hais

50 minutes. Intention was to run for 2 hours until they drop below 380F. The break-in was cut short because of an alternator problem. That left the question: do we repeat the break-in when the alternator is fixed, or is this good?

IO550N, engine break-in. Looking at this photo, do #2 and #5 cylinders still need break-in or is this CHT difference negligible and break-in can be considered completed?

A feature I wanted are two separate buttons. The stopping one just stops it. The reset one starts a new count. Some work in sequence like start-stop-reset-run. Too many clicks while in the hold. One press too many and now you have to click like 7 times to get in the correct mode...

The Poh for O says if you have fire while starting, continue to crank, and if it starts, continue to run it for a few minutes and then inspect for damage. That sounds like they expect damages to be limited. Hopefully that will turn out to be the case with yours.

Then how do you call the one where you get to reuse the underwear?

All you need is a nutcase who insists on succeeding despite the unfavorable odds. There are not many of them around. Occasionally one appears, and the result is an Austro or ..... G100UL.

If it feels difficult pushing up 30 degrees, it's probably the envelope protection trying to push the nose down to normal attitude

I have a feeling you didn't mean in one flight, but if you did, where do I send you the congratulatory case of beer?

Funny story: you need to know your systems. I didn't know that the overhead vents don't pass through the heat exchanger. That ignorance was rewarded with a memorable flight

The problem with these threads is that I tend to discover that I actually don't know anything...:) When flight planning, do you actually look at OAT to figure out what climb performance you can expect at flight levels? Or do you reliably see the same performance at FL200? Or is the performance difference not significant for flight planning purposes?

Like the jet operating BA38?

There are two factors that would be an improvement I think. First is that, an algorithm would pick up a condition sooner than an eye scan would, and offer a suggestion quicker than a trained person can reason out the situation. Second, the annunciator could be made to be drastically different from normal display. Think about the old school warning light. Quite effective when it comes on, compared to picking up changes in a somewhat busy display.

We have nice engine monitors. What is preventing the software from annunciating abnormal conditions? Is it regulation or lack of demand/ROI?

I'm prepared to bet a quart of oil that you haven't encountered these in your flying

Neat, thanks! have to go read the manuals again.