dkkim73

I spent a few years in and around the startup scene in the mid-latter 2010's. I recall a conversation I was invited to at a venture-incubator around mining data from medical equipment. More for failure prediction rather than bio-data. One of the sharper guys kept talking about all the "data exhaust" in the world and how to mine and monetize it. So that article talks a lot about using your personal data, probably in some way like grocery store discount programs. Cross-tie to other databases and build a marketing profile. I think the darker side has to do with "enforcement". Or really control. It would start as a discount and then become more punitive over time. The central blue/green bureaucrats will decide that you really don't need to drive that fast or far, after it's societally irresponsible and who are you to have such privilege? Esp. with your low social credit score. Deactivated. Throttled back. Good thing they aren't looking quite as hard at GA. Paranoid, sure, but maybe not enough. We have new tenants in a suburban homestead we worked on for years. It has great network infrastructure, but they are so excited to connect all sorts of appliances. E.g. the thermostat, so the utilities can turn it down for them. Networked everything. And with all the debanking and whatnot over the last couple years, who knows. London already has zones where you simply cannot drive certain vehicles. I am with the gent talking about his 2003 Tundra. That's about as much comms as I want the car's ECU to have. Sure, add 4G/5G and other RF, but under your own terms. Also, just wait until the first bad over-the-air firmware update borks a bunch of vehicles

@PeteMc Your advice to the OP caught my eye as well. I'm looking at the schedule and trying to figure out if I can get to one. As you seem familiar with the program: Do you happen to know if they ever offer options to train in provided (rental) aircraft? It's obviously less valuable as it's less specific, but I'm thinking about the logistics of punching a 3-day hole in my work schedule vs. more time to fly out and back. Will definitely try to get to one in the coming year, sometime after initial transition training. David

Ah, the bureaucratic mind. Even if you find a reasonable individual, you can see the mental strain that discussing it causes them. Notice something else? The little rules always accrete, and never get pared back. Seen it in medicine, seen it in government/mil. This is a big reason IMO to resist adding rigid rules in every organization you touch. There is always an excuse to keep it ("security", "liability", "safety" [love that one]...) And to keep it on topic (ish): I recently tried to test my new Sentry Plus on a commercial flight. I admitted to some trepidation as I got some funny looks from the other passengers And you never know when to joke in those situations, esp. these days. "I'm remotely controlling the plane, where do you want to go?"

Not an immediate need for me, but following the thread with interest for a number of reasons. I agree with Ray's point about reasonability. Naïve question: if STC's can be obtained by 3rd-party suppliers and retrofitters, where is the threshold that is crossed requiring manufacturer involvement? Ie. could an ad hoc corporation (say of Mooney owners) do a project to achieve this? I'm not saying it wouldn't be much easier for Mooney, just curious. Or is there a separate category where it is more deeply "baked into" the type certificate in this case? Or maybe even contractual with Garmin? Much simpler question: Can any sort of external keyboard be added to the G1000? I've always thought a keyboard for an FMS would be a useful thing, looking at those Ultra and Cirrus photos (though it sounds like you didn't like it very much). David

Thanks for the info. Makes a lot of sense for the type. Looking at the logbook entries, it's unclear to me what's "normal process" and what's an option. David

Really very helpful people here.

I bought a 2009 Type S (N2903G), WAAS from the factory, TKS and speed brakes added shortly thereafter. Seems like a good plane from good people, not flown as much recently but going to rectify that. Hold on? Yes, I alternately am excited and slightly concerned reading this forum

I used to wonder what it was like to have curly hair. Then I read your post. Now I know. Curly and blown back at the same time...

Thank you! That was a fine listen. I'd never heard it before. Had some other thoughts but not going to spoil it for anyone who hasn't listened!

