PTK

If he owned the airplane he’d be more careful. He didn’t own it and having paid no money for it he didn’t value it. He only paid to rent it. The place he rented from is down one perfectly good airplane and we are all saddled with increased premiums. I feel sorry for the ones left behind and the owner of the airplane. I feel very saddened for the fate of that beautiful Mooney. It deserved better than that jackass. A lot better. He inconvenienced a lot of innocent people with his selfishness, his sheer incompetence and stupidity. He was an idiot in my book.

No. That POH table assumes holding level flight. You can't speak of bank angles without also speaking of g load. Not all 60 degree banks are 2 g for example. G load is responsible for stall speed increase, not bank angle. Stall speed increases in relation to the square root of load factor. In order to have an increase in stall speed you must have an increase in load factor.

Yes. In a bank the vertical lift component (that was acting straight up when at 1 g or level flight) splits to horizontal and vertical components. Assuming you don't change the amount of lift the wing is producing some of the lift that was acting to hold altitude is now acting to turn the airplane. The result of this is that now we have less of vertical component to maintain altitude. Now hold that thought and fast forward to a low agl, low airspeed, overshot base to final turn where instead of going around the pilot wants to desperately maintain altitude and get back on final. To maintain altitude lift needs to increase and to do that pulls back on the yoke which increases the aoa. To get back on final rudders the nose around which produces yaw with unwanted roll. These are all incorrect inputs hopelessly trying to correct a pattern gone bad much earlier than the overshot base to final. We need to think of the pattern from downwind to touchdown as one continuous descending turn flown according to what the wind is doing.

“One of the reasons is sometimes one needs larger bank angles than is prudent, and stall speeds rise accordingly. The tighter the pattern the larger the bank angle, the higher the stall speed.” This statement indicates a gross lack of understanding of the concepts. It is statements like these that are at the root of spins from cross control stalls. As in the infamous base to final turn for example. Pilots reading such statements are afraid to bank and set themselves up for a cross control situation of the bad kind, i.e. a skid. Banking is not the problem and it doesn’t increase stall speeds. Stall speeds only increase when g load increases when pilot tries to hold level flight. This is very important and needs to be understood.

Cabin side of firewall deep under the glare-shield above pax feet. It’s a pain to get to it.

What bank angle is not prudent? It’s ok to bank the airplane! In fact being afraid to bank and instead rudder the nose around trying to hold level flight is what kills pilots in the infamous base to final turn. It’s about time we put away these myths and teach pilots how to fly. Bank the airplane all you want and unload the wings with your elevator into a descending turn. Stall speed will not increase. It will only increase if trying to hold level flight.

The information you had was that you knew there was traffic in the pattern you were going to join. You did not see nor identify that traffic. But you barged in anyway. “Barged” in the sense that you ignored the existing traffic. Forget what the warrior did or did not do. What did you do? Do you still feel that you did the best you could with the info you had?

You had better be careful of accusations you post on a public forum. It can be a very sharp double edge sword. Especially because based on your description you are not innocent. You barged into the pattern without having identified the position of traffic you knew full well was there before you entered.

Why did you turn downwind anyway when you didn’t see him where you expected? You entered the pattern without identifying traffic in the pattern that you knew is there. The Warrior was on crosswind when you made your call 4 miles out entering on a 45. You know he’s in the pattern, lower than you at that point and you should see him. I also think you should’ve slowed down to pattern speed sooner knowing there’s traffic in the pattern. Gear speed is too fast. I like to analyze and critique my own decisions and learn from them. We can’t control what others do. We can only control our own actions.

And he didn’t forget the rest of us rest his soul. He thought of us by making his contribution to raising our insurance premiums.

Looking for a split landing light cb switch. Anyone have one?

The lower latch is connected to the upper claws. It sounds to me the latch mechanism may have separated. I’m not sure the lower latch ir releasing either. You’ll need to go from inside and remove the interior plastic enough to release upper claws manually. The plastic is in two pieces, upper piece around the window and lower piece. There are three or four screws along the bottom of window and some around the perimeter of the window holding upper plastic in. If the lower latch is not releasing then lower plastic has to be removed. If this is the case another approach may be to remove the armrest and that ornamental leather or vinyl piece covering the plastic above the armrest. Then cut the plastic under it careful to stay an inch or two within the border of the leather/vinyl piece. This should expose the latch mechanism and hopefully give you enough access to release it. Good luck!

