kortopates

So far links work for me, but Markus Wagner is the President of EMPOA and probably does all the admin on the EMPOA site. If you need his email i can provide. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As said above 10 hrs in another Mooney won’t make any difference when you go to insure your Dad’s C - most underwriters need a 100 or more time in type or lots of retract time to get that first discount. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree, When a gear up occurs after a normal landing flare and speed we have a long history of minimal and non-structural damage. It’s when the incident follows a loss of control landing accident, gear up or gear down, that damage can be much more severe including breaching a tank. Fire is still very rare unless an off field landing in my experience. Perhaps it’s very helpful there is no fuel directly behind the leading edges. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

GPS is a approved substitution for DME Distance with any approved IFR GPS for all phases; including your 430W. But really nobody uses that NAV page with the compass orientation at the top you have displayed. Instead the first two pages are much more widely used, especially the Default page with all the data fields. The Distance/DIS field on the GPS is the distance to the active waypoint which is equivalent to the DME distance as long as the active waypoint is the VOR facility (note there is an exception when the active waypoint is actually a DME arc on a loaded approach and then the distance is the along arc distance to the end of the arc). Keep in mind, regardless of what mode the Navigator is in, VLOC or GPS, everything displayed on the GPS screens is 100% GPS data. The only VOR data is on the CDI/OBS head. Your instructor should already know all this, else he/she is almost as new to IFR as you are and I'd respectfully recommend finding a more experienced CFII. Oddly in your picture, it appears the GPS is only being used as a Nav Radio for the VOR, as there is no flight plan with a destination airport within 30 NM loaded, because its in Enroute phase.

#1 - No, minimums is a PFD function not GPS. Plus they are not automatically known, such as ILS, or Loc or circling minimums. #2 Because of the poor terminology this may not be a direct answer. But i assume you are referring to the Nav frequencies: active and standby. You can toggle the cursor between the Com and Nav frequencies to dial in either one. But when you load the approach that will automatically put the proper frequency into the standby NAV frequency. Then all you need to do is make that standby frequency the active frequency. You also have to identify VOR/LOC on the 430 by listening to the audio. Secondly it doesn’t give DME distance but GPS distance from/to the active waypoint or along a DME arc. The 530 though self identifies the nav station and also gives GPS distance from it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s not very hard to over extend the gear when extended manually such that it becomes locked in place as Skip mentions above. All it takes is pulling past when the light comes on. One can also bend a tube doing that when the limit screw isn’t properly adjusted. With a bit of disassembly it can be freed up as if nothing happened Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Still PIC if sole manipulator and rated regardless of who you are flying with. see 61.51 e Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t doubt there is some of that. But i was taught that a good instructor needs to be able to reference the regulation for any “rule” including CFR’s, AIM, FAA approved limitations in the POH and AFMS and LOI’s. I think CFI checkrides prove we don’t need to remember or memorize everything as long as we know how to look something up we’re not sure about. But clearly answering something incorrectly rather than looking it up results in a disapproval. So i always do my best to reference the proper authority when i am instructing. As for nemonic or memory aides - why not? They can be helpful but they alone don’t provide an understanding. Take AVIATES for a memory aide of required airworthiness inspections. It’s helpful because not all of them are found in 91.409 where the annual/100 inspections are listed - we have to go to additional sections to get all of them. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree entirely and understand the sentiment. You’re surely not alone so this directed more to the sentiment shared by many rather than you directly. But i feel GA needs AOPA and without them GA flying will go the way of flying in Europe with ridiculous fees and overly zealous restrictions. I don’t think we should abandon AOPA but do everything we can to straighten out their direction to include our needs as i believe Darren was trying to do. I am an EAA member as well but i don’t see them as a replacement for AOPA. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That seems rather harsh. I was merely showing some empathy while directing them to the regs to see for themselves. Not interpreting it for them but merely pointing to the controlling paragraph for a student pilots. Actually trying to encourage folks to read it for themselves.

I know 61.51 may be daunting for some it has a paragraph entirely on when a student pilot can log PIC time, see 61.51 e (4). The earlier 61.51 e (1) paragraph is only for pilots with a certificate Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Folks can also sign this petition to re-instate Darren and give the board your comments. https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/reinstate-darren-pleasance-as-ceo-of-aopa?source=direct_link i know there is better way to post a link but not figuring it out from my phone with Tapatalk Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I could be wrong. i am no insurance expert but i think per person is referring to pax only - details would be in the policy or a phone call away. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not as PIC - only when solo. Being under the hood doesn't change how its logged.