@tracer773 I recently bought an Acclaim, really can't wait to fly it. (So what do I know?) This discussion made me think of the discussion thread(s) I posted and a lot of thoughtful advice. It feels a little bit like deja vu incl a lot of the alternatives you are considering. I was hard-selling myself, in the end, on FIKI TKS and turbocharging/normalizing because of my locale and primary zones of operation. It sounds like you're really a lot more flexible on that. In addition to the above, if you're flex on the turbo, esp. in KY, you might consider the Ovation? People in the know really seem to love them, and they would seem to offer significantly lower cost of acquisition and operation, while still allowing airframes new enough to have fewer troubles, but old enough to be more affordable. Also with or without G1000. Food for thought. David

Well, another thing to be concerned with. What's the best way to get a parts manual and a maintenance manual? Are those factory items? I'm kind of a nerd for good maintenance manuals but, even for cars, they are hard to find sometimes.

I would be surprised if there were not significant consultant opportunities for anyone with such focal domain knowledge and a helpful instinct. Thank you! Much obliged for clarifying that hanging question. David

"Aye, and if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon!"

Thank you for the detailed reply! Yes, the plane is WAAS-enabled (from the factory, so with VNAV), with SVT unlock shortly thereafter. System version was 0401-34, being upgraded to 0401-37 at the Mooney factory service center now. Yes, the unit is the GSM 85, the write-up is "Roll and Pitch Trim GFC700 GSM 85 clutch mount failed clutch torque test and adjustment." so exactly as you describe. They list part # 011-00894-09 to fix. So I am thinking it is the repair/exchange as you describe (going to get an update soon as they had been waiting to speak with Garmin going into the holiday). Hopefully that helps clarify your assumptions, which I think are correct. As for the upgrade possibility, it sounds like it's possible but requires a bulletin/approval? Someone suggested it would likely be expensive and not worth "the squeeze". David PS. And congrats on retirement!

I just bought a Mooney and found many of the reasons John listed compelling. Also, for some mission-specific reasons. So I'm obviously pro-Mooney in the balance. But this line caught my eye. I did a lot of my instrument rating training in Archers and Warriors. They are very stable, forgiving, docile airplanes with charming if sedate personalities. So I could see an insurance advantage, though the RG nature might offset that. I was part of a club, so not as aware of maintenance and ownership costs with Pipers. But it also might make for a less stressful flying experience in some cases. So I guess my point is, the flying might be easier and slower in general, with a bit of a speed boost in cruise for the RG aspect over an Archer. But it might fit your mission better? I know I'm less intimidated by the idea of jumping in a straightleg C172, or even C182 in terms of having to be "on game" all the time. For sporty, in terms of IFR-capable platforms, I don't think it's a question

Does anyone know if it is possible to do a wired connection (RS-232) from one of the G1000 boxes to an Aera cradle for flight plan cross-loading? (to get around the lack of Flight Stream support) I realize others are discussing G3's and GTN's, so I might be conflating things. D

When I went to redeem the DB purchase, it requires me to choose between Americas vs. US only (AOPA) airport directories, and also for terrain you can choose 30 vs 9+4.9 arc-second resolutions. Is this purely a personal need/preference thing, or is there some subtle trade-off that comes with space or capability on the original G1000 units? (the plane is a 2009) Wonky question, but trying to figure it out and figured someone else had more insight. Unclear if this is alterable later. David

Yes, I did, with both (still need to find a good data plan, but GPS and Wifi work great). IIUC I can use it with the GTX 345R (Jeff at Mooney is checking to make sure it has an RF-lucent panel between the transponder in the tail and where I'll sit). Also have a recent Sentry which works nicely, though I may return it given all the various options and recommendation to use a more sensitive CO detector. When I said portable (to @EricJ's question above) I was thinking of a dedicated aviation GPS unit, e.g. an Aera or similar, with controlled firmware for a somewhat higher level of reliability than an iPad, where IMHO there will always be some higher risk of interactional bugs etc. I did not look at some of the other dedicated EFB options... I think those options mentioned are apps. Though TY for the point-out to Avare, since my phone runs an Android fork. BTW I did just buy a OnePak (from Garmin, so Garmin data and FliteCharts). Appreciate the inputs on the chart choices. That will give me the familiar govt charts on the G1000 as a fallback, whatever I go with externally. Also a DB subscription for an external GPS. Sounds like I should try Garmin Pilot to see how it feels vs. ForeFlight (the commonality point is a good one). If I had to choose right now, I am thinking the Aera would be a good choice. Oddly, lots of models mentioned but only two listed for sale on Garmin's site. Thanks, David

