peter

If it were only so straightforward .... Unfortunately, past certification costs rarely get "built in" to the price of a product in some effort to recoup those costs - those costs are "sunk", and were either funded by investors or from retained earnings. On a go forward basis products get sold at a price that is sufficient to cover the cost of manufacturing, the cost of distribution, the cost of marketing and sales, the cost of customer support, the cost of warranty claims, the cost of overhead, interest, and taxes, the cost of R&D for new product development, and then hopefully there is enough left over to produce a small profit and a reasonable return for the shareholders. If a company like Dynon were to enter the certified market their business model would change as they would start to incur costs that are not part of their current business. For example: They would have higher manufacturing and engineering costs related to the FAA overhead of certifying their designs, and developing new designs. They would need to have more people in production to handle the FAA independence and quality requirements. They would need to change their distribution model since owners can't legally install avionics in their airplane, so they would need to build a large dealer network and include a dealer mark up in their MSRP, typically 15-40%. They would need a bigger technical and field support organization to handle questions from all these new dealers. They would need to start advertising in new places and attending more shows to drive customers to the dealers. They would need a direct sales force to go out and visit with the dealers to get them to promote their products over Garmin's, etc. They would need a bigger customer support organization to handle all the questions they would get from pilots and aircraft owners unfamiliar with their company and its products. They would need bigger buildings to host all these new folks, more desks, more computers, more more servers, etc., all driving up their fixed costs. Perhaps their existing gross margins would be sufficient to fund all of these new costs, but I suspect not - otherwise they would be selling their current products at an even lower price. What is more likely is that they would need to raise their prices to cover their new cost structure, at which point, they will be competing head to head with established players with large, loyal, customer bases that have little incentive to switch brands. Unless the FAA decides to get rid of certification requirements on design, manufacturing, operations and maintenance, then the foregoing scenario is unlikely to change.

Here's another measure: Median home price October 1982 --> $69,700k Median home price October 2011 --> $212,300 I'm not sure the lawyers deserve all the blame (and no, I am not a lawyer). The FAA is part of the problem too. A manufacturer can buy insurance to manage the litigation risk, but managing the certification risk is not so easy. Today's requirements for certification and production are more time consuming and labor intensive than ever. This drives up the non-recurring and recurring costs as engineers spend hundreds and thousands of hours working on reports, analysis and tests. Higher costs means higher prices, and ultimately it means fewer aircraft owners and pilots, which further drives up aircraft prices. I am optimistic that the FAA's current part 23 rule making review will directly take on these challenges and implement meaningful rule changes that reduce the cost of certification while improving safety. If we can make flying an airplane as safe and easy as driving a car, and as affordable as owning a home, I think we would be amazed by how many people would take up flying. Peter 82 M20k 231

Actually, I think its a Cessna.

A tail dragger?

Underwing courtesy light? I've seen something similar in business jets to aid passengers boarding the aircraft at night.

bump

My apologies if this has been discussed on the forum before - I searched old posts but could not find an answer to this question ... Can anyone tell me what is the normal EGT rise during a LOP mag check in the M20k with TSIO-360LB engine? We did our first LOP mag check today and all went well - engine was smooth, EGTs and TIT all rose smoothly and together. We let the engine run on each mag for about 20 seconds, but this was not long enough for the EGTs to level stabilize. In fact, they really didn't stop their pace of increase during the mag check and we switched the mags back to "both" as TIT quickly approached the transient redline of 1725. We saw a temp rise of about 135 deg for each EGT and the TIT during the 20 second check. We started the check at 65% power and 75 deg LOP. Is what we saw normal for this engine? Peter 82 M20k 231

I found tank weights here: http://www.airportshop.com/aviation_oxygen/cylinder_specs.pdf A fully charged 115cf composite tank is 28lbs. Steel is 44lbs. The fully charged 77cf steel tank is 29lbs, or roughly the same as the bigger Kevlar tank.

