David Mazer

Somewhere above the question of calibration difficulty was aksed. I've had three AOAs. The first in a Dynon system. Required several attempts to get it right. When I was done, I was never perfectly comfortable I got it right. The second was a Lift Reserve Indicator. A very nice product but, like ALpha Systems, required numerous flights to accurately angle the probe. I really didn't like the display for the Mooney but it was completely mechanical (no electrical at all) and was easy to install in my SeaRey. The CYA-100 was calibrated twice but I had to fly three times to get it right. On the first flight, I had wired it into the master and it couldn't be turned on and off (required to calibrate is to start from off if I recall properly). The second time, after I installed an on off switch, all went. Unfortunately, I accidently pressed the calibration button on the ground when I turned on the system and it assumed I was calibrating it again. The third time I was very careful to get as close to stall as I could control and that turned out to be the best so far. With this calibration, the AOA warning always sounds before the stall warning but not by much. It has been very accurate and I now KNOW where I am with respect to stall speed. I would strongly advise adding an on/off switch. The tone, while useful and important, is ver irritating as I taxi in and out and the switch solved the problem of making the tone so quiet I might not hear it or so load it was an irritation. The heated probe would be nice, especially for you TKS equipped guys but how often do we really fly in icing? Personally, and I've already made the choice to proceed, waiting for a heated probe means flying without an AOA instead. Hardly a value trade off for the <1% situation of icing. Rip, go for it, give them a discount and get more of them installing this great safety device. After that we can talk about my next profession of AOA salesperson!

Erik, I don't think the voice thing is likely but I just sent an email to the inventor and asked about heating. We'll see what he says.

I don't know of any videos for the CYA-100 during landing but I can tell you the last red LED and the warning sound occur prior to stall. I usually try to approach at the last yellow/first red and never seem to be a problem. On takeoff, I rotate earlier and stay just in ground effect for a few knots now since it can also be used for take off and climb too. I stay in the green and the Aspen starts showing me chevrons. My climb is much faster to a safe altitude this way. I'm really rather surprised that for $400 for a nice/small, bulletproof unit there is so little apparent interest. This design is so much cleaner than the Alpha System and takes up so much less room on the panel and behind it. I was sold the minute I found it.

Marauder, here is a link to a poorly filmed video of the CYA-100 but it gives you the idea. For those out there that believe the AIS gives the pilot the same usable information as the AOA, IMHO, haven't flown with an AOA. The conservative factor I carried before the AOA really meant I wasn't able to land as slowly, a safety issue right there, and that my base to final turns were always shallower than they needed to be. We have been flying for a century now without AOAs but that doesn't mean we should if we don't have to.

For what it's worth, I went a different route and I am very heppy with it. My investment is $400 for the unit and I installed it with an IA looking over my shoulder. The guy that makes it is still trying to get the blanket paperwork that Alpha Systems has but he expects it and so do I. Here is the link to my thread on the subject. http://mooneyspace.com/topic/10120-cya-100-aoa/ Oh, and in the intervening time since installation, I've had no problems. It works great and, with it right on the glare shield, it is easy to see during approach and flare. I recently easily made a 1500 ft turn off a 2500 ft runway. I couldn't (really wouldn't) come in slow enough before the AOA was installed to do that. This opens up an entire new category of airport for me.

I am regularly asked if my M20K Rocket (M20T on the flight plan) is a turbo or turbine by controllers. I was even asked that by ground and then tower on the same flight out of my home airport.

I also have the manual inflatable seals. I always have to pump them up again after take off but usually that is it. The plane is noticably quieter with the seals inflated but I don't have a non-inflated seal comparison. I've had the plane for 7 years and had to replace the tube and bulb early on. There was also a small leak which was repaired with a blue sealant, rather than black, that has irritated me ever since but at least it works properly.

It must be pretty bad where you live to get your Mooney frozen to the ceiling!

Not an MSC but there is an IA at my field whose day job is at an airline supervising other A&Ps and he has done my annuals for 3 years now. He has also done at least one other Mooney 252 for a couple years. He is honest, reasonable, and very detail oriented. If he needs a specific Mooney tool, he gets it. I've been happy with his work and he would be a little closer than either Daytona or Ft Lauderdale. PM me and I'll send you his contact info if you are interested.

I'm not an expert on these regs but I have a dual Aspen with battery backup and the avionics shop insisted that I had to maintain the vacuum driven AI. They wouldn't let me change to electric either.

My breather tube is in essentially the same location. I have almost zero oil use between changes (less than 0.5 qt over 30 hrs) since my OH. There is a trace of oil on the breather tube but clearly it is insignificant since I never have to put in any oil between changes. Sorry but I think the problem is somewhere else.

