dkkim73

It took me a while to figure out that my plane only has one of those radios, XM I believe... Is this decommissioning coming soon? I flew home in an area with widespread convection and I appreciated having the satellite info vs. just FIS-B.

Yeah, restricting the pool of applicants to "chosen characteristics" seems like a bad idea for several reasons. It seems that, with all the motion in that vein, the burden of proof is shifting to them to prove it isn't material. On a humorous transition from the above: https://babylonbee.com/news/airlines-offering-100-upgrade-where-youre-guaranteed-an-old-male-pilot-named-steve

Oh my, oh my. This is perfect.

Niice short field landing. That did not look like much extra energy at all. I didn't hear power changes either. I would imagine you need to have the profile just right, maybe set up speed and then "grab" the slope with just the right power setting and ride it in? Still leaving myself a lot of room in the Acclaim...

That is super-helpful, thank you!

Think about how much fuel you are saving with the CG not so far forward!

Thank you guys! @Utah20Gflyer @Air pirate Do you or anyone else have any opinions or info on Cornerstone Aviation? They look like a 61 or 141 school, based on student preference. Their FAQ and info are pretty thorough, which seems like a good indication.

Thanks @GeeBee, what did you use? I just ordered a Novus kit from further up this thread..

I never noticed.

#3 cylinder issues, makes me wonder about a ring flush. That and valve lapping can make a huge difference. Maybe get some advice from an AP and have them review borescope photos.

Well you really took your time sending me that, didn't you? That's great, picture ~= 1000 words, ty!

Yeah, that's what I'm working on, a more robust flow. It's the exceptions to flow that scare me. Had something similar though less ridiculous (#8, is that today or tomorrow? :)) recently and was very aware of the gear. I was low and far from the field and trying to manage power and guess what speed would help the traffic flow. Canonical points to lower gear for me so far are: -FAF or cleared for the visual on IFR -abeam the threshold on a standard visual pattern Beyond that I'm working on it. The "UPS" checklist on short final has been helpful so far as a cross-check on gear status. And the LHS is there, though a lot of places I fly have big drops prior to touchdown.

I'm still wrestling with the question of how best to do this procedure. My understanding is that it's more of an issue on the long-bodies, and the balance seems to be forward a lot of the time in my Acclaim (though I've started purposely loading as far aft as I can on commutes, which just feels better). Techniques I've heard of: -trim into the flare to keep forces low -trim up on the transition but push forward, so trim is set for the flare portion, kind of an alternative approach to the above (you're moving the muscle-y part earlier in the process where you're higher off the ground, almost a reverse flare) -keep trim more moderate and use more force in the flare Pros of more trim: -Weber's law says our perception threshold is 5% of the force we are holding, e.g. so trim to neutral gives much finer feel than 10 lbs of force against a faster trim setting. So much quicker to feel and react to changes in force (feedback from flight surfaces), able to be more precise with force applied, less mentally-distracting Pros of less trim: -Less dangerous on a go-around (the trim is way up for me, to be neutral at 70-75KIAS, and required forward pressure is significant; not crazy but a lot of force and should be applied quickly) -Less risk of tail plane stall. I've felt this about 3 times, once very notably where I had to push forward a bit to stop the bobble. My transition instructor warned me this can set me up for a sudden pitch down and a prop strike. Also, it feels... "not right" to be so close to a limit of primary control authority. Overall I'm seeing better control and awareness with more trim than not, but I'm still very aware of the potential problem. Tips appreciated.

At the risk of asking you to tie my shoes for me, when you're at the plane next can you send me a photo of where you put the index marks? That's a great idea and I think I'll add that. Did you use touch-up paint or some kind of marker, or something else? The horizontal stab trim is a big safety focus item for me, too. It's a really elegant engineering solution (movable empennage) but slow to move in this plane and generates a lot of force.

Thanks. I had a similar thought. Asked about adding a connection to one of the main masts, but Jeff at Mooney thought it would be a trade-off of signal quality for the affected onboard COMM. Maybe he was talking about a splitter rather than a switch-over. In any case I didn't think the juice was worth the squeeze. Bought years ago as in-flight backup but agree mainly useful for on the ground stuff. I recently started carrying it again when I saw a twin Beech taxi out at a field I was visiting with something hanging from the bottom. I had to run to the ship and wait for the G1000 to fire up to call him. Realized it would be nice to have more comms on the ground in general. I wonder what the appropriate callsign is for a handheld aviation rig. "Mooney Nxxxx mobile"? "Mooney Nxxxx remote"? "Mooney Nxxxx"?

