ZMERC

I'm not familiar with the “Erase Error Bank 0 Address C0000", but I removed a KLN94 from my Mooney last year, it has a (then) current database card in it. Are you looking for for a replacement?

looks like your plane is already IFR ready, unless want to train IFR in something more modern (I get that 100%). New avionics is a slippery slope lol. I just needed to update an old transponder that was failing and ended up with this. Added Aspen Pro Max, PX8000G and GNX 375, removed vacuum. Because once I saw the capability of the newer avionics it was easy to justify why I should add enough "other equipment" to be able to use it to the fullest. Not sure if it drives the AccuTrak, but it makes the STEC-30 a very capable auto pilot.

several low altitude sectors in ARTCCs use more than one RCAG site. Depending on your distance from that site and altitude (lower is worse), you may not be able to transmit to them very well. I'd try again in the same area at a slightly higher altitude and see if that changes anything. If not, I guess it's possible your radio may not transmit at the right power at different frequencies, but that's a question for a radio expert (I'm retired ATC, not a radio expert). I have seen this happen in small areas at certain altitudes at a number of areas in center airspace, the explanations have always been weather anomalies, obstructions, or some other vague reason that may or may not be able to recreated. Low Altitude sector = at or below flight level 230 ARTCC = Air Route Traffic Control Center (Houston center in your example) RCAG = Remote Communications Air to Ground site (where the transmitter/receiver the controller is talking from) RC retired ATC

Is this version of the 65 POH in the download section? Do you know the name? The copy I have is a blurred version with poor scanning and I'd like a cleaner version.

Just my perspective.... I would have done nearly everything the same. The one exception is I would have used a little of my radio time explaining exactly what I was expecting to happen to ATC. For example, when asked if I was declaring an emergency, I would have replied "I'm losing voltage and may lose electronics, there is no risk to flight at this time, my plan is to continue to OSU, VFR if need be. If I lose comms prior to OSU, can you coordinate a landing clearance?" Now the controller knows exactly what's wrong and what my plan is. Nobody is surprised by what may happen. ATC would know at this point an emergency doesn't exist, however, if things get worse, like they don't hear me later, or lose my beacon code on radar, they know my plan. ATC would have done the same as they did with you, declared an emergency. As for the EMS on standby at the airport, not a problem. That's why they are there. The tower controller dispatched them when an emergency aircraft was inbound. And for the aircraft left on the ground waiting and the practice approaches? They absolutely are not as high a priority as the aircraft that is inbound with an equipment malfunction. Sounds like the controller interpreted your predicament pretty well and took every step necessary so that if things didn't work out like you expected you'd still have the best chance at success. And that's why they are there.

@mooniac58 I found it, I think, It's the Paypal button.

I got your guide via email. Thank you! Not sure how/where to make a donation though. Let me know.

yes, but.... of course there's a but. The MIA a controller sees "could" also be due to radar coverage in an area. Although that would be locally adapted by a center. It's not typical to create an MIA for radar coverage.

@midlifeflyer MIA and MVA (in ARTCC) are effectively the same thing. MVA "maps" are not displayed, what's displayed to enroute controllers is the MIA map. So you may hear an enroute controller say "my minimum IFR altitude in your area is XXXX" or they may say "my minimum vectoring altitude in your area is XXXX" In the enroute environment the only difference is a potential lower vectoring altitude carved out for vectors to approaches at outlying airports (not inside an approach control). disclaimer: MIA in this description is NOT referring to MIAs published on a chart. They refer to the controllers MIA in their sector. Controllers know the MIA published on charts (and have been tested). They have that info available to them. Aside from that they also have an MIA "map" overlay on their radar display, which is NOT necessarily the exact same altitudes. This is one of those things that always get confusing when pilots/controllers discuss MIAs in an area. Bottom line, it doesn't really matter, if you file/fly what's published as an MIA, you will always be at or above what the controller knows to be safe. For example, a route between A and B shows and MIA/MEA/MOCA, whatever of 4200, the controller may have knowledge that they can actually vector you and use 4000 in that area, but the fact that you believe 4200 when you file makes you safe. I hope my disclaimer didn't make things more confusing.

1. When you're cleared on a route, is the final altitude assigned supposed to work for all MVAs along the route? I'd assumed that was the case...but that's not how it played out yesterday. no. MVAs don't apply to routings, UNLESS it's a radar vector or a direct point to point clearance, like in BVT direct PHL. They are established specifically for ATC to use. There are some exceptions to everything, I realize, but in most cases a controller won't give you a direct routing BELOW an MVA. This is because there are several reasons the MVA is established, could be obstructions, terrain, radar or radio coverage, etc. 2. Is there a good resource that gives you a global picture of MVAs along your route? The FAA website MVA charts by sector are patchy and hard to line up to the real geography and MEAs on the sectionals. again, no. MVAs sometimes change and you can refer to #1 as to why it doesn't really matter if they're published in a global picture. my caveat to this is, if there is, it's not available to controllers. 3. During flight planning, I've generally just looked at the MEAs in an area to figure what minimum altitudes I can expect to get. Is there a better approach here? I now realize that MVAs can sometimes be higher than MEAs. BTW, for the segment in the scenario above, I was given direct point to point, not on an airway. Your method is a good approach. however, you may get changes, like in this case. If you can't or don't want to be assigned a higher altitude, then file airways and stay above MEAs. Also, you can put in remarks section of your flight plan that you request to stay below xxx feet. That would let ATC know you have a restriction. 4. With winter coming, any other useful flight planning trips for us non-FIKI equipped folks? In the northeast, late October to late April ends up mostly being a VFR season for me, which is very limiting. like in #3, file airways and let ATC know early you'd like to stay on course because you don't want to be above the freezing level in clouds. retired ATC (Center). My views are my opinion, not established FAA regulations.