mhrivnak

Air Power recently quoted me a 14 month lead time on swapping an A3B6D core for either an A3B6 or an IO-390. A more local dealer quoted 18 months.

As others have indicated, summers see a lot of convective turbulence out there, which is made worse by the hot desert floor being around 6000ft. July at 9500ft is miserable after 10am. I love my J, but if I was flying through there regularly in the summer, I'd want a turbo and O2 to get well above the turbulence. When calculating climb rates based on 310ft/nm, just keep in mind that 90kts indicated at altitude could be more like 105kts TAS. With no headwind, that comes to a 542.5 fpm climb rate. The J performance charts suggest that should be achievable. But it's worth keeping a close eye on it, especially if you end up climbing with a tailwind. On the other hand, if you find yourself in a J looking for a stop in that area on a hot day with a heavy load, just stop at ABQ where you'll be at "only" 5355ft MSL and have almost 14k ft of runway to work with.

I have the ETA version out of a 1990 M20J. It's marked "41-10-P10" and "5A AC250V" on the back. Let me know if that would work for you. https://photos.app.goo.gl/u9kBTwbUz8Si4Uqy8

That is only for "flight plans that are created/edited on the G3X Touch". Generally most people don't ever do that. The G3X Touch has its own internal VFR-only GPS and flight plan capability that's handy if you have a VFR-only airplane that lacks an external navigator, but it's a confusing feature for everyone else. If you have a separate IFR GPS navigator, just use that, and avoid the G3X Touch's internal flight planning features entirely. The G3X Touch will display information about your external navigator's flight plan, including the waypoints, distances, etc, but it's best to think of it as a read-only display. Use your tablet (foreflight or garmin pilot) and/or your separate GPS navigator only to input and modify flight plans. You'll notice that in the video I linked above, the flight plan went straight from the ipad to the GTN 650. That's where he was able to load the flight plan, and where he could modify it or add procedures. The G3X Touch is only displaying the flight plan that is loaded into the GTN 650.

That 650xi manual just says "Service required. Contact dealer for support." So perhaps your dealer will install a software update that fixes whatever that issue is. It should work like this: What happens when you try to do that? Have you asked a dealer or Garmin for help?

I'm not sure what part of my statement you're disagreeing with. But if flight plan transfer isn't working for you, I suggest contacting your installer. For GTN navigators it uses Connext and shouldn't be any different with the newer Xi models. See section 8.9 "CONNEXT COCKPIT CONNECTIVITY" of the G3X Touch pilot's guide.

These are typically configured so the G3X Touch can display any/all of your nav sources. And if it fails, the G5 is the backup and can likewise display the same.

Luckily Tempest wrote down what they think: https://tempestplus.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Sparkplug-Cleaning-The-Right-Way-081412.pdf As for blasting... "Fine wire spark plugs normally don’t need much cleaning. However, if you do need to get the lead out don’t pry against the electrodes or insulators. If you blast the spark plug, use only high grade, new, spark plug abrasive. Use the lowest pressure possible and blast for only a second or two."

It would be interesting to try a mag check in-flight if you see that again. I can understand not wanting to try that with family onboard over the mountains. With ram air on, is it possible something was ingested and partially obstructed the #2 intake? Also consider that your unexpected measurement is past the exhaust valve, which is a classic source of cylinder issues. It may be worth taking a look at it with a borescope.

I did this upgrade 2.5 years ago. If I was doing it today, I'd go with a GTN unit rather than keep my 530W. One of the "hidden gem" features of the G3X Touch is that it enables you to do bluetooth flight plan transfer with GNS units, very similarly to if you had a Flightstream 210 installed. So now I input flight plans (and reroutes) on foreflight, then send it to the panel. No more endless knob-twisting, which helps extend the usability of the GNS units. Given that, the 530W is very easy to use and lets me fly every approach or route that I could fly with a brand-new GTN. But we're significantly closer now to the end of life for GNS units. And when you think about the used resale value of GNS units, now might be a good time to get that value out; at some point they'll inevitably become less sought after. I'll likely end up with a GTN 650Xi before long. Talking with Garmin and some dealers about the difference for my panel between a 650 and 750, it almost exclusively comes down to just a bigger screen. If you're interested in a remote transponder, remote audio panel, etc. then the 750 gets more interesting. Classically, people like that the 750 can display approach plates, but I'd rather have those on the G3X Touch anyway. As nice as the 750 looks, for me I don't think I can justify the huge increased cost. And when I ask Garmin and dealers "please sell me on the 750", they mostly shrug and say that for my panel, the 650 is the right option unless I just want more screen real estate. If I could do it again, I'd get rid of the original annunciator panel and replace it with just a few dedicated lights light you're describing. Most of the lights on my annunciator panel are no longer relevant.

