is whole bunch of tasks that would benefit immensely from much faster chips.

Airbus was actually much worse: it was averaging control from left and right. I think having full control on either side would not have resulted in catastrophic outcome…. Averaging was bad decision made by non pilot software developers and some how it made thorough all the testing.

I would strongly object comparison of normal flight law that is based on precise, deterministic verifiable and reproducible algorithms to the AI. The whole thing about AI that we can’t predict given the small change in the training scenario what output we will get without actually testing ALL possible inputs. Unlike normal control law that is based on strict math and control algorithms.

Correct, absolutely BS answer that _can_ be used by trained pilot, but not a solution to the problem. Deterministic algorithms/procedures built in after that crash indicate precisely what needs to be done. Possibly above information that GPT is generated came form the numerous texts published after this accident

For those that think we have an age of AI here is the article from one of the smartest gentleman involved in computer technology: https://rodneybrooks.com/what-will-transformers-transform/

I do sometimes

Thank you. Obviously using superior intelligence so that one does not need to use superior airplane or skills goes without a question I think if we wait couple more years 75k will become like 45k 5 years ago :) Just have to time it right before they raise the price.... Bravos are excellent machines thought even without TKS.

Don, do you have TKS on yours or just heated prop ? If no TKS would you go for TKS upgrade ? Cheers!

You are not the only one. I suspect Garmin did not investigate full envelope of stability on the Mooneys.

I think You are 100% correct about about ignition system. Had a real trouble hot starting engine last week. Went and swapped too spark plugs on fresh new ones, while keeping bottom the same since they are fine wires- zero problems with hot start for the next 5 really hot starts with various time during shutdown (5 min to 45 min) My observation spark plugs are good till 50-75 hours after that they need to be gapped and cleaned. If one happens to hit those 75 hours during hot weather - expect trouble. Let’s see if SureFly helps with a little.