Hi All, This thread: made me wonder about polishing my ice light. The ice light lens is hazy, and the factory (where the pre-purchase/annual was done) said it was actually a fair bit of trouble to replace it, requiring some interior disassembly and paint work. I deferred, and since scarcely use it, more in the habit of shining a bright flashlight out the window. But, it occurred to me that maybe it would get better with some polishing, like old auto headlights? I haven't done that in the past, but assume it is essentially a fine abrasive process to reveal the plastic underneath. Has anyone tried this, or have thoughts based on transferable experience? Thanks!

The swiss-cheese model of error might be over-quoted, but it's for a reason. There are behavioral controls (norming, etc), environmental controls (sterile cockpit, workload mgmt), technical controls (warning systems), procedural controls (checklist discipline, individual and corporate etc). There seems to be a lot of magic-bullet thinking, for example the comment about "technology being the solution". If technology were the answer alone we wouldn't see things like the 737Max8 disasters, which were arguably in significant part an attempt to use technology to make up for human resource shortcomings. I deeply believe in both-and type solutions. I'm nerdily compulsive on my flows and checklists and I'm just a PP. I also enthusiastically bought the Microkit LHS in part for the gear warnings. etc, etc. Also have been spending a lot of thought on procedure, being newer to retracts. So this is all very close to home. The other meta-topic here is shaming. I think generally shame and social norming are under-rated ("I'm ok, you're ok", "you do you", "all truth is relative", blah blah). Many of us just need an ***-kicking from time to time. There are tons of sociological examples of why social norming works. And that can be via positive norms such as ideals of airmanship, professionalism, etc, or negative in not wanting to be "that guy". OTOH human-factors and organizational analytic approaches show that shaming and overly-simplistic norms drive error and its root causes underground. A good case study is the use of checklists in surgery (inspired by aviation). The traditional ideal of the surgeon is essentially to be perfect. There are good reasons for this ethic, but errors inevitably occurred as that ideal is simply unrealistic. Checklists and process controls helped a lot. Some technical controls, too, but people will often do stupid things just because a machine tells them to. Now watch me forget to take out the chocks...

@EricJ I thought I was the only one with that problem. A habit my transition instructor taught me that I really like is to hold on to the gear lever until I've confirmed them down by two indicators (the line on the floor and the annunciator light). However, that delays my power reduction (abeam the #s in a visual/standard pattern) unless I do it out of order (tried) and also I keep confusing the G and the U even after many years. Not really confusion just a hiccup in the flow. PUFFS sounds like a nice flow. Dr. Know for the win! How long did it take you to get used to it? ETA: Here's another one I learned from a Mooney broker. The "UPS" check on short final: Undercarraige, Propeller, Switches.

I found myself saying "down and welded" which is kind of like my habit of saying "altitude" on the intercom when I hear center ask some other flight to "say altitude". Sort of a poor-man's Rod Machado. But seriously though I do think it helps keep up the habit of running GUMPS.

If the thread police weren't so lenient, they would've put me up against the wall a few months ago Your description sounds familiar, and it's great to hear the responses. Compared to other planes I've flown (lighter wing-loadings I would guess) there seems to be more of an "interregnum" where you're not really flying, but you're too fast to be taxiing on the nosewheel. For cross winds and weather-vaning, I have been concentrating more on maintaining intermediate aileron positions and "working the controls" more like a taildragger. But I still don't have the sense of control, lifting off and touching down on one wheel, etc., that I would like. OTOH it seems to take more of a crosswind to make it matter.

@LANCECASPER I just re-read your installation story on the Bravo. The aero accessories site only lists earlier Mooney models, through the K. Did you use that version, or was there a separate offering for Bravos and Acclaims at that time? No immediate need but this sounds like a nice upgrade.

Funny, I had wondered about getting the new Sporty's with the jacks built-in. This brings up the reliability question which I am now wondering again about. I have an old Vertex Standard (really Yaesu) VXA-300 Pilot III which has an unintuitive user interface but seems pretty bomber otherwise. Also shares battery systems with the Yaesu FT-60R ham rig...

Hi Ross, Do you mean a constant pitch attitude? (more elevator early, then less later, maintain attitude to lift-off) Or constant subjective amount of elevator, which would resulting in progressive lightening of the nosewheel and eventual rotation and lift-off? I suppose there is more drag at higher AOA, though @PT20J pointed out that induced drag is dominant here, and greatly reduced by ground effect (which we are in while rolling). And having the nosewheel off, or at least light, reduces wheelbarrowing. David PS. Coincidentally, the scenario discussion for the Pilot Workshops newsletter (received just this morning) touches on several of these topics (Leadville, how to manage potentially not enough energy for climb-out, etc): https://pilotworkshop.com/tips/calculating-takeoff-and-landing-distance/

Well, so let's take this conversation in a natural direction. What determines Vr? I'm having good results with Vr=55 and aim for liftoff at 77 KIAS.

Just saw your intro "2 years" video. Nicely done, and with funny bits (isn't life just that way?). Reminds me of flying in MN. Thanks to you and @00-Negative for all the details.