Here is my setup. The 10" adds a lot of value, so I would highly recommend it. Flying an approach, having the geo-referenced plate on the display minimizes the need to look anywhere else during your scan. It's a very nice experience. In busy airspace (especially around Airventure recently!), I'll put the traffic view on the right side of the display so passengers can help visually identify targets. The map and chart views are helpful. I especially like the descent planning; it shows where you'll be when you reach your target altitude given your current rate of descent. While I still like using foreflight, I appreciate that I can fly without a tablet at all and use the G3X Touch for charts, plates, ads-b in, etc. Pulling up weather and notams through the G3X Touch is nice and easy. I find it more convenient than looking it up through foreflight. Controlling a GNC 255 through the touch display is very convenient. As for layout, I like having the EDM 900 and backup G5 close to each other and in a central location. If things go bad and the PFD fails in adverse conditions, I like that my scan is now focused on these two instruments in one fairly central spot. They're also both visible from the right seat without too much trouble.

The light is "required for primary installation" according to the install manual. It doesn't matter where the main display is.

I assume that's among the reasons they're targeting airports and heliports.

The Wisk folks said they'll have remote operators monitoring each flight, communicating with ATC as needed, and intervening when needed. One person will be managing up to 3 flights at the same time. I assume they'll use software extensively to help that person keep track of what's happening and what needs attention. In terms of "Especially from companies that have never certified an aircraft before", Wisk is now owned by Boeing.

Wisk had a nice display at Airventure showing off their autonomous eVTOL. They do a better job than Archer at telling the story of their vision. https://wisk.aero/ To the original question, the goal of these designs is to make aerial short-hop transportation much more affordable and mass-market. Yes helicopters can fill the same mission, but these new eVTOLs will (in theory) be a lot cheaper to operate and thus more cost-accessible to the general public. To that end, it seems like the automation is the real innovation and key feature that will lower the cost of a ride (pilots are expensive and take up a seat). I suspect the fact that it's eVTOL vs. an autonomous helicopter is a secondary outcome. Outfitting any VTOL aircraft to be autonomous is a big deal requiring a ton of new systems and integrations. It probably wouldn't make financial sense to retrofit an existing aircraft vs. design a new airframe; and as long as you're starting fresh, you may as well go with the better airframe and power plant choices for the mission. The manufacturers would argue that their choices have more redundancy and reliability than anything else that's available to fit the mission, and being electric gives them a better sustainability story.

I found similar reluctance after noticing an obvious hot spot with a borescope in an IO-360. It seems like it will take more time for valve lapping to become something that an average A&P feels comfortable with. Thankfully it's an easy flight from here up to Shenandoah Valley, and I was able to get Dean Showalter (a big proponent of valve lapping via his podcast) to do it. I arrived in the morning, and he was done before lunch. At the next annual, compressions and borescope views were stellar. I recently had another borescope view after about 70 hours, and it looks just as you'd hope; no sign of the hotspot or any other concerns. The cylinder is more than 30 years old with ~2300 hours. I figure that changing the cylinder would be around 10x the cost, so lapping was worth a try, and it will only take 100-200 hours of extended life to easily justify the cost.

Spot checking aviationoiloutlet.com, where I usually buy oil, I see about a $1/quart savings on Phillips and $1.72 on W100 Plus. My flying club buys oil by the barrel, and I think we hope to save about $1/quart. There's also the convenience of not constantly breaking open cardboard boxes and individual bottles; and speaking of that stuff, hopefully there's less waste, assuming the barrels can be recycled. But we do several oil changes per week, so we can get through a barrel in a reasonable amount of time. For most people, 220 quarts is a lot of oil to buy at once.

