aviatoreb

Bleh what a mess! What is that little jet looking thing WD187?

Good luck!

I think someone is shopping for a Cirrus. What years you looking at?

Exactly. If you are flying high on a lovely severe clear day to enjoy a big tail wind, then descent is a much better option. But there can be scenarios where immediate descent might be a problem - due to weather, (ice, etc), terrain (rocks), or traffic (but then there is the emergency word - still watch out). So a back up plan of a second o2 source is good too.

Good comments. But one of my questions was what do people mean when they say the flight levels. Not what is the best choice. Since the way some people seem to use the phrase, I think it is upper teens and above. Others seem to mean anything above the 12500 rule. Others seem to mean just 20's and above. So it is sort of a person specific phrase and therefore sort of useless to convey anything. So I say "mid teens" or "upper teens" etc.

So when people say they avoid the flight levels, what does this mean? FL17? Or are they saying the 20s? I often go 17/18, and rarely have I been above 19, specifically because it feels "spooky" at 20+ in the sense that I am hyper aware of how inhospitable it gets as you go up from there. I have not been working it as a problem as a "line in the sand" not to cross though, but I am thinking about it. I am in excellent cardio health, as far as they come, for an aging graying, stereotypical ga pilot dude. I have also been thinking about, for reasons of pure convenience, to let my standard 3rd class medical go when it is time next summer, and then go with the new medical standard that came out - the only thing extra that I can do with the 3rd class medical that I couldn't otherwise do is to fly 18 and above, which maybe we should all decide isn't a good idea anyway. I love flying between 14 to 18 on the east coast, since it is very quiet there. To high for most GA, and too low for the jets. In the north east corridor, I nonetheless get really good routing, and very rarely need to be pointed out traffic. Plus the turbo gets to be pretty fast there. But even so, I sometimes will fly in the mid teens into a strong headwind for the other reason I like to fly high - like I fly direct over our local mountains (Adirondacks) and high teens over the lakes, even into a headwind, since I am thinking gliding distance, that altitude/glide distance is the parachute. My feeling is that at 17 I might have a good chance to react and descend if need be, and I have tested this with a copilot at my side. Much higher - and maybe not. So I choose altitudes accordingly.

How high do you fly Mike?

I’ve got vgs and tks also. If you take the vgs off please do before and after speed tests - I’m curious. my feeling is that tks does damage to the speed but then the damage is mostly done and vg s don’t make it worse.

How high do you fly?

Love the webcams on the Mooney as you disassemble it. And the grim reaper mask. Great production. But for next year for the season to up your game, perhaps you can add in some handheld camera work, and maybe something in the woods, with scary stick figurines hanging from trees, and some scenes of the flashlight pointing at your face, sort of like the Blair Witch Project? I give this film only 1 thumbs up.

In Lake Wobegone, All of the children are above average.

Nontheless - it might be priced - lol in - such that it still makes since - considering selling back what you have - early adopters will get better price there. I too have a good engine monitor and adsb out.

..and cars. Watch out for flooded cars flooding the used car market.

Like a parachute?

I have a well working KFC200. I am interested in next generation digital autopilots, esp envelope protection. But I get you are happy. I think maintaining our old stuff is expensive in the long run. In any case, as I understand it - the Dynon system will be all or nothing in the STC.

Wow - that IS impressive. I figure first thing if these conty/lyco engines we have were meant for cars is they would have steel cylinders and cases and so be heavier but stronger. But they are old designs. That wouldn't be anything anyone would do. What I was trying to say mostly I stand behind, that whatever you put on your car may not be the same as you put on an airplane since that horse power rating is often 75% continuous power on an airplane, and on cars that it is just a need for brief peak power. Race cars I don't know anything about. How much continuous power is that 1000hp diesel Audi engine producing on a continuous basis? I would still guess it averages no more than 200hp during that 24hrs. Just guessing a number out of the blue.

Yeah - race car engines only need to last a few hours before they fresh rebuild them for the next race. Consumer engines are not really as tweaked as they could be. I know my car engine, the Subaru wrx sti, is rated at 300hp, but you can buy software kits to up them to 350, and other stuff to up them to 600hp, and people do that - and you see a lot of used tricked-out wrx-sti for sale with new engines on them.... And car engines aren't meant to be run at even 75% continuously, but rather sort of a peak ten second thing for yahoos accelerating with your foot to the floor and otherwise they live a polite life churning like 50hp while cruising down the highway. Airplane engines are really big - if they were steel and on cars, I bet a 300hp big conty would be mapped as a 750hp car engine, but as above, Peak power, for advertising rights. For reliability, I wouldn't want a car engine tricked up to 400hp on my car, much less my airplane. The best car to airplane engine conversion out there is probably the corsair engine. It turns rather slower than most modern car engines, so it turns naturally at airplane rpms. So no gear box is needed. And also, then down-rate it - for reliability. They are popular and considered an inexpensive and reliable alternative for homebuilders.

Oh no Eric!!! Well I am glad he is ok. But oh! I flew an hour of dual with Eric in Jan. Be well Eric.

No coke - I want an autopilot.

Ok betting man - are we going to get the GFC500 available? And when?

That was the cost they charged themselves, off the shelf, experimental I believe. And I don't think they included the cost to install. My guess is that it will be 25-30k installed in a Mooney, all in. Still good by previous standards, for everything it includes, but I am saying likely >10k more than their number suggests. and at that price, the other options, including Garmin, will be on the table.

At this stage - I am hoping a pair of G5's and the GFC500 will be certified for my airplane. That would be a lotta bang for the buck in term of operational improvement. And considering I already have a newish ADSB-out transponder, and a EDM830, I am not feeling like I want all the rest that comes with an all in one. I would consider a Txi 500-7'' depending on costs. Trutrek and Trio are still very much in the running. But I really like the ESP feature of GFC - which helps even if you make a mistake while hand flying. the BK drop in might win out - if it has that feature - although I wish there was some modern version of the servos too, and I am not too happy with BK these days since they threatened us with massive cost increases earlier in the summer then backed off. My KFC200 is running great, but for how long - and the ongoing costs are enough to pay for an upgrade to a modern feature rich digital autopilot ... which I will do in a year or so when things shake out and I see what is available in the market place. Dynon might be in the running too if this thing is for real and at a fantastic price.

Did they say if gfc500 is coming for us?

...yeah - and I have a very nice engine monitor too. But if the price is right...

Yah I know. I shoulda said "Dynon is getting closer" eye-roll.