In fact you were required to log 10 hrs of solo PIC time for the private, which included at least 5 hr solo xctry time, (including your 150 nm xctry with 3 takeoff and landings) and your very first solo with probably 3 takeoff and landings solo when your flight instructor was no doubt supervising in a sweat till you were down!

Lasar has their own PMA version of these which were half the cost of the factory shock disk towers. Many fail to visually check inside the tubes at the bottom for corrosion. It only takes 1/10 of loss of the tubing thickness from rust to render them unairworthy. I squirt some ACF50 into the bottom to prevent rust from water getting in there; but LPS3 and many other things would work as well.

Vance, very well reasoned argument for not being too concerned about the sub-limits. Personally though I think the better argument would have been to point out that these sub-limits only apply to pax you're carrying - not injured people outside of your aircraft and not other property like cars or house(s) damaged etc. So we're talking about a smaller risk with pax. Still though you brought up the point of net worth I quoted above which is my concern. If your pax or their estate sues you for much more than 100K, that 100K policy limit will go as far as they believe they can't get additional money's out of you. You're hoping that the old phase "you can't squeeze blood from a turnip" is going to appease them. And sure when I was young that would have worked. But when your net worth is many times that sub-limit I am not buying the plaintiff's lawyers are going to walk away when they still have a good case for recovering much much more - despite how good the insurance company's lawyers are. My big salary days are over with a lifetime of acquired wealth I sure don't want to risk losing in an aircraft accident- its too late in life for me to to rebuild it. So despite how small the chance, it still seems foolish to me to put it at risk. In my mind that's what insurance is for and luckily we have better options. Personally for me I found Avemco more expensive than my broader coverage I have with smooth limits. So it really comes down to each person's situation for which net worth is critical to the calculus. I still don't buy Avemco's argument that they nearly always settle suits without exceeding their sub-limits. 100K doesn't go very far these days. But of course they have to say something like that since that's all they offer. If only they could guarantee it!

#1 only, when lapping a valve is what we recommend

Very true, but the big problem with Avemco is that they don't provide smooth liability coverage, only with sub-limits. 100,000 per person is what I recall which is nothing in today's litigious society of ours. Plus they have more restrictive geographical limits. Of course its better than no option at all.

At the typical 1-2 Mooney gear ups per week during the prime flying months I’d say the fleet needs all the help they can get to prevent gear ups. Currently the LHS is very effective calling out check gear. Much better than the throttle switch warning which is too easily ignored as the record shows. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Robert McGuire does that talk at our PPP’s. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good job Paul. At Savvy we concur with replacing on condition and any time the valve is lapped. I would add though rotators can be tested as soon as you pull off the rocker shaft by staking the valves. Mike B demonstrates this in his video on youtube showing how to lap valves. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I notice it doesn’t seem to offer any integration with the gear warning circuit like the LHS does. Although Garmin integration is a big plus, at least for GI-275 users, so far i am still giving the edge to the LHS for its additional capabilities at significantly less cost. Although installation cost for the Garmin unit should be less than the LHS. No telling why they didn’t or couldn’t readily expose the G3x functionality from the experimental version. May well have been easier to add a new function to the GI-275 than refactor the original code base to expose the needed functionality.

QAA is qualified but their quality sucks. The only good thing about them is they have capability to overhaul most everything. Suggest you contact https://aircraftaccessoriesofok.com/ ask for the fuel shop and you can talk to the guy that will repair or OH it for you for a rough estimate and shop time. They do good work, are reasonable and provide prompt service. Please don’t fly it like that. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Given the forecast predicting strong gusty winds this afternoon, most instructors where able to get 2 of our4 flights done late Friday afternoon and evening so that we could finish the second 2 flights by noonish today. Winds were still light till noon when I finished my 4th flight. But I offered to go back up with one of students if they wanted and we did. The winds rapidly came up after noon and my C student landed on the big rwy 36 with winds 270@12G21. That was still doable without using the cross wind runway 26, still 3000' long. But we had so many near bird misses at takeoff, climbing and on the downwind and then again on base and even final and right on landing that he called it because of the birds. Nobody else I talked too had such bad luck with the birds. A few Mooneys that came in a bit after this did go for Rwy 26 when the winds increased to 270@15G31. But winds where also variable besides gusty the entire time with the 3 windsocks all aiming very differently. Temps where fine the last two days, despite chilly at night but tomorrow morning promises to be much colder. Hard to believe this is Florida At least ceilings where always plenty high or clear and conditions where quite smooth from 1000 agl up.