Earl

Quote: rob I bought, and subsequently returned, an iPad. I found it to be a waste of time. Was hopeful that it would be more useful, but I had trouble with it from the start - even things as simple as reading mail weren't working properly. I think this, like the iPhone, needs some time to mature...

I don't have a problem with anyone's decision to fly at night. I simply choose not to from a risk management standpoint. As for the night IFR v. VFR debate for me it is moot. I file IFR for any cross country flight even in CAVU. I like to spend the time in the system and I have learned and experienced a lot of things on IFR flights in VFR conditions, several of which I was glad I didn't have the extra workload of IMC. My CFII encouraged me to do that and I have never regretted it. And the few times I was being jerked around by ATC and in a hurry I just cancelled IFR. As I said above, some of the most pleasant flights I have ever had were at night. But the like the old saying I'd rather be on the ground wishing I were flyiing than in the air wishing I were on the ground, if I lost my engine at night I'd be wishing it was daylight regardless of whether I was in IMC or VFR. Anyone who says they would prefer to lose an engine at night is fooling themselves.

Quote: Jeff_S Here's a PIREP on the 64Gbyte iPad 3G. I actually stood in line at the Perimeter Apple Store last Friday to get one (but only for about an hour) and finally got a chance to take it flying on Tuesday. I primarily use ForeFlight, which I've loved on the iPhone but can say that on the iPad is simply awesome. I have all the charts/plates for the SE region states loaded into the device, so I don't need any connectivity to view them even at altitude. Of course cellular data connection craps out at about 3000', but I found the GPS to work well at my 5500' test altitude, and if it works there (with "No Service" indicated for cellular) there's no reason it shouldn't work at all altitudes. I also found the GPS to be much quicker to pick up than with the iPhone...perhaps with the added size of the iPad they can get an antenna that's more sensitive. My intention is to use this as a chart/plate reader so no more paper for me. Of course, on the ground it's an awesome preflight and briefing tool. In the air, it will provide all normally paper charts, and since GPS seems to work well it will be an emergency backup if all my other panel gew-gaws crap out. It (currently) has nowhere near the full functionality of a real flight GPS like a 696/FlightCheetah etc., but I have all I need in the panel for normal situations so just an emergency, get-me-to-the-nearest-airport capability will suffice. I didn't have any problem with glare and it was a sunny late afternoon. I'd be interested in what other apps are being discussed on the Beech forum besides ForeFlight. Based on past experience, I expect ForeFlight to keep adding significant functionality, but I image other apps will spring up as well.

At least when you are on the ground you can get all the weather info you need on the ipad. It's in the air that it falls short. Will be interesting to see if XM comes up with and adapter to plug into the ipad with an app to display weather. Like I said, I pay a ton of money to keep charts and plates updated on my 696 and this will totally replace that functionality. I will post pix and video when I get it and use it.

I just ordered the new 64GB 3g IPAD and am really looking forward to getting it (already sold out at the Apple stores in Atlanta). I also participate in the Beechtalk forum and there is a very long thread about the ipad and the aviation apps available for it. Very good reviews on the product there, including the gps function on the 3g version. Only rub was some thought the glare in direct sunlight was a problem but other posters did not agree. It sounds to me like a combination of the ipad and a couple of apps (that cost $100 per year) and it can replace my chart and approachplates on my 696 which will save me hundreds of dollars every year. If I were Garmin I would start thinking long and hard about their subscription fees. I can replace everything on the 696 with the ipad except XM weather. Anyone here using it yet and what do you think?

I wish I had the evidence but on a trip from Georgia to New Jersey my groundspeed was 221 knots with a nice tailwind at 70% power. As I recall I was in the mid-teens sucking O2 and made it all the way in a little over 3 hours. I was then brutalized on the return trip two days later at lower altitude to avoid the 50 kt headwinds up high. If I recall it took me 4.5 hours to get back. Ugh! But I could have been in a 172 and it would have taken all day so I am not complaining too much.

Methinks Wistarmo regrets this post already. I have to admit that $20K sounds a bit pricey but I have never looked at replacing all the glass so I don't have a clue on those costs. I have a little research on having the interior done soup to nuts and costs ranged from $7K to $10K.

