dkkim73

Your broader point is more important, but a small technique that helps with the above (from one of Mike Elliott's experienced instructors) was keep your hand on the gear lever until confirming indications (I look down at the mechanical indicator then up at the annunciator panel). Also I check again on short final. Main threat is variant flow, from dropping gear way out to lose energy when in ice and can't deploy brakes, to planning on abeam but then getting extensions, 360, side step etc. Postponing seems the biggest red flag to me.

Your comment makes me wonder if it might be possible to design a curved bracket or something to increase retention. Something "fence like" and thin that would be affixed further aft along the wing. Might look a bit busy. Might be simpler to periodically re bond. Just thinking out loud.

It's amazing how well that actually works, too. I was practicing uncoupled the other day and marveling at how well the SVS and calculated velocity vector work.

I think there are two kinds of restrictors: 1. for using the built-in oxygen system and titrating flow (like the little needle valves) 2. a pressure regulator to drop the supply pressure to match the requirements of the Mountain High O2D2 units I would also call Mountain High. Their guy there is very patient and helpful.

I think the 737 stuff was all about excess forces on the structure with rudder use. I'm not sure the lesson is transferable to our (more durable) airframes. Appreciating the other rudder comments, though.

I will actually do that. I'm sorry for your loss, and theirs. RIP

Full fuel in the Acclaim doesn't leave enough weight for 2 pax unless they are small.

*Great* pictures! It looks really clean and somewhat fighter like with the wing tanks. Very cool also you met The Great Man. I've heard him speak at Oshkosh years ago but never met him. I wonder how his new project (the ski amphib) is going. Thanks for sharing!

I wondered if he had an in flight issue mandating a descent, with distraction maybe causing a trim stall. NB this is of course all speculation. Very sad, overall. (Edit: fixed autocorrect, mandating not managing)

I think it's even cooler he built a Long EZ. I was seriously planning to build a Cozy back in the 2000's.

Good answers above and some fairly long threads on almost the same topic (might take a bit with keywords but you can probably find them). A few people here have done ab initio in a Mooney and thought it worked for them. They should be along shortly. I think that would be the minority. Agree most are better-served by a stepwise approach for multiple reasons. "Gnothi seauton" as the old maxim goes, know thyself. I would further add that, if you have limited aviation experience, you might be very discerning in other respects but not really have a basis for evaluating your own ability to do this kind of approach. A practical thing I would add to the above posts is: If you are an airplane owner/buyer you will spend a lot of time doing things that are not making you a better pilot. And you might decrease your actual aircraft availability vs. finding a good rental situation. Spitballing out of the blue: - get some hours of training, ideally through the pre-solo stage, make sure you like it - get a medical (required for the above) Yes a 172 or PA-28 is different than the Mooneys but the knowledge and skills will dovetail nicely into a foundation. You *might* have this same conversation about instrument training, but even then it's not a clear choice IMHO as a human factors guy. I think it's certainly too early to think that any time in trainers would be "wasted". As to cost-effectiveness, it could go either way. I'll leave the tax strategy to more knowledgeable people but if that's a determining factor for you, probably best to consult an appropriate planner early. HTH D

*Great* write-up! I love the practical weather stories here. Congrats and welcome.

This is a great rec. When life gives you lemons... You could also do some hard IFR sim dual. But taildragger time heals all wounds.

Coming back after close to 12 yrs off I was surprised by: 1. How behind I felt in the first hour (in a 172 to boot) 2. How quickly things came back thereafter. I will say the longbody extended the time to get the feel right, but the aviation environment, comms, IFR were all better than I thought they would be. No reason not to get dual if it's not crazy to find an instructor.

It's tricky doing medicine over the Internet, but what you describe falls into the general spectrum of decompression sickness ("the bends"). There're a broad range of manifestations, less and more serious, type I and type II, respectively. A bit discussing cutaneous symptoms is here: https://dan.org/health-medicine/health-resource/dive-medical-reference-books/decompression-sickness/diagnosing-dcs/ You might consider visiting with a doc who has some expertise in the area, ideally someone with a dive/hyperbaric certification. I never went to DMO training though I wish in retrospect I had. IIRC they will sometimes dive people after the fact. I will have to read a bit more and reflect on the comments earlier in the post where the flight doc recommended that restriction. That feels aggressive, though I've talked to a few other knowledgeable people that do not like flying the FLs in unpressurized aircraft. D