Jump to content

M016576

Basic Member
  • Posts

    2,769
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by M016576

  1. It’s a valid spear- but when I said “airliners,” I was referring to part 121 (scheduled air carriers) specifically with the thought of the multiple turbo props that have succumbed to icing. Most people I know (including Webster’s dictionary) would consider a part 121 short haul carrier as an airliner, but I should have been more specific and said “turbo-prop commuter air carriers.” our de-icing procedure in the F-18 and F-15 were both “go faster”, which just melts the ice off the skin of the airplane due to friction. Easy to do with overpowered turbofans complete with augmentors. Even without them, though, there’s an abundance of power (thrust… but also bleed air and electricity) available on most, if not all jets to handle icing. the engines are sensitive to FOD though- and while icing may not necessarily bring down a jet, it can certainly do millions in damage to the compressor and fan sections of the engines.
  2. ^Yes- this. icing has taken down airliners, TBM’s, Cirrus’s… you name it, icing has taken it out. About the only thing I haven’t seen icing take out is a fighter jet, although, I’m willing to bet it’s happened. I do know of a 4-ship of twin engine fighters that “lingered” in icing conditions just to see if they could find “work-able airspace” and ended up 6 of 8 motors fodded out (I think the damage was somewhere near $8 million). That’s with engine Heat that’s supposed to help prevent that sort of damage. if your aircraft doesn’t have a turbine engine… or even if it does… “lingering” in known icing conditions is increasing your risk tremendously, regardless of what some words printed on paper about “certified” say. that said- a de-icing system is a very useful tool in the event the weather isn’t what you thought it would be, and need an “out.” This sort of weather system is all too common in the north west.. and it helps with risk mitigation to have a de-icing system.
  3. I've taken it up to FL190.. the climb from 16-19 takes a while though. It had room to keep going under IFR standards.
  4. You could just ask them to remove the speed brakes entirely, as well as the now useless backup vacuum pump, and be thankful for the extra useful load and slightly better CG. No matter what you choose to do- the shop should be liable for making it right, as they made a massive mistake on this one.
  5. It was 4 years ago (at least the flat rate annual was), particularly when you factor in no sales tax. This is the first time I’ve used Top Gun, I’ve heard good things, but I’m sure it’ll be an expensive experience. The first time in a new shop always seems to be, despite how clean previous annuals may have been, a new mechanic/shop with a fresh set of eyes always seems to find new things, which isn’t a bad thing when we’re talking safety. I used LASAR a couple times back when Paul was still at the helm, and they had a similar squawk list procedure as you describe- which I appreciated as well.
  6. Please don’t mistake what I said…. I didn't say that working on GA aircraft is easy or that it isn’t time consuming: just that it’s expensive and specialized. Nor do I believe it’s unreasonable based on what’s needed to keep an aircraft airworthy and safe. I think it’s sad because as the price increases (on everything GA related.. aircraft to parts to labor to insurance to hangars) it’s pricing more and more folks out of GA and that in turn is leading to an older average population base of GA pilots and… the way I see it… a continued contraction in GA as an industry. kind of crazy though how it has taken a pandemic to strengthen the fleet hull market though. Makes me wonder how long that will last (forever maybe? Or until the next recession? Time will tell).
  7. I’m currently in central California. I lived in southern Oregon for about 8 years prior… the labor rates and taxes are very expensive in California. I’d recommend flying up to Southern Oregon for your annual. Grants pass or Medford…Oregon in general is very GA friendly. There’s an excellent Mooney service center in Portland- but that’s a bit further away. there are several excellent MSC’s in California as well. Top Gun is probably closest to you (it’s in Stockton). My Mooney is current there for it’s annual…but as Don alluded to- it’s very very expensive.., 3200 just for the annual inspection. And that’s without parts and labor for any squawks. Crazy expensive.
  8. It’s sad how expensive an annual is… but that’s the way it is in general aviation these days. It’s a rich persons “sport.” A very specialized industry working on relatively simple machines. I fear it’s only going to get more exclusive from here on out.
  9. Nope- just tks fluid from the prop slinger. Was “exercising the system” when I took that photo.