There are STCs. I just clicked through their website and found this list: https://earthxbatteries.com/list-of-stcs/#mooney-m20

I had a Strike Finder that was installed at the factory (I think in 1991, a year after initial delivery), and this was the antenna. The antenna cable had tens of individual conductors in various shielded groups, all wrapped into one big cable. It's been a couple of years, so my memory could be exaggerating the thickness, but it was a big heavy cable.

I decided to remove mine when doing a G3x Touch panel upgrade. Though that was helped by the fact that it wasn't working correctly, and I'm not sure what it would have taken to revive it. But I live in the south-east US where we have thunderstorms nearly every day in the summer. I just don't tend to fly often in proximity to such convection where real-time strike data would make much difference. The storms around here build and develop quickly, and even before the first lightning bolt they are well-worth avoiding. If there's convective precipitation along my route, I like to either be high enough to see and avoid the large buildups (usually 10k plus on a hot summer day), or low enough to be below the bases so I can see and avoid heavy rain. On the rare day with thick IMC and embedded convection, I just avoid that. Others with more experience navigating such weather, or more of a logistical need to get places on those days, could benefit from live strike data. Before you decide, consider this: look at the big antenna on the belly of your plane, imagine its interaction with airflow, and then imagine it gone. Think about how heavy the whole system is, including the cable that's nearly the length of the plane and is a good 1" thick. For my typical flying, I was more interested in reducing weight and drag than to keep/fix/upgrade/replace a piece of avionics I'd rarely use. But clearly it has a lot of value to some pilots, and we each get to weigh the trade-offs for our own situations.

When I bought my plane, the prior owner had been doing oil analysis with AvLabs. It's been a few years so I forget the details, but they made me do something to demonstrate and assert that I was the new registered owner before sharing anything about the prior history on the engine. It may have been enough that when I sent a sample from my first oil change, the FAA registry had been updated and matched my contact info. In any case, they are at least particular about only sharing data with the owner of the engine or their mechanic, and they specifically told me they guard against prospective buyers fishing for information. If you want to make sure a future owner of your engine doesn't get the data you paid for, AvLabs might be willing to delete it or at least not share it if you ask.

You can buy the kits with or without the pre-paid shipping. I buy without and then pay normal USPS 1st class postage, because I've also experienced the long delays (at best) of their cheap pre-paid shipping.

I also stopped by the Whelen booth (as I did at last year's show, when they were "almost ready but didn't quite make it in time for SnF 22" ... ). They said they were wrapping up the final testing and would ship in about a week. So likewise, it did not sound to me like anyone had the 28V parts ready to hand out yet.

In my 1990 J, the circuit breaker panel and related enclosure was riveted in place, making that shunt a giant pain to access and replace. It was a slow exercise of blind contortions and patience. It might be better to drill out if you face the same. When I did mine about 2 years ago, JPI did not include a tachometer cap for the engine, so check early to see if your mechanic has one. https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/inpages/tachcap.php The thermocouple wire they provided was just long enough to fish through the wing thinking it would work, but came up a bit short. I had to get a longer piece of thermocouple wire myself and pull that through using the one that was too short. So as you pull it through, watch the other end carefully to make sure it doesn't disappear! The zip ties inside my 1990 J wing were tight, which made pulling the old wire out and new wire through (twice...) challenging, but it's worth it to have the probe in the right spot. Don't let them talk you into putting the temp probe in an air vent or somewhere easier to access. Lastly, I found this stuff made an excellent cover for odd shaped holes, like the hobbs meter and the engine instrument cluster: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0049MWXM8/

I'd call them on the phone and ask if they generally expect to put you in a position where you can intercept the GP at the FAF, and if not, what are they expecting people to do? In the air, you could just tell them you need to be at 1800 by the FAF. There's no ambiguity in that, and it still gives them flexibility in how they accomplish it.