The two variables that determine survivability in an off airport landing are initial impact angle and speed. Both have to do with the initial impact. Not what we’re going to collide with if anything but the initial ground impact. These two variables should be to a large extent and with some planning within our control. But we need to fly it all the way to the ground wings level and control the airspeed. In doing so we minimize the excess energy that needs to be dissipated on the ground. So I wouldn’t focus as much on gear up or down. I’d focus instead on airspeed and “land” as flat as possible. In this case I’d leave gear up. Danger being I don’t come in flat and one digs in cartwheeling the airplane. The goal is to survive the initial impact.

@aviatoreb you are continuing your MO. Fact is someone drew a parallel between guns and aviation. Very perceptive of them. It is not a political debate. It has nothing to do about your politics, my politics or anyone else's politics. What we all believe has no bearing on the fact that the actions of very few affect all of us. This has everything to do with the challenges we face in ga. These things invariably hit some of us harder than others. But I don’t find that very relevant. It would have been much worse if it was an innocent pax dying as well. From all indications this was a goof ball showing off and got bit hard. As I said earlier we need to elevate the discussion beyond the “RIP prayers, etc. etc.” level and try to come up with solutions to our collective challenges. In any case we don’t agree on everything and I’m perfectly ok with we agree to disagree.

Anthony, the comparison to guns may be not be directly aviation related per se but the parallel was brought up in the discussion by someone. It is a legitimate topic of the discussion. Guns is a sensitive issue for some and I respect that. But so are airplanes. We can’t be tippy toeing around because someone may become offended! If they don’t wish to join the discussion that's fine but they will not shut it down by trashing others. So it is my sincere hope that you're planning to also direct your advice to those on this thread who seek to trash and shut down voices they disagree with. Those who have demonstrated they are just not able to rise above the nasty name calling and vilifying? @Tommy and @aviatoreb for example. You haven’t said anything to them but hopefully you’re planning to do so. Unless you are in full agreement with the MO of these individuals. In any case I value your input. I’m sorry to hear about your BK. And for those who don’t want to see the direct correlation please see Germanwings flight 9525.

Discussion is important. Someone made the comparison about buying firearms in Canada and hoping this doesn’t go in the way of villyfying the many for the actions of a few. The discussion went along these lines and it’s perfectly legitimate imo. Now some don’t like to hear topics as these discussed and get a bad case of hives. But I think as adults we can and should have these discussions. As adults we should take the discussion beyond the “RIP and prayers for their loved ones” level. We owe it to our passion for aviation. Those who don’t wish to talk about it don’t have to. But they certainly can’t shut down dissenting view points. This is America!

No. That is not Peter’s view. You are not authorized to speak for anyone but yourself.

It sure does. We’re viewed with skepticism, much like gun owners, thanks to the actions of a few individuals. The best thing here is that this dumbass was alone and didn't also kill an innocent and trusting pax. Otherwise I view this as Darwin at work. Much like gang violence and shootings.

RIP. Prayers for the ones left behind. Very sad and very bad for GA. So unnecessary and so very preventable. I have flown low over the Jersey beach multiple times. Never below 500 feet. What this guy was thinking skimming the water like that I don’t know. Not to mention of course what this does for our insurance premiums.

Before he can be cleared for the approach he must be established on a published segment. Otherwise ATC will issue an altitude to maintain until established on a published segment or IAP. For this reason a published PT is considered a segment of the IAP only when the aircraft reaches the initial fix upon which the PT is predicated. So he must fly to the VOR then turn outbound and fly PT. May seem redundant when VFR but not when in IMC.

Three holes at the top on mine.

Frankly, I think the data is very realistic. I don't know about yours but as I said my landing light lives in a closed cavity in the lower cowI. I don't want it relying on throttle back reducing its output so it doesn't overheat. I want it to be properly designed to dissipate the heat while retaining its candelas.

This is a good review of lights and what’s currently available. However imo it misses the single most important point: how do these lights handle thermal management. To what extent do they rely on throttle back. How bright they appear when initially turned on is useless and very subjective. They are all bright when initially turned on! Here is the data on the aeroleds 2130LX. Initially it comes in at 190000 candela but look how it degrades even after just 5 or 10 min. It’s a light. But it definitely does not satisfy the requirements for a landing light. The led landing light with best data that I have seen is the illumivation lazr. This is by the former Lopresti which now is Whelen. If I go the led route this would be my choice. Whelen bought Lopresti and dropped the price also. https://www.illumi-vation.com/product-page/mooney-m20-c-d-e-f-g-j-led-landing-light

The point of my post was to share what I have learned. Independent data exists. Manufacturers have it. Ask aeroleds to provide you the independent lab data of candelas over time. Assuming you leave your landing light on for more than a minute, candelas over time is the most important metric. Throwing out numbers with no basis is meaningless.