Maintenance

Ive been following the EFB debate for years-often considering but never committing to buy a device to take with me on IFR trips, yet reading everything available on the subject. I was amused by your “Gear of the Year” awards (July 2010 Aviation Consumer) in which you awarded fully three different devices to do the job of plate reading, flight planning and enroute EFB. It seemed as if my own reservations were validated by your conclusions: There just isn’t any one device that does the whole job well.

Back when fiberglass airframes were first coming to the piston-single market, one of the sales brochure bullet points was that they would be cheaper to maintain: no corrosion, patching or fill for minor dings, simpler structures with less to inspect on the annual.Unfortunately, thats not what were seeing in the real world. It appears that composite designs, like the Cirrus or Diamond, have traded one set of airframe issues for another and the costs have come out a wash or in favor of metal-at least looking globally. The caveat is important because we saw greater variability in ownership costs within a given design than between designs. The average cost of ownership for two similar-vintage Cirrus SR22s could vary more than comparing an SR22 and a Mooney Ovation of similar model years.

You cant imagine how difficult it is for us to keep a straight face when we ask a company for an estimated delivery date of some new airplane or widget. We dutifully report what these companies tell us and when theyre out of earshot, we allow the sniggering and eye rolling to begin unabated. But there are exceptions. Some companies do what they say theyre going to more or less when they said they would. One of these is Aspen Avionics, which we are selecting as our company of the year.

When the specifications for LSAs were first announced, I was disappointed that there was a maximum gross weight limit. This limit is so restrictive that few LSAs have reasonable useful loads. To be functional, I think a two-seat airplane should have enough carrying capacity to put two adult males and enough fuel for three or four hours flying in them.

Some inventions seem to be naturally bad ideas but work anyway, while others are bad ideas that don’t actually work that well. In-tank electric fuel pumps are an example of the first, the Bendix dual mag as a poster child for the second. But not for much longer.Earlier this year, in a terse two-line press release, Teledyne C ontinental announced that its discontinuing manufacture of the D2000 and D3000 Bendix magnetos. No details were offered nor provided by follow-up query, but we can connect the dots. D-mags arent used on any Continental engines, just Lycomings. Litigationally speaking, theyve lived a rough life so Continental must have figured why have the legal exposure just to supply a competitor with a few mags. Even a Goldman Sachs executive could figure that one out.

As always, I enjoyed reading Aviation Consumers airplane review of bargain retractables in your April 2010 issue. But having owned both an Arrow and Cardinal RG, you represent the especially efficient Cessna 177RG unfairly. In range, for example, you chart the RG range at 500 miles, which must be the original 1972 50-gallon model. The 1973 RG manuals call for 682 miles, while 1974-1975 models with standard 60-gallon tanks show 821 miles range at 75 percent cruise power. This places the 177RG just behind the Bonanza and Debonair in range capability. Your chart should have at least shown this model variation, if not the maximum, since it purported to include optional fuel.

The underside of an airplane is out of sight and thus usually out of mind until the owner peeks downstairs to check something. And there, in all its filthy resplendence, is a flying Super Fund site. How to clean it up? To find out, we recently tested a crate full of commercial cleaners designed if not specifically for this task, then for general degreasing and clean-up. Lasering right to the findings, all of them work, some are better than others, but the overarching consideration is to have a strategy to get this messy job done just frequently enough to keep the airplane clean without getting obsessive about it.

As we attempt to keep our legacy aircraft flying longer and more efficiently, more pilots look to the avionics upgrade path as a means of improving utility and safety. And while the glass-panel primary flight display and multifunction display have both earned their fair share of attention, its also correct to suggest that the combined engine monitor-shorthand for a screen that includes powerplant and airframe system monitoring-is on many owners radar. Who isn’t eager to get rid of those wiggly needles, anyway? J.P. Instruments has been a household name in add-on engine monitors, making popular the bar-graph style of EGT and CHT monitoring. Many pilots are familiar with the firms 2.25-inch gauges and while some of them can include monitoring of other engine parameters besides EGT and CHT, the limited display size reduces the number of items you can watch at once.

Hows a good time to buy a used airplane. Savvy buyers can snap up pretty much whatever they want, paying as little as 50 percent of what the same plane might have gone for only three or four years ago. But what to buy? Our answer always has been the right airplane for you is the right airplane for your mission. For many of us, that means a four-seater capable of [IMGCAP(1)]cruising at around 130…

I have read with interest your comments on the SolidFX. (See Aviation Consumer, September 2009.) I was able to see this in person at Oshkosh and would have bought it save the price. I was very impressed by the unit. To me, it seemed fast enough and the zoom feature was very clever and easy to use. However, I did find your comment about the size somewhat confusing. On the one hand, Ive noticed that you complain when the full chart cant be seen (AV8OR ACE, October 2009), and you complain when the unit is large enough to see the whole chart!

On the surface, co-owning an aircraft just makes sense. Most airworthy privately-owned light singles fly less than 100 hours a year-in many cases far less. Regular use is better for the aircraft and better for amortizing the fixed costs (hangar, insurance, databases) per hour of flight. More users should mean more bang for everyones buck. Unfortunately, several owners also mean more opportunities for conflicts in time, resources, flying style, opinion and even personality. Being connected to anyone by your checkbook can put a strain on the best relationship. There’s no magic formula for creating the right partnership. But our survey results hit the same key points with metronome-like regularity: Good partnerships have clear expectations between partners of similar economic standing, and they have written rules or bylaws to settle disputes.

I enjoyed your article on electric airplanes very much, but would like to point out a technical error in