logbook issues

[gsengle]

Just now, gsengle said: No real storms around NYC, nope...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Lol, in all fairness that's quite a bit north of NYC, but I guess I'm just used to southern storms.  It's like when people tell me NYC is hot and muggy and then I remember daily temps back home around 100 degrees with 80% humidity for several months straight.  

Do you guys think a stormscope is more accurate or useful than foreflight and ADS-B in weather?

In all fairness at cruise speed it's about 20 mins from the JFK VOR, and I don't think the weather is substantially different that short distance away. We get some wicked thunderstorms throughout the region....

Stormscope is more real time.

You also may find that a new Mooney wants to go farther from home anyway

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bob_Belville]

Just now, Ben E. said:

Ok, good to know.  I'm going to try to figure out what the issue is with it.

I had to have my WX900 overhauled 9/2012. $1199. which might have been a flat rate. As I recall it needed a display and another component or 2.  

[Guest]

54 minutes ago, Ben E. said:

This is the only evidence I can find that the plane is on its third engine:

This is the first page of the first airframe logbook.  The original engine was scratched out and replaced with the second engine, which was replaced according to the logbook entry I posted previously.  There's nothing in the airframe logbook that indicates the first engine was replaced.  That seems strange.

Unfortunately it's not all that uncommon that maintainers forget that if an engine was replaced, it does effect the airframe and as such it should be noted in the airframe log that engine s/n.....was removed and replaced with s/n.....after major overhaul.  Part of the issue is the small size of US logbooks, and the rest is lazy sloppy workmanship.

I agree with others that based on a suspected prop strike, the airframe would still be reported as No Damage, unless of course the airframe slid on its belly.

Clarence