John Pleisse

I was always taught that when instructed to "ident" that one shouldn't reply verbally and that timely identing was your reply. Others say....give'm a quick Roger. Which is best?

Quote: Hank We need some WV hospitality... we should do Elkins sometime.

Quote: Hank I'd love to come, but I'm picking up the plane from tank reseal on the 18th, and once I get home we're off to see the inlaws for Thanksgiving Week. Can we do this again? The weather usually sucks pretty bad between here and MD in Jan and Feb, although I did make the Gatlinburg trip in Feb of this year. You just never can tell.

Quote: colojo Oooh, PilotDerek asks the Million Dollar Question! I also don't support user fees but I guess it would depend on how much it was. Even in the $50-$100 range per flight it would definitely have an impact on my flying habits... when VFR I would probably just rely on the TCAS. If the flight called for IFR there might be cases where I'd punt and go commercial.

and come to think of it he was very surprised a bug got in and maybe he would have suggested a vacuum system source if it was a possibility?

great creative: Cry Baby: Ride Along:

I can do it... How about Hank, Anthony, 201'er or Ross? There are several guys based FDK who I will convey for you.

I have a waterproof SPOT...it goes seamlessly between my aircraft and boat. I have the lowest level subscription. Fills a great void, but you are on the hook for a monthly fee.

Mike thanks for joining. It's always great to hear it directly from the source. 1) What is your public position operating Lycoming 4 cylinder enginers LOP? What is your opinion of Lycoming's lag in providing data given the tsunami of LOP op's? Given major overhaul shops won't warranty LOP Lyc 4-banger ops, where would prospective operators get sound data and operating procedures? 2) CHT temps maximums in Avweb paper #46 were subsequently contradicted by one of your colleagues. Where did you finally arrive with your max CHT suggestions? Is there another Avweb article? 3) Given you provide type specific advice to C, B and Cirrus, do you feel type specific maintanence is the best approach? Would expand your repetoire to include broad based Mooney Service? Thanks in advance for your answers. Thanks for joining in!!

I use FF almost exclusively, usually back-ending wx and getting a pop-up. It works real well and uses the system to your advantage. This eleviates waiting for a clearance out of NW DC area (some times 30-45 mins on a weekend). This will change in Feb when my home base will become towered. I will then file almost exclusively. When vfr, you never know, so I always leave a flight plan on my voice mail. Wifey knows where to find it if I am not accounted for.

nvm

Quote: danb35

Quote: JimR

Way to go Brandon!!! File and crawl around in it before the freeze levels come down!!! Awesome achievement!!!

Quote: jetdriven

Quote: Hank

Quote: jetdriven Any proof of this owner performed maintenance being less safe? I do our maintenance under supervision of an IA and so far everything is fixed once. Not like the first mechanic who forgot many things.

Quote: KSMooniac

Quote: jetdriven

Quote: Parker_Woodruff One more time....publicly touting flying engines past TBO by 900 hours, or failure when you are pitching weekend seminars and engine management theories isn't savvy. It lacks prudence and ethicacy. Your results may vary.