16 lbs, all in the tail

@N201MKTurbo Thanks, but no - the weight delta between composite and steel is a non-starter for us. I appreciate the offer all the same. Peter

Sadly, the Kevlar O2 tank in our 231 has reached its 15 year life limit and needs to be replaced. Can anyone offer any suggestions and/or recommendations on the best place to buy a replacement tank? We've also been toying with the idea of downsizing to a smaller 77cf 3HT steel tank since we never seem to come close to using all the O2 in the bigger tank (thank you Oxymizer!) and the weight of the smaller steel tank is about the same as the larger tank we have now. Thoughts and input on this idea are welcome, as well as any Pireps on the real-world usefulness of the 77cf tank. Many thanks in advance, Peter 82 M20k 231

+1 Perhaps a bad antenna or coax somewhere, or splitter. The correlation between com and Nav is a clue. It could also be a bad box. If the original Garmin work is still under warranty it may be cheaper to start your troubleshooting there.

The metal strip is a lightning diverter strip and is there to protect the RSM should the aircraft be hit by lightning. Your shop might be able to bond it back to the RSM housing with some adhesive.

@ Carusoam: I don't recall if the company providing on-line webinar type sessions while I was still there, but it is possible that something like that was offered without me being aware. I am sure if you called or emailed them that they could let you know if they have anything like this, or if there are any planned live events in your part of the country. I guess I have to vote for Craig's panel too since I get a little twinge of jealousy ever time I look at it.

I'm having the same issue. I get an error message that says: You are not permitted to upload any more items into this album

Thank you Craig for creating this group.

Advisory Circular AC 23.1311 provides guidance on backup instrument placement. This advisory material is used by the STC/TC applicant when developing their design and showing compliance. Once STC'd or TC'd, the specific requirments for that equipment/airframe are governed by the STC/TC data. For example, The G500/600 STC requires that the backups be immediately adjacent to the G500/600 bezel. Aspen's STC provides more flexibility, requiring that the instruments be as close as practicable to the PFD, but in no case may they be more than 21" from the PFD. The Mooney factory configuration specifies an exact location that was found acceptable as part of the Type Design approval. Other OEM's have similar specific locations that have been found acceptable.

Quote: KSMooniac I think something like 165 KTAS or perhaps 170 KTAS might be closer to reality when it is all said and done, and perhaps with a 2800 or 2900 lb gross weight after it gets through the certification wringer.

+2. Maybe we can do a group buy? I hear the pin kit also helps quite down the cabin by keeping that top corner of the door tighter against the seal.

The ASF Study includes some interesting conclusions pertinent to retrofit of glass technology. In the study they could only get statistically meaningful data from Cessna and Cirrus aircraft fleets. Affecting the conclusions is that the Cirrus fleet has a higher fatal accident rate versus Cessna, and in Cirrus aircraft, glass does not seem to make a difference. Most Cirrus accidents are stall/spin in day VFR. However, in the Cessna aircraft a statistically significant positive impact was observed from the transition to glass: In the larger Cessnas a dramatic reduction in accident lethality accompanied the conversion to glass. Thirteen of the 20 fatal accidents in conventionally equipped examples were due to controlled flight into terrain, VFR into IMC, or deficient instrument flying, as were all four of those in the glass-cockpit versions. Relative to length of service, this represents almost a 40% reduction in fatal accidents arising from spatial disorientation or loss of situational awareness The study also suggests that transition to glass may contribute to increased utility at an equivalent level of safety: By FAA estimates, about 9% of the time flown by aircraft comparable to those analyzed here is in actual instrument conditions, and another 8% is in VMC at night. We lack the data to determine whether glass-cockpit aircraft undertake those flights more frequently; if so, the result would appear to be increased utility at an equivalent level of safety. Finally, some things could not be measured: However, no data exist on the number of VFR pilots who have escaped IMC encounters in these airplanes, making it impossible to evaluate a potentially important safety benefit of glass.

Ok, that last post post was me, not N4352H!

Quote: Bnicolette Seth, I have the pocket CO300 and have been extremely happy with it. It fits very nicely right above my head (which I figure is a good sample area since it's close to my nose/mouth. See picture.

Greg, Guilty as charged, but you played a great straight man. My bird is over at AEG - and you are welcome to safety pilot with me any time if you like. I have just under 2k C130 hours as a navigator. Every time you boys fly over our house I tell my boys they are hearing "the sound of freedom." If it hasnt been said already, thanks for all that you do. Peter

Here's another - this is from my K, post Aspen upgrade, so things have moved around slightly from stock.

No charge.