Hello All, Was corresponding with a couple knowledgeable members about this and realized it would be good to ask more widely: I've been researching database options for my new plane (M20TN, thus G1000) and devices, Jepp vs. Garmin databases, plate types, etc. Read several related discussions along the way, which I *think* are still current regarding the bundle offerings (fairly confusing). Hoping to get the hive mind's opinion also on dedicated portable aviation GPSes. Historically, I'd flown with a GPSMap 196 (one of the first units with a virtual panel, black and white, latest SW release in 2011), paper govt charts, and a GNS430W. So I'm spoiled by the idea of a G1000 (WAAS + ADS-B in/out + XM receiver). Also bought a newer iPad air and Foreflight (mid-level subscription). Thinking to go with a Garmin DB subscription including the Jepp nav data but regular gov't charts for the G1000 (the "PilotPak" vs the "OnePak" with Garmin data, though some say the Garmin data is adequate esp. in the US; I don't anticipate flying up to Canada much at least in the near future). Seems like several experienced folks here favor not squinting at the G1000 for the plates, thus the idea to just get regular govt plates for the G1000. Maybe add Jepp plates to the Foreflight subscription since I've not used them much but they have nice added features. My main question is: Should I also have a newer portable unit? In the past, I've been a snob about real TSO'ed gear, even if simpler, and dedicated units, though I have to admit iPads have become a great deal better and Foreflight is a superb product UX-wise. I used to love the 196 as backup on the yoke and Garmin used to be generous with updates. Less so now. And how does this affect any software choices I might otherwise make? It seems like the OnePak would cover a new Garmin GPS DB as well, but if I read it correctly would imply using Garmin rather than Jeppesen nav data. Looking at updating the DB separately for close to $300 to have the 196 work as a backup, vs perhaps get an Aera? Is that overkill either way with the G1000 and a Foreflight/Sentry? One Aera user spoke very highly of it and opined that the G196 is basically done-for, which I think is probably true. Fun facts: I fired it up yesterday, it quickly came online telling me it was 2004 and listed my local approaches, including a decommissioned NDB... The latter fact is an old DB, but the date bug underlined the fact the software is old. Not so much trying to be cheap as frugal, but I think it will go to the great shelf in the sky. (note: above is written with a lack of knowledge of Garmin Pilot; haven't tried it at all yet) Thanks for any thoughts, David PS. Related question: as far as I've been able to determine, there is no device that lets you cross-load flight plans with the non-NXi G1000's. If I've missed this, please say.

Yes, you are entirely correct. Sorry to be unclear. I suspect this is actually a coordinated international standard, and stems from maritime practice, as do so many of our practices (I joked with my father in law that boating was like flying, only much slower; he added that you also do a lot of maintenance underway). My musings were more about what people do "in the wild". E.g. we are taught that birds, if faced with potential collision, tend to dive. So I wonder what people actually tend to do if surprised and not thinking through resolution maneuvers. This is also confounded by the possibility (probability?) that you might not be seen. And the general lack of direct two-way communications (we don't address other aircraft usually). As people have raised earlier, a person might view the world differently "heads down" looking at cockpit traffic displays vs. being visual with the other traffic, etc. Unless there is obvious coordination (via ATC or on a CTAF [local pattern frequency]) I tend to assume the other craft might not see me and try to factor in potential erratic maneuvers later (ie. be more predictable, wider berth, etc). My comment a few posts back was that if I had a choice between being blind or a closer pass, I'd choose the latter, but obviously someone might see you at the last minute and do something unexpected. Or try to resolve it via their traffic display (again, without a full TCAS there is no guaranteed separation). David