Quote: Shadrach With all due respect John, I appreciate that you take issue with Mike advocating for 900 or whatever number of hours past TBO. However, I don't ever think that he's advocated that everyone or anyone in specific do it, only that it's not necessary to tear down a perfectly running engine because of numbers in a log book and replace it with an unknown quantity. I've heard some awful overhaul nightmares... I know more than a few people who take the "I add oil and gas and turn the key" approach... While this may work fine for you (I know of some [mostly Bonanza guys] who wear this doctrine like a badge of financial status, albeit a foolish one), it's not the best nor most safe way to maintain an aircraft in my humble opinion. Somehow as a community, we've gotten the false notion that spending money equals safety. It does not in my very factual experience. Maintaining Aircraft to a high standard equals safety; money can be well spent or poorly spent to that end (I've spent many $1000s on both in the past). It was only after years of bloody knuckles and taking on in-depth projects that most owners would avoid that I saw how unacceptable the MX/owner relationship can be. Just a few of the things that have happened to me personally: 1) Broken pieces from careless disassembly. Hidden only to be found years later. 2) Screw holes and nut plates stripped from improper hardware and sheet metal pierced from inappropriate length screws. 3) Bills padded for work not done or time billed exceeding what was realistic for work completed. (2.5hrs to replace an exhaust hangar last year.) 4) Nose truss bent (likely at a MSC of all places) 5) A DOM that wanted to replace a bent nose truss with a new $1800 dollar one and insisted that LASAR was an illegal "chop shop" and that the legality of their beefed up unit was "questionable" at best. I could go on, and on and on... with my own experiences as well as those of others that I've witnessed first hand. The point is, the skepticism that I've gained as I've become more mx savvy was hard won and far more expensive in terms of cash and time than $500 If spending $500 with Mike Busch could help an unknowing owner detect just a small fraction of the times when he's being had, then the seminar will pay for itself many times over inside of a few years... The other side of this is that as a white collar guy who exchanges it for a blue one on the weekends; I see guys get screwed on both sides. Lawyers, bankers, stock brokers, etc...often times stick it to a working guy who's not savvy enough to know when he's assumed the position. So he pays just the bill. Just as a Lawyer has no idea if his "just out of warranty" BMW really needs 2 new $450 front brake calipers. So he pays just the bill. Maybe it's a subtle cosmic balance for those that have specialized themselves out of any other process other than their own vocation... Mike Busch is just trying to make an honest dollar off of those who "know what they don't know", he's not telling anyone to fly there engine into the ground (figuratively... For those that "don't want to know what they don't know" ignorance is bliss. It's great for them to have the safest, most well maintained wnd expensively serviced bird on the field. Even it's only true in their head. BTW, I have never taken a Savvy Owner MX course, but I have enjoyed Mike's free webinars, lots of good and inexpensive info especially for a first time owner!

Quote: jetdriven Airlines are "cheap", by that definition too. Here we go again with voodoo feelings vs. hard data. I work for an airline, and everything is run on condition. We have engines with 20,000 on the last overhaul. These airplanes have a safety record soem 50 times better than your "open checkbook" airplane. Throwing money at the problem is not a solution. People soend 10K getting their autopilot worked on, and it still does not work. If you have the service manuals, and do some troubleshooting, and have an A&P with that mindset as well, you can fix it for 10% of the amount, and it works when it leaves. Again, please quantify with data how replacing parts based on some calendar or hour limit improves safety? The part that is on your plane is working. The part you are putting on it may have an infant mortality event. We just installed an electric ADI in our plane, and now we are going to run our 800 hour vacuum pump till failure. Yes, right up until it quits. What are the consequences of it failing? none. Does it affect safety? no. dispatch reliability? no. Prop has 12 years since new and 1400 hours. Past the McCauley TBO. Airworthy? yes. Legal? yes. Does replacing it with an overhauled unit make that next single hour more safe? I believe, less safe. What about the next ten hours? It might be trouble free, where it is as reliable as the one we took off. But more safe? no. Its just money. Our cylinders are first run and yes, we are going to take those past TBO unless there is a reason to pull them off. A reason, not a feeling. So, there it is.

Quote: KSMooniac

Quote: jetdriven His theory is that TBO is just a recommendation. And it is based on severe service. Does the failure of the part cause a hazard or a dispatch reliability problem? Is there an AD or a FAR 23 mandate for it to be replaced on a schedule? If not, RUN TILL FAILURE. Someone doesnt have to replace something based on a calendar or a hours fgure. It is not required, and in the case of pulling off all the cylinders on a Cirrus for a top overhaul, when you reassemble the engine the bearings shift, causing a rod to throw and a crash. How safe is that?

Quote: jetdriven He is also an IA and I think his position is credible. He says dont replace something until it needs it. His work is all signed off and he flies the aircraft. Isnt that what it's all about?