Please consider looking at my Rocket, which is for sale on this site (1986 M20K Rocket). Thank you.

I see. So the $13,000 covers just a quarter of the current equity and the new partners sign on to the note. That makes more sense but I don't think one is really buying a quarter share for $13,000.

I am so depressed that I'm beginning to believe this is the single most compelling reason the government does everything it does. It reminds me of the seen in “Blazing Saddles”, where Mel Brookes is saying – gentlemen, we need to protect or phony, bologna jobs.

I just can't get my head around these numbers. For starters, an airworthy Rocket for $52,000? Seems too good to be true (or too bad to be true for us current owners). Second, $35/hr dry is extremely low from my experience for variable costs. Third, $385/month x 4 x 12 is $18480 and this seems about $6,000 high (8000 for hangar at a significant airport, 3000 for annual, 2000 for insurance). Even with a higher than I would have expected monthly cost, the cost per hour is very low. What am I missing about this deal? Airplane value 52,000.00 Monthly 385.00 hourly 35.00 $/gal 5.00 gal/hr 20 Hrs/year 50 75 100 125 150 $/yr 11,370.00 14,745.00 18,120.00 21,495.00 24,870.00 $/hr 227.40 196.60 181.20 171.96 165.80

Unfortunately, he was definitely denied and even if he wasn't, he is in love with his RV-7. Not exactly in the LSA class. BTW, it was my pleasure to have been of any assistance not the other way around.

If you're talking about the guy I worked with, the struggle begins anew each time.

In what world do you think taking your plane to an MSC and having it worked on for unknown number of hours and flights will turn out to be "free"? If it is, let me know as entropy has reversed and I need to get ready for the end of the world. Or is the beginning?

I fail to see how any medicals will help with your concerns. Most students are probably young enough that no medical restrictions could be relevant and, if more training would be helpful, why should we spend the available resources on medicals rather than training? Actually, the bienial has been determined to be of no safety value per the FAA itself so that might not be a great example. Doesn't change the requirement but they know it is a waste of time and energy too. My point is the FAA should focus on things that do or may help and stop dealing with things proven not to.

Hallelujah! There is hope. I've encountered icing at 19,000 ft in August over JAX. Does that count?

The problem I see, even in the opinions expressed here, is a willingness to create or accept restrictions without basis. There shouldn't be a medical if there is strong proof that the medical doesn't promote safety (and I've never found any). Calss 1, 2, or 3. There shouldn't be a commercial restriction or and IFR restriction or an altitude restriction unless one can demonstrate that it is protective (and I've never found any). It is totally unacceptable to me that anyone in government should be sitting around dreaming up restrictions just to dream up restrictions and create more government jobs. Even if these rules don't create harm directly, and I think they do, they divert attention and resources from activities that do or might. If, after some period of time, these rules don't demonstrate benefit they should sundown out of existence. Above someone said I can see commercial medicals, but why if they don't improve safety? Another guessed at the altitude restriction, we shouldn't need to guess as the basis should be provided. At least two of us are confused by the IFR restriction but another accepted it. The government should only interfere with our lives where there is a clear demonstration of public good in so doing. Call me a Libertarian!

It's a mess. I was helping a friend jump the hoops and, after 8 months, he was approved and with it came the letter that said it all had to be done again in 4 months since the data was now 8 months old. All that work for a 4 month medical. Very depressing.

Is there any studies that show that the medical, any medical class, is of any value with respect to aviation safety? Last time I reviewed the litrature some time ago there was no support at all. With respect to 1st class medicals least of all since there is a second pilot always there. The idea that you need one in IFR vs VFR makes no sense to me. If you have a heart attack in clear weather, the ground will be just as hard as it is if there were clouds at 200 ft just above your final resting point.

As RJBrown notes, one of the great things about a Rocket is the ability to fly very fast or throttle back and go forever (a little hyperboly, I know). A J can make it all the way cross country on one tank but the J just can't make the headway a Rocket can if you maximize the altitude and power settings. On the low end you still burn more fuel but at 13.5 +/- gph and 8,000 ft, I still cruise about 150-160 kts.

I don't think I'm miss-reading or misrepresenting the chart. Those ages are for a restricted license not a full license. I specifically stated that NY allowed drivers under 18 if they have additional education. Some of the other states also have education restrictions but some also have pure age limit restrictions. Chose the column you want but the statistics still show that people that start driving at 18 are way safer than people that start below that. I agree government is way too intrusive but I also believe that there are reasons to have government restrictions and limitations on children (like no tobacco sales to minors, for example). Driving age is one I agree with and wish more states would move to 18 as a driving age. So, we disagree. I can accept that too.