Utah20Gflyer

I’d heard that and called the parawon airport and the guy I talked to didn’t know anything about anyone who did Prop ECIs. Maybe I didn’t talk to the right person though.

This is what we did last annual. The mechanic asked me to take that panel off and I looked at it and asked “We are about to do the gear swing, how about we take it off with the gear up?” He agreed and we saved 5 minutes of disassembly and reassembly. If you have to swing the gear anyway, why not?

You might be better off doing a second aspen screen which would likely allow you to remove steam gauges. Or you could replace the Aspen with 2 G5s, but you’d still have to keep the back up instruments. You aren’t really going to get any benefit from a single G5 except redundancy in case the Aspen bricked. I don’t know anything about GFC500 compatibility with Aspens. The Aerocruz 100 is an alternative and that I’m sure would work. If it were me I’d do the aerocruz 100 with a second Aspen screen. It’s by far the most bang for the buck.

100 mph and clean configuration before I get to the FAF. For me this is 16” MAP. When I need to start the descent I drop the gear and put in half flaps and get the plane configured for landing. This will give me a 500 fpm decent rate which I fine tune with slight throttle changes. After some practice I don’t have any issues making a normal landing from 200 AGL and 100 mph, although it usually requires chopping the power to idle and aggressively trimming nose up to get me to the 80 mph I’m looking for over the threshold. The extra 20 mph is just the extra energy you need to maintain a consistent decent rate while also slowing down.

Looks really nice! I cheaped out and did a I phone max surface mounted with magnets. It’s really nice having another moving map gps, checklist, traffic or approach chart available at all times. Also the redundancy is great. My I pad mini froze up and then had to be rebooted a couple flights ago. It’s nice to have multiple sources of information.

Looking at the picture of the airfoil in the wind tunnel the air to the rear of the wing is lower than the air in front of the wing. What’s up with that?

I fully concede that this topic probably exceeds my expertise. But for those that don’t believe the wings push air down. Why does it get so windy when I start my planes engine? What’s up with that rotor wash from Helicopters?

Approximately half of the air being forced downward is coming from the top side of the wing. When the air detaches from the top surface it is no longer being forced downward and you lose a lot of your lift. When you look at the side section of an airfoil you’ll see that the air from the top of the wing is actually being forced downward at a greater angle than the bottom of the wing. You gain a lot of efficiency from that top surface smoothly dropping down toward the rear. Sucking that air downward. I guess I would think about this like a leaf blower. It’s a device that performs work by creating air pressure differentials. At the intake there is low pressure and at the nozzle there is high pressure. The point of the device is to move the leaves with the high pressure air and I would propose to you that an airplane is also a device that uses high pressure air to do its work. Low pressure is just a required side effect of creating the high pressure that is actually performing the work. But you can’t create high pressure without also creating low pressure so you could say that a plane flies by creating low pressure and that would technically true, but I think it’s more true to say it’s the high pressure that is making the plane fly. Plane go up, air go down!

I’ve actually noticed the opposite where Amazon is missing delivery dates. It’s never been by a lot but has been noticeable.

I agree both are happening. Because you are flying through a homogeneous air mass and you want to create a zone of high pressure under the wing you necessarily have to create a low pressure area above the wing. You can’t have one without the other. For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. So to me it makes more sense that it’s the downward high pressure that is pushing the plane up against gravity rather than an equal and non opposite (aligned) force that is pulling it up. I think this is more intuitive with propellers and helicopters than our wings because wings are so big and slow moving. They only have to displace the planes weight worth of air to stay aloft and because that is spread over such a large area it’s not obvious to us how much air they are pushing down. The tip of a propeller blade is approaching the speed of sound which is way faster than our wings move through the air. Therefore the effect is exaggerated in comparison. I accept I could be wrong on this and many other things, but this is how I think about it. It’s a bit of a chicken and egg situation.

The last ECI I had done was at the Provo UT airport by Duncan Aviation. That’s a bit of a flight but not terrible. The only other option I found was in Boise ID. Cost was around 400 I thought all the 3 blade props didn’t require ECIs?

Does a propeller create thrust by creating lower pressure in front of it or by moving the air from in front of the propeller to behind it! A propeller is a miniature wing. Lift is created by forcing air downward. The significance of the lower air pressure above the wing is that the air is being sucked downward and therefore is creating extra lift through the direction change downward. The process of changing the direction of the air creates drag. This explains ground effect perfectly since the downward moving air is now hitting a solid surface and the air can’t move as freely as it does at altitude. Without forcing air downward you can’t push a plane up. It really is just that simple.

Seems to me that calling and discussing an issue is perfectly good etiquette. The flight school is free to disagree and say why what they did was perfectly acceptable. Seems like a lot of our problems are a lack of communication and therefore additional communication would be helpful.

Sounds like you are already doing what I would advise which is to run off ship power. I used to run my G3 on setting 1-3 to save battery but now that I can run it off the planes power I can run it at setting 5 as long as I want. The battery will charge while running so if something happens to ship power I still have several hours of battery backup. My older unit does great, it’s a great alternative to bottled oxygen for 1-2 people. Here is a testimonial for it. A couple months ago I was down in St George Utah to see my son perform at Utah Tech University. He had driven down earlier in the day with my wife. I flew down because I had to work that day. After he was done I gave him the option of flying home with me which he took me up on. We were flying back after dark at 11500 when about 2/3 of the way through the flight the battery died on the O2 concentrator. I hadn’t been able to charge it after the flight down and this was before I could use plane power. A couple minutes after the O2 stopped I started feeling much more tired and got really sleepy. It was shocking how fast things changed. Now I use oxygen anytime I’m over 9000 feet, especially at night. I paid 400 for my unit used and then replaced the canisters for another 100. Maybe the best 500 dollars I’ve spent in aviation. I think O2 is underrated.

My plane has that crack and so far it has been a non issue, maybe I’ll look into the CA glue because I can’t help but try to improve things. I personally wouldn’t consider replacing a window over that defect. But to each their own.