  10. I remember that feeling all too well (getting kicked in the face upside down underwater with blackout goggles on). Makes one appreciate their hand hold references!
  11. Whoa! What is mine, chopped liver? I’ve been flying with an aspen since 2014… I had mine refurbed/upgraded to “max” units when they came out. I’m a big fan of the Avidyne/aspen combo.
  12. I’m pretty sure NAS North Island has a helo dunker… just because they have so many 60’s there.. although I’ve never seen it. I do know NAS Lemoore has a helo dunker- I took a few trips through that thing back in the day. And of course the one atNAS Pensacola, as well.
  13. Did you type that all by yourself, or did your WSO do it for you? tracking guns kill- hah!
  14. I haven’t seen any deals announced yet. It seems like every year someone makes a similar comment about Aspen’s survival as a going concern and yet they remain. The Pro Max is a nice upgrade over the original pro in speed and display. For those of us that aren’t happy with garmin’s stuff, it gives an option.
  15. Looks like he was able to land on a highway.. that can be challenging to identify at night with low illumination. Impressive work- glad everyone is OK!
  16. Classic Jepp… giving you less for the same net cost.
  17. I’ve had a couple familiarization flights in the F-16, but never a qualification in it. It’s OK… I like the others better though.
  18. 2001-2011 US Navy 2011-Current USAF / ANG T-34C, T-2C, T-45C, F/A-18 A/B/C/D/E/F, F-15C, F-35A.. back to F-15C now.
  19. I don’t use a knee board either. iPad + finger works just fine for me. I don’t even mount it on a yoke- I just look at it when I need it (similar to approach plates). I should mention I’ve got an Aspen setup with pfd/mfd that shows plates geocentered- so I get a lot of SA offthe panel. If I didn’t have an MFD- I’d want an iPad on the yoke probably with FlyQ or Foreflight running for additional SA. I have seen, amongst some of my friends and students, riveting a clip to the front cover of an iPad- to hold papers if you need them for some reason. Kind of turns the iPad into a clipboard. ive also seen some iPad cases that can clip into a strap on one’s leg. Seems overly complex/unnecessary to me- but it might be worth looking at if one is looking for a knee board type feel. I’ll see if I can find some pictures…
  20. here are the charts from the 55 and 58P manuals- they are a bit higher than your graph states (assuming power on)… much higher if you’ve got any weight on board (particularly near gross) Again- my point is not to quibble over what stalls at what- my point is that twins exceed the value of a single (and are given leash to by regulation- although the argument about blue line speeds makes the entire discussion more complicated when it comes to safety). and I also believe light twins to be safer than a single engine piston, so long as they are in the hands of a competent pilot that maintains their training requirements.
  21. There are tons of advantages for a twin… Just takes more time, money and maybe effort than a single to do it right.
  22. I just grabbed the numbers off a quick google search- I don’t have the flight manuals. Clearly the numbers I posted don’t match up with your manuals. Doesn’t change the point though that twins aren’t held to the same stall certification requirements as singles although I should have done a little more digging for numbers (#ConfirmationBias)- my bad.
  23. Yes… I’ve seen several in the turbine world… and can’t think of a single engine failure in a twin engine jet that I’ve personally witnessed that’s resulted in a loss of the aircraft. Something as innocent as a bird strike, though, has resulted in the loss of an engine in single engine jets and ultimately led to ejections (I know 2 guys that have had that happen when flying low). That’s all symmetric thrust though for the twins.. About 10 years ago when I was stationed at China Lake just starting my mooney ownership, the base XO at Fallon lost an engine in his Cessna 320 with his 3 daughters onboard in the pattern in the approach turn. He lost control of the airplane- It can happen so quick when you’re in a turn and at those power settings. An approach turn stall is bad in a single- imagine now having the thrust being unbalanced in a similar situation….Unfortunately all onboard perished in that accident. Accidents are fewer in twins when it comes to off field landings- but they can be equally tragic.
  24. Yes, exactly. From the best I understand, the second engine is there for useful load and speed… the added “safety” is a side benefit from a design standpoint. IMO any airplane is only as safe as the pilot flying it (… accepting responsibility for flying it… really…). Twin, single, jet or helo. That’s why we get paid the “big bucks” as pilots ;p
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.