• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


chrisk last won the day on July 4 2016

chrisk had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

586 Excellent

1 Follower

About chrisk

  • Rank
    Won't Leave!
  • Birthday 12/31/1965

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Austin TX
  • Interests
    Flying, Mountain Biking, Scuba diving.
  • Reg #
  • Model
    M20K (1981 231)

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. chrisk

    Garmin suing uAvionix?

    I think the key will be extracting info from your own transmitter and using it some meaningful way.
  2. chrisk

    Promotional give away

    How much time did you spend cleaning the belly before you took that picture?
  3. chrisk

    Garmin suing uAvionix?

    The novelty is well described in the first claim: A method for configuring an ADS-B system of an aircraft having a transponder, the method comprising: receiving, using a receiver associated with the ADS-B system of the aircraft, a transmission from the transponder of the aircraft; extracting information from the transmission to be included in data broadcast over an ADS-B datalink; and causing the extracted information to be broadcast over the ADS-B datalink. In my opinion, the patent reached the bar of non-obvious. I mean, why would one capture a broadcast and decode it, when the normal method would be to hardwire the appropriate information via a serial port from a box that sits within 3 feet. The patent will like maintain it validity, unless prior art can be shown. If one can show a previous example of capturing info from a transponder, extracting that info, and using that in some meaningful way in an aircrafts avionics system, then enough prior art probably exists to invalidate the patent.
  4. chrisk

    Garmin suing uAvionix?

    The patent seems solid to me too. I suspect the only real vulnerability is prior art, of which there maybe some. Transponders have been around for a long time and surely someone has received the data from a transponder and rebroadcast it. --Maybe a TCAS? Anyway, I 100% agree, the one with the most money will win. In this case it will be Garmin. Just imagine your typical 60 year old mom on the jury. The technical subtleties will not matter.
  5. I suffer from the same problem. You have my sympathy.
  6. chrisk

    Fixing a door seal coming loose

    Silicon grease, similar to what is used for dive equipment. Wipe on, wipe off excess.
  7. chrisk

    lawsuit in Philly

    McDonalds and Hot Coffee. The barrier to frivolous law suites must not be that high. The issues I have with the civil justice system is the quality of the jury. Just imagine your mom (or spouses mom) on the jury of a high tech patent case or a case like the one mentioned here. You might have justice if the jury for an aircraft accident was filled with pilots and aircraft mechanics.
  8. chrisk

    Seat rails

    I have a 1981 M20K. I'm 5'11. I think I am pretty close to the front most hole. If anyone has 3" extensions they are removing, please let me know. As I have aged, I now appreciate sitting a bit further back from the panel.
  9. chrisk

    Pitot drain

    With my 231, a finger works just fine. I've never found water in either drain, and I've flown through rain on a few occasions.
  10. chrisk

    Mooney must be selling some

    I have a friend who was one of the test pilots for the Carter Copter. Lots of interesting stories. I'd expect test flying a Mooney is quite a bit less exciting. (and less exciting in a good way)
  11. chrisk

    Mooney must be selling some

    I'd love to apply for the test pilot position.
  12. chrisk

    Shop breaks a part

    There are two separate item here. 1) the broken gauge, and 2) banging on the top access cover. I would be quite unhappy with any mechanic that would bang on an access cover to remove it. That said, I am having a hard time imaging any amount of banging that would impart enough force to break the needle in a sight gauge. Further when flying, (and landing) you get some pretty good jolts. I'd spend the $40 for a new gauge and assume the part was end of life anyway. And as far as yelling about the sight gauge, I'd skip it. I'd be happy the mechanic was honest enough to call you. The reality is the mechanic probably thinks he broke the sight gauge, but it could have been broken before he even touched the plane and he merely noticed it. --Now if he hit it with a hammer, I would be yelling.
  13. First, you did an awesome job putting your plane down on a runway with an engine failure. Second if I were in that situation, I would have done the same thing with shutting off the engine. That said, if I found myself 1 or 2 miles short of the runway for what ever reason, I would have restarted. --Nice to know it probably would have restarted, even if the engine would need an overhaul afterwards due to the oil loss.
  14. Thanks. I understand the concern now. Basically the critical altitude of the plane when the turbo has failed. As jlunseth mentions, this is somewhere around 12k based on the re-start procedure in the 231. For me, that is high enough to not be a concern, even in most mountainous regions. That said, I expect the most common "turbo failure" is running a tank dry. I am quite careful about running a tank dry at higher altitudes due to the fear it might not restart without going lower. Now the question of how the critical altitude differs between a TN and TC engine. I'm sure it depends on the compression ratio, and there is no guarantee that the compression ratio is significantly higher on the TN engine. --Most TN implementations I have seen are high compression, but I also recall some older engines that were quite happy with 80 octane fuel. If there are TN variants of these engines, I would expect them to have lower compression.
  15. I don't understand your comment about turbo normalized. If the turbo fails (and doesn't dump your oil), you will have a normally aspirated engine. A turbo normalized engine just keeps the turbo at 30 inches, instead of 36 or 40 like factory turbo engines. And a turbo failure in a turbo normalized engine results in a normally aspirated engine. The only difference is most turbo engines have a lower compression ratio, which means a bit less power until. But in either case, the engine will run.