jetdriven

Those dang unions, I tell you.

The battery must have 80% of its rated capacity or it’s not airworthy. We capacity test every one of them and we throw a few of them out every year. So take whatever 33 is times 80% is (26.4Ah) and that’s what you really have and it still a hell of a lot more than a 35 series compatible EarthX. One more point, the capacity test cuts off at 10V. So you’re guaranteed to run two hours with a 13A power draw with a marginally passing battery.

So who creates the bigger hazard here, somebody who was choosing to fly a Nordo aircraft or somebody who enters a leg of the pattern? As far as I know, there’s really no reason not to have some kind of COM radio. That’s not justification for creating imminent collision hazard. And furthermore, even if you did enter the pattern on the 45 you can still cut off his downwind or run him over in the pattern. It doesn’t mitigate the imminent risk created by an aircraft that doesn’t have a radio.

We put a snubber on a MVP50 fuel pressure and it damped it right out. It previously was always all over the place.

In Texas , two seven is 2 syllables sounds like too semb

Actually, I think you should have two separate alternators and a reasonable battery, but you only have one alternator and in my 1200 hours of flyong my airplane at 14 years. I’ve had 4 alternator failures. Two of the field wire breaking, one was the output wire left loose by the installer which arced and melted away, and one was the output wire breaking. Interestingly we’ve never had a belt failure. And we seen some really shitty belts come through that are still turning the alternator. But it happens, and the alternator is your second electricity source. Sometimes you fly at night, sometimes you fly in the clouds, and sometimes you fly them further than 30 minutes away from the nearest suitable airport, and I think it really matters. How are you gonna click the runway lights on at night to turn them on? . And are you really gonna stop 30 miles short of your destination where you’re based at where you can deal with this problem better? Here’s the deal, bring something to market that’s actually better, and I agree it’s better technology, but it’s simply the wrong size for the application. And the case of the Cirrus it’s actually bigger than the application so it’s like better in every regard, and I applaud those who take the initiative to buy the thing. But don’t try to sell me half a cup of tea at 1.5 times the price. And don’t school me about ADM when you’re not even a licensed pilot at all. Maybe I got this wrong, but I did look. You can look my name up too, It’s there.

Who is attacking who? I would buy one of these things if it had approximately the same amp hours that the battery I have. I think it’s a very valid concern.

If Trio wanted to certify autopilots for Mooney, they would’ve had plenty of interest. They just could not get it done.

Our plane is LED and Garmin everything and it still draws about 15A. My neighbors plane is older and it draws 22A. A 16AH battery isnt going to last 1.5 hours. And its not about droning on and on intentionally after alternator failure in IFR. However, just like reasonable fuel and oil capacity and reserves, the more you have the better you're going to be. Yes you pay a useful load decrease, but I also pay that weight penalty with Bendix 1200 magnetos, and the old-school tractor starter because those things are all bulletproof. More reserve capacity is more conservative. However, VFR, you can fly 2 hours vs 1 hour to complete the mission or to find a more suitable airport for repairs. This just happened to me a couple weeks ago. I would have missed OSH if I had your battery onboard. Instead, I continued to PWK Chicago for repairs, and started it up and proceeded on. Alternator or not I would still been able to go. Also, there's there's no Kathy Nichoson in the FAA Airman registry. I thought it rather unique to be getting flying lessons in aeronautical decision making lessons from somebody who is not a certificated pilot.

I believe they are Rochester senders right out of a ‘57 Chevy

0 ohms is zero. 64 ohms is full. Open circuit is offscale high

the thicker gee bee P-shaped seal wont allow the door to close. The newer one barely does.

Because I want a solid hour of reserve capacity in my plane, and if I load shed aggressively, two. Important in a single engine plane with only one alternator.

If you guys would put those cells in series and parallel and get 30 amp hours out of a 12 V battery you would sell a heck of a lot more of those things.

0 is empty

0-32 OHM. but they are in series so, as installed, its 0-64 OHM.

then the autopilot breaker will still kill it.

That also brings up a another point. Transition to a different airplane. Rarely will you only fly this exact airplane the rest of your flying career. So you get into a piper arrow, or a Bonanza, and since your SOP is to put the flaps up to get weight on the wheels, you try that.

It’s a really great design and a really great idea, and the switch placement is ideal, but it still happens.

The glue isn’t as strong as the Velcro and when you pull the two Velcro pieces apart on one side of the other of the glue comes off of the part. And whatever they make that glue out of is impossible to remove later, so you have these little squares of glue instead of fuzzy velcro on the end of your glare shield

You would think that shape coding would eliminate gear retraction on rollout, but in fact, it happens quite often. And the results are pretty devastating. But if you don’t start grabbing stuff without actually paying attention and looking at it, you can’t put the gear up on the runway. But runway ops are the definition of a critical phase of flight. The first Culver cadet delivered from the factory had an interlock to where if the gear wasn’t down, The throttle could not be pulled back less than 1/3, and the factory pilot came in and realized that he couldn’t pull the throttle back far enough, so he turned the key on and geared up the first one. And we’ve still haven’t invented anything that’s idiot proof yet.

What’s the far part 1 definition of a major alteration?

The tires are 125$ but the tubes are 200$. So changing them twice as often is false economy.

If it comes from Kelly Aerospace or Hartzell, it ain’t gonna be quality.. that’s one thing to think about.

I used to fly with a guy that would do that…. He would put the gear down at the outer marker, and then he would add half flaps, and then full flaps while going down the glideslope, and then he would open the cowl flaps and mess with the prop and the mixture and everything. I mean, he made it work out OK but there were a lot of distractions inside the marker where it really all you wanna do is keep the needles centered and the airspeed where you want it. but one thing I did notice was that the CHT’s would crash. Can’t be good for it. The sole purpose of the cowl flaps is to manage engine temperature, so open at high power and low speed, and closed for the opposite.