Well I finally reviewed the data from my 730 and I was slightly off in my original post. It turns out that 5 of 6 cylinders were within 25 dF of each other and one cylinder was about 50-75 dF lower which also corresponded to one of the cylinders that had a lower compression but there is no correlation.

Very reassuring to know I am not alone about flying at night. For me it is a matter of risk management and evaluation of the probability and magnitude of a problem. The probability of something happening while flying at night is the same as daylight flying. However, the magnitude of the potential risk is much higher for obvious reasons. What I decided in establishing my own risk management program is that I would eliminate the risk by not flying at night. These are the exact words typed into my kneeboard. "That's what hotels are for". Applies to weather as well. What is kind of sad is some of the nicest VFR flights I have ever done were at night. But so was the experience of flying VFR into IMC at night with a friend flying an Archer over Indiana before I had my ticket. He had the autopilot on and we descended to below the layer into VFR. Still an uncomfortable few minutes.

Quote: Jeff_S I don't really know much about turbo engines but I do know about analysis-paralysis, especially when you're getting used to a new plane and even moreso when that new plane has way more engine diagnostics than you're used to. But from the experiences I've had learning the idiosynchrasies of my new J, I'd say that if the engine generally performs well but you're seeing things you're not used to on the gauges, then the first step is to check the gauges. In the three months I've been flying the plane, the oil pressure gauge all of a sudden started sticking, the fuel pressure gauge decides to cut in and out with a mind of its own, and now the right fuel-tank gauge has decided to start sticking. The first two of these freaked me out at first (I'm used to fuel-tank gauges not working) but I learned the value of the gentle tap. And so far (knock on wood) the engine just keeps motoring along not caring what the gauges are saying, and the JPI has been a great backup to provide confidence that the old mechanical-analog instruments are just finicky. See if you can get an alternative MP reading before you start tearing anything down.

Quote: Mooney65E I've got the EDM 830 on which MP comes standard. When flight testing after installation of the 830 I noticed an approx 1.5" discrepancy between my original MP gauge and the 830. There are adjustments on the 830 to make them equal, but it makes me wonder how accuate the original gauge is.

Quote: Cruiser you mention low CHTs and low compression but how much lower are these than the high ones? When you do a LOP test what is the spread in fuel flow? Having low compression after 500 hours would make me want to know more about the engine. As for the oil consumption. It will change with power settings. If you run low vs high RPM you will see a difference in consumption. Is it blown out or burned up?

Quote: KSMooniac I would try to plumb another MP gauge somehow, either with the JPI or something else and check to make sure yours is accurate, first. The inability to fly LOP with that engine would bother me, though. Perhaps GAMI jectors would solve the problem, or in the process to determine whether you need them you might discover other issues like induction leaks first. Do you make POH performance numbers currently?

Interested in other's thoughts on my growing anxiety with my engine and whether I am overreacting. Some quick background because I know you will ask. 1986 252 with 2,300 hours TT and 500 SMOH (engine done by Mattituck). I recently added an EDM-730 (which some of you may remember from my earlier posts). The 730 provides CHT, TIT, EGT and RPM but not MP. Since I had the 730 installed, and maybe this is just a coincidence, but I have not been able to get 35" of MP at takeoff and climb. I have only been able to generate 33.5". I had the turbo inspected and it seemed OK and MSC increased fuel flow at full power to 24 gph (I was only getting a little over 21 gph before he adjusted it). He also repaired my alternate air vent that was not seating properly. My A&P checked cylinder head pressures and most were in the 70's with two clylinders in the upper 60's. Oil burn has always been inconsistent which is maybe a function of my measurements (i.e., comparing a cold measurement with a hot engine measurement, etc.). Sometimes it seems like I can fly 8 hours and burn a quart of oil and other times I will fly 2.5 hours and it is down a quart. I also have a pretty big spread in CHT's and the two lowest cylinders in terms of compression also happen to have the lowest CHT. The other clyinders are much closer in temperature. I have tried running LOP but when I get below peak the engine runs rough. My mag checks are fine (using the rich and lean approach) and each of the cylinders jump around 50 dF when I go to a single mag. Am I suffering from too much information and imagining a problem that probably doesn't exist? Both the MSC and my A&P have stated the engine runs great but the inability to produce full MP is bothering me. Could it be that the MP is not accurate and something happened when he installed the 730? Am I just being paranoid or should I be worried? What do I need to check next?

Comment on the statement and then a comment on the youtube video. Statement: I think whoever made this comment must have been taking a specific event and using it to create a generalization. As the saying goes, "All generalizations are false, including this one". If you use proper technique with a power on stall (75% or otherwise), keep the ball centered and properly recover, the airplane will not roll over on its back (I assume from a rolling motion). If you cross control like any other plane watch out. Video: Without knowing the skill level of this pilot if that were my son and I were sitting in the back seat when we landed I would be inclined to punch his lights out. I tend to think that the spin was intentional because he recovered very quickly although the addition of power and his comment makes you wonder. We can't see the rudder or the ball but it seemed to me that he did have the yoke turned. If it was unintentional he sorely needs some air work. Also bugs me that there were no shoulder harnesses being worn. This is a pilot who is way too cavalier about his flying. Old pilots and bold pilots........

One other thing to consider in your decision is whether the cost of insurance will be lower with a hangar that might offset some of the hangar costs. I am like the others, I would consider covered parking to be a minimum but I live in Georgia so rain, thunderstorms, hail, snow, etc. are all a consideration.

I like having my ADF for a number of reasons. First, I like to use the timer on ADF for my in the air flight time. Second, I regulary use it to cross check NDB approach fixes when flying a non-precision approach just like I use my second VOR to cross check fixes. Third, I like to listen to Rush Limbaugh on AM stations while I am flying. :-)

One question I had about the product was sort of answered by their tech support. I asked if the unit could output TIS data to a Garmin 696. One of the features I like about the Zaon is its display in the 696. See answer below. Dear Earl, yes that will be possible. GARMIN gives us the interface into all portable products, e.g. 695/696. Any other questions please let me know! Kind regards Marc Butterfly Support

Quote: skyking Man, you guys get cheap insurance. I have over 6K hours and fly a A model (300 hrs on type) with only 70K hull, in motion, not in motion etc same liability etc and pay $2400 a year in Canada.

Quote: fantom Given the current pressures on revenue increases in Washington, do ya think that just maybe you rich airplane owners might get a second or third IRS look and possible audit? At 5% or 25% business use, IMHO, the advantage is negative....there be drageons there, sorta like a home office, only worse.

Quote: GeorgePerry Before purchasing my Mooney I sat down with a very reputable Aircraft attorney and asked the same questions. First he told me that using an LLC as a shield for liability is a fallacy. If the owner’s at the control and something bad happens, it doesn’t matter if the bird is registered under an LLC…A good lawyer will rip that façade to shreds.

Alan: It's a shame you aren't more excited about this great news. ;-) Congratulations on the get out of jail card. I still remember my first solo flight in my Mooney. Both fun and exhilarating to be free to zoom along on my own. Have fun with your new found freedom!

Just thought of another one. When an old pilot was asked if he had ever tried skydiving he answered, "I never saw the sense in jumping out of a perfectly good airplane".

Quote: rturbett Can anyone offer advice on any tax advantages of having a mooney registered through a business versus as an individual? What specific tax advantages sre there? Any insurance difference? anticipated business use will be about 5% at first, but growing once the IFR is finished. Thanks, Rob

That was my quote that I read somewhere and I think it overstates the case. The point being that flying, despite being enjoyable and challenging, is many hours of monitoring, adjusting, looking, playing with stuff, etc. And then there are those moments when something goes really wrong and those routine hours come off as both tedious and boring in comparison. I would say every pilot that has crashed could probably identify with this statement, assuming they survived. As for me, my first moment of terror was a botched, nose low landing in a 182 at night. After the second hit of the runway my brain was in shutdown mode. Thank goodness I had an instructor along with me and he salvaged the landing. I was certain we were going to nose over. Compared to those few moments the remainder of my flying experience has been tedious and boring.