Thank you, much appreciated. If you wouldn't mind clarifying, the "turn toward someone's tail" paradigm, over how wide a range of situations would you employ that in a normal category aircraft? In the Eagle, and I would assume the Mudhen (even with conformal tanks and 1,000,000 lbs of GPS-guided bad news), you could do that from any aspect, angle, altitude, all day long and it would work. With GA, would you do that only with a constant-bearing presentation fore or aft? You said it might be a big turn and I'm literally using my hands to try and figure out the variations (ie. this is a naive question). I agree on the formation flying point you made. Once you see an external reference, it's suprisingly intuitive to maneuver relative. It would be interesting for someone to "game this out" in terms of likely responsives to uncoordinated resolution maneuvers (vs. TCAS which coordinates this). Ie. if you presume similar maneuvability, how does the other (presumably GA) pilot's likely reaction or non-reaction figure with your planned maneuver. I think the simplest thing is the point already made that keeping the other bird in sight will mitigate risk and require the least mutual training. Thinking out loud at a lower level here... D

Thank you, also got a PM mentioning @TrekLawler and his expertise. I figure everyone's tied up during the holidays but will look forward to any advice. I suppose in some ways this bears on the whole upgrade pathway for G1000/GFCxxx systems, so I'll post back if I learn anything offline. Thanks to all!

That's a smart idea. Leverage the up-front part of the work (panel cut-outs, wiring, tech time, etc) so might not have to repeat it later. Could have a spare slot, or plan to possibly pull and sell a unit while upgrading later. Previous poster made some good points about getting feature-value out of the GFC500. I suppose part of the value calculus would also depend on how long you're keeping the plane. If "indefinitely" is the answer, then planning something further in the future would seem to make sense. If not, it would seem that minimizing spend makes sense based on what I keep reading about recouping avionics investment. Definitely respect OP's budget discipline, all of us little demons are pretty much on one shoulder.

Following this thread with great interest as a new Acclaim owner (plane still elsewhere). If you'll forgive a minor thread deviation ("Moon Flight, turn right 10 degrees, vectors for newbie"), what are some good references for understanding operational principles and best practices for the TSIO-550G, and similar powerplants? I started going through the intro portions of John Deakin's online engine course and will probably do the whole thing. So far it is focusing more on combustion theory, leaning, etc. Any advice appreciated. David

Thoughtful post overall, quoting a part here. This thread reminds me of a larger trend I've seen over the last 10-15 yrs (I associate it with software/technical people, but hey we're all guilty) to overgeneralize from discrete models and to worship data ("more data, better!"). The missing elements are usually actual real-world experience, empiric observation, etc. Also the problems of false correlation and silent evidence (e.g. "I'm making all these frequency-cluttering calls, heads-down, and being a general nuisance, and I'm still alive. Must be the reason. Yay, me! Yay, safety!" Even if it reduced safety, they got away with it). Anyhow, two generalizable points I might make are: there isn't one right overarching viewpoint, but complementary grains of truth in the last several pages data without prioritization and mental models and flows that use it well obscures actionable information With point #2, I think there's a real danger of too much mental clutter in many occupational environments, including a gen av cockpit. Thinking through how to use the tools well is important for me at least. Might be different for different people, too, I don't have enough observation in the post-ADS-B gen av environment of different pilots to comment too much more. As for de-confliction/resolution maneuvering, I would *love* to hear someone more knowlegeable comment. Your point about showing your belly seems right-on. Maybe one of the front-seater types here (rags?) or an airline driver could opine? My instinct would be to roll to keep the traffic in sight even if it meant a closer pass or pushing over. My 2 cents. That and $2.97 might get you a small cup of coffee at Starbuck's. D