WardHolbrook

I am a CFI and the #1 most common cause of muffed landings is too much airspeed crossing the threshhold. It's all about airspeed control. If you're coming in a bit on the fast side and carrying some power to boot, you'll have plenty of opportunity to muff up your landing while you're floating down the runway in ground effect. You can also throw the landing distances in the POH out the window. As you have suggested, make sure you're using the proper approach speed. Some guys add a lot of cushions... 2 or 3 knots for this, a couple of knots for that, and a few for the wife and kids oh and don't forget a little something for grandma. They add up quickly and they're not necessary unless you're dealing with a STRONG direct crosswind. 100 IAS works well in the pattern but you're going to want to back it off to 1.3 times the stall speed for the landing configuration you're using as you're crossing the threshold. (I am NOT a fan of partial/no flap landings.) That speed will be a function of weight, in other words, the appropriate threshold speed landing with a pilot 3 passengers and a couple hours of fuel won't be the same as when you're in the airplane by yourself and only have 10 gallons of fuel. This is where an Angle of Attack indicator really comes in handy - it makes flying at 1.3 Vstall silly simple regardless of your weight and configuration.

Over the past 47 years I've made over 12,000 landings. I think that I've finally discovered the secret to making good landings, every time, in any airplane. At first, I figured that it had to do with being properly configured and flying a stabilized approach at precisely the proper airspeed, but obviously that wasn't it. I then worked up a theory that involved planetary alignment and moon phases. I was getting closer. It finally all came together once I figured out how to hold my mouth. So here it is - the key to perfect landings every time... You have hold your mouth just right, the planets have to be in proper alignment and the moon has to be in the proper phase, additionally, you need to be properly configured, fly a nice smooth stabilized on speed approach. If you get a greaser other than when you're doing all of that you're just lucky.

I don't know that I'd go that far, there are certainly times where they are very useful but If you've got them and you find yourself using them on each and every flight then you need to examine your flying style. You probably need to make a few adjustments.

I used to have a nice one in my flight bag. It had been in there for a while, but I never used it and eventually I forgot it was in there. A couple of months ago we had to airline out to Boise Idaho to pick up one of our Falcon 900 and you can guess the rest...

Jimmy Doolittle's autobiography, I Could Never Be So Lucky Again. He was an amazing man and involved in the introduction of a lot of things that we take for granted nowadays - 100 octane avgas and the first "blind" flight and a bunch of other stuff all in addition to the Tokyo raid.Well worth reading. There are two flying related books that ought to be in every instrument rated pilot's library - Weather Flying by Robert Buck and Instrument Flying by Richard Taylor.

We never did and still don't. The factory always has. It's pretty presumptive to think that you're going to come up with something totally opposite (flaps up vs flaps down) to what the factory certification test pilots did back in the day. Seriously.

The performance charts in most newer aircraft are reasonably accurate, the caveat is that if you want to achieve book performance you need to fly the aircraft by the book, taking into account all of the book procedures, techniques, profiles, speeds, etc. However, if the book call for a certain flap setting or a certain rotation speed and you chose to use something else then you can throw the book numbers out the window. In other words if you can't consistently achieve the performance in the book, the problem is likely the pilot, not the airplane. I always wonder where all of these "extra curricular" procedures come from. I'd truly be surprised if it was beneficial; in fact, I'd be willing to bet that overall takeoff performance is reduced. The problem with procedures like this is that they feel like they're doing something, but unless you've got the data points to back it up the fact is that they probably don't. My experience is that the manufacturers typically put procedures in the POH that result in the maximum available performance - after all, performance sells airplanes.

OK, so here's what I've learned about pre-flight planning after 47 years and a couple of thousand coast-to-coast trips as PIC, my two most recent were last week... In spite of all of the futzing one does in the weeks and days leading up to the flight, it all boils down to what Ma Nature decides to put in place on the day of departure. In other words, when you wake up and check the weather, it's either going to be good enough to go or it's not. What constitutes being "good enough to go" is purely a function of two things - the pilot flying the trip and the airplane s/he's flying. For one, it's ratings, experience, heath and rest status, etc. For the other it's performance capabilities, certification, maintenance status etc. All good pilots will have alternatives in place just in case their 'Plan A" can't be successfully accomplished. For some pilots, an acceptable alternate is an approach at a different airport where the weather's better. For other pilots the best alternate is an airline ticket.

All it would take is an understanding insurance broker and the $$$ to cover said insurance premium. (And that's only if you want the process to be cover by insurance, some folks don't worry too much about stuff like that.) Even light twins have been used as primary trainers. A friend of mine has a couple of primary students learning to fly in a DA42 Twinstar. I've never had a primary student in a retract, but I've trained some in a Cessna 182. It only takes a little additional time to get them up to speed with a C/S prop. Adding retractable gear to the mix wouldn't take much more effort. Besides, most military pilots are starting out in turboprop singles. Bottom line is all it really takes is $$$.

The problem with relief tubes and aluminum airplanes is corrosion. If you go that route, you'll want to take all of the preventative measures to clean it up after every flight plus make sure you don't have any leakage in the tubing and connectors. In many ways, the other suggestions are a much better tong-term solution. I've known guys who use external catheters and leg-strap bags. Seems to work well for them.

Exactly, there can also be significant differences between specific examples of the same make and model. In other words, if you polled 5 owners of any given make and model about their direct and indirect operating costs you're very likely to have a lot more than $20 variation between them. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the delta was a lot higher. Still, Conklin & De Decker and other similar comparisons are fun to play with, but there's enough "slop" in them to limit their usefulness to "entertainment purposes" only, While we're at it, you need more than 5 to 10 knots difference in speed for there to be a meaningful time difference on any given trip.Remember all airplanes are "flying compromises" and that there's no such thing as the perfect airplane.

Denial is not a river in Egypt. The airplane has no idea what the paperwork says it weighs, it only knows how much it really weighs. Heaven forbid, if you were to ever have an accident or incident that gets the feds involved, the first thing they'll do is weigh the airplane - if they can. (Wince) Do you really want to be flying your airplane over max allowable gross weight for whatever reason?

I apologize if this has already been mentioned, but if you need to gain a quick 70 pounds of useful load just take a tip from the guys who fly jets and turboprops - fuel for the trip. Honestly, how often do you need to fly nonstop to the very limit of your range? SOP for jets and turboprops is to fuel for the planned distance then add a reserve. I personally use 60 minutes for most trips. However, if there's weather or other factors the reserve fuel increases. The fuel you don't carry is extra weight that you can.

I'd love to see what that Frankenplane looks like.

If they subpoena your records the wording will probably read along the lines of "any and all".

Byron is spot on. You need to know and understand your rights. There's one other aspect to all of this - If they end up inspecting your airplane you also need to understand that indeed they can disassemble your airplane to any degree they feel necessary and then simply walk away leaving you to deal with the results including the costs of reassembling the mess and repairing any damage. Keep that in mind when you're standing out on the ramp and a couple of non-pilot DHS types are trying to decide if they're going to have to open up your airplane or not.

You haven't spoken to the same guys I have then. That's why I made the suggestion. (Grin) Yes it's expensive, but so is a top overhaul if you happen to muff something up. I've never found additional training not to be worthwhile.

Instead of asking a bunch of questions on this forum, why don't you take a portion of that $3000 to $4000 annual savings and invest in some serious training by the guys who reinvented the way piston airplanes are being flown? http://www.advancedpilot.com/ You can take the course on site or online either way it's probably a good investment.

A proper checklist is used to back up a flow and used together they give you redundancy - you've got two passes at each item. The best light aircraft checklist I ever saw was the one silkscreened onto the sun visor of a Piper Arrow that I used to fly. Short and adequate. Perfect. The worst checklist I ever saw was a extremely detailed multipage affair that the pilot used as a to-do list and required way too much heads down time.

Good luck on finding an app that works well for you. The best electronic checklist I ever used were the customizable ones integrated into the Collins MFDs on some of the bizjets I've flown. They were very slick and extremely easy to work into your normal routine. Even with those, we still carried paper copies of every checklist on the airplane. I wish the same system was available on all of the aircraft I fly and unless you have at least two electronic devices with your checklists, I recommend that you do the same. All that high end Collins stuff is great, but we're talking Mooneys not Gulfstreams. The next step down the ladder is the system that I'm using on everything I'm flying now - up to and including the Falcon 900s that our company operates - is the tried and true paper checklist put together using either MS Word or Excel then taken to Staples and laminated. If the normal procedures - preflight to shutdown - for a Falcon 900 can be put on the front and back of a 8.5 X 11 sheet of paper you ought to be able to easily put everything you'd need for a Mooney on it. If you want to include a complete checklist for Normal, Abnormal and Emergency procedures and need more room, you can take a page from our military brethren and put together a complete checklist in one of these military style binders. Back in my Learjet days, we used a pair of these binders in the cockpit (one set for each pilot) and they really worked well. http://www.flyboys.com/fb2202.html

It looks to me like it is something that will be removed by your mechanic prior to signing off the annual inspection. There are similar devices in the aft equipment bays of many bizjets.

I will second this. The problem with XM or ADS-B weather is the refresh rate. By the time the info actually works its way through the system and onto your display it can be quite stale. When things are popping the info may simply not be good enough. At best, it's better than nothing. At worst, it's more dangerous than having nothing at all. With the existing refresh rates, they will never be able to replace airborne weather radar and a stormscope combination.

Nearly every serious aircraft/engine issue I've encountered over the years were directly related to recent maintenance/inspections. I'll echo what others have said and add just be extra vigilant for a few hours - some issues take time to develop. Fortunately, you're not likely to run into any issues.

Prist makes an fuel anti-icing additive that is commonly used in turbine aircraft that are not equipped with fuel heaters. The additive is available on just about every jet fuel truck for direct injection into the fuel as it is being pumped into the aircraft. Prist is also approved for use in avgas, but it's only needed in extremely cold temperatures. If you check your POH, you'll also may find that you can add up to 1% isopropyl alcohol to your fuel - it also serves as a fuel icing preventitive by removing any free-water in your fuel. Other than than those (and of course TCP) there are no other approved avgas additives that I'm aware of. As for MMO, it has a great placebo effect on some pilots. Here's a link if you'd like further information: http://www.pristaerospace.com/index.html