redbaron1982

Unrelated, but not so much, I know there is a process for owners to fabricate parts (as long as they are for their airplane and as long as the shop is not selling the part but instead following owners directions). Is all the required information publically available to fabricate, let's say, the steering horn? I mean drawing with dimensions and tolerances as well as the type of materials to use?

I guess to be 100% valid proof you can email the photo to the fbo email address. Emails are 100% accepted as legal proof.

Actually I think here it says that they can use one user's data (in this case the seller) to provide a better service to another user (in this case the buyer): Except as stated elsewhere in this Privacy Policy, personally identifiable User information is only used for the purpose of providing or improving Savvy’s services to its clients or other Users.

Following this analogy, a doctor should openly discuss with anyone interested in getting into a relationship with a patient of them, if the patient has any STD. If they don't share the information, and then one person gets an STD, is the doctor liable for this?

The fact that Savvy shared information from one account (the seller) with another of their account (the buyer), without the owner of the data (the seller) authorization is wrong. Big time wrong. Savvy should provide their pre-buy service based on information made available by the seller to the buyer and add their extensive knowledge to ask the right questions or ask for the right inspections to be performed to get a good idea of how well-maintained the airplane is. What Savvy did here, most likely without ill intention, is equivalent to a doctor sharing information about one patient with another patient, and I think we all agree that that's wrong. I don't have an account on PoA or other aviation forums, but I think it would be great to share this knowledge as much as possible, at least for people to discuss the privacy of their information with Savvy.

40 minutes after take off today, the LO/HI VAC annunciator light illuminated and the vac gauge was reading zero, I was VFR on a VMC day, so no biggie. I turn on the standby vacuum pump, the anunciator light extinguished and the vacuum was back at 5in hg. My understanding is that there is no other thing that can cause this that a failed engine driven vacuum pump. Am I correct? The one I have installed is this one: https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pnpages/10-23925.php which goes for $454 brand new (no core exchange). Am I analyzing this right? Any suggestion on staying with Rapco or moving to Tempest or other brand?

I think there is a possibility that the engine is still untouched. If at all possible I would try to get there or get someone you trust there to assess the situation in person.

Hey, sorry if I missed this part, but are you 100% sure that the engine is disassembled at this point? I wouldn't be surprised if this shady shop has not even touched your engine and is just looking for you to bite on that 45k invoice. Did you personally verify that the engine is all disassembled? Did you already pay them the prop-strike inspection part? That is something that should be 100% covered by the insurance.

Cool, thanks. I don't know how I missed that post!

This is awesome! Thanks for sharing. What motor are you using?

https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1ce07d3/damage_from_the_tornado_at_eppley_airfield_in/

Actually, you're correct, it could be the crankshaft. I have a MT 3 blades prop. Part of my preflight is to look for play on each blade and we apply (light) pressure on the tip of the blades, I cannot feel anything. Only when pushing/pulling from the root of the blades.

Usually when pushing/pulling my M20J I apply some force to the root of one blade of the prop. I push as close as I can to the hub. A couple of weeks ago I started hearing a "clack" noise, as if there was a minor play between the blades and the hub. You cannot feel the play, just hear the noise. I guess this is ok, the aircraft just went through annual inspection and nothing came up. But I rather have some other opinion on this. Is it normal to hear this noise? Also, what's your opinion on pushing/pulling the aicraft from the root of the blades? Not using a powered tow bar is really hard to pull, and specially push, just from the tow bar.

What about running mmo a couple of hours prior to the oil change? That's supposed to free up oil rings as well.

Thanks, guys, for all the feedback. I think maybe SavyQA is the best combination of price/benefit. I might end up downgrading instead of cancelling. I do like a lot the analysis service they offer both of engine data and borescope images.

I'm five days away from renewing my subscription after my first year with them, and I'm doubting about renewing. I like the idea behind the service, but my experience was not in line with my expectations so far. There are some exceptions, like Dave Pasquale and Kortopates, they are great and always provide good insights. But this seems to be more the exception than the rule. So far I had to use the "I'm not happy" button twice: I have an issue with oil consumption, I burn (or lose) 1 qt every 3hs. They haven't come up with any solution. The conclusion was "It's inside what is considered airworthy". I'm going through annual inspection and one day before starting the annual inspection, my account manager went on vacation without let me know and a new guy came in, so I had to get up to speed on the list of squawks I have discussed already with my main account manager. Then, when the shop sent back the result of the inspection, they didn't reply for 3 days until I used the "I'm not happy" button and then I was informed that both my main and secondary account managers were on vacation. Now I had to get up to speed to a 3rd person. Two days after, my main account manager came back, and again, he asked me to get him up to speed on how the annual was going. So, I don't like the service, my question is have any of you had one of those cases where you were "saved" by having Savvy?

With 0 complex time you don't have the endorsement that is required. I started flying my J model with 0 complex time. The insurance asked for 10 hours transition training which included the complex endorsement. In addition, 10 extra hours (which could be solo flying) to get the minimum of 20 to fly with passengers. Have in mind that many insurance companies ask for time in make and model, so it your complex time is on a 182RG most likely is not going to help you much with a Mooney insurance.

I think the insurance doesn't go down until at least 50 hours in make and model, so yes, just get the airplane you want and build the time with it. In your place, my main concerns would be: getting the right airplane (and I don't mean the right make and model only, but also one that is in good shape) and get enough trying to fill confident of flying solo.

I replaced mine one year ago with the "approved" one (https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/safOilDrainValves_07-00879.php?clickkey=6418) and so far 0 issues. I do put a vacuum cap on it, not to stop a leak, but to prevent the remaining oil inside the drain from flying around.

My two cents: I was troubleshooting a hight cht on #3 when someone here at MS pointed out that I was missing a baffle in front of my #1 cyl. It's a small L shaped aluminum plate, that you have in you engine, right in front of #1. I installed this baffle and #3 temp went down but #1 went way higher. I finally decided to remove it and leave it as it was before. I don't know if it is better to leave it on or not,.from my experience it seems better to leave it off.

I ran the system today while on the ground and I didn't see any dripping from the inspection panel. I have a theory, is it possible that the TKS fluid is getting into the wing through the speed brakes? And then from there run towards the lowest part of the wing (which is close to the inspection panel that was dripping)? Any thoughts or has someone seen this?

Hey, is looking great! Do you mind sharing rough numbers on how much it cost? Thanks!

100% For me, the most impressive number is not the 8.3 gph at 75% but the 11.4 gph at full-rated power. I have no idea if it is even feasible to retrofit this into an M20J, let alone if someone is willing to go through the STC process. I wonder how much would be the TCO, considering there is no ignition system at all (no magnetos, spark plugs, etc.). Reliability could be also a relevant improvement.

If these panels are hardly removed, how do they inspect for corrosion during annual inspections? These panels are between the main wing spar and the aft stub spar.

Kind of a side question, I looked at removing the panel that drips, and I found that some screw heads are stripped. Also the screws are painted over and it looks as if it was not removed in a long time. Are these panels supposed to be removed during annual? The dripping (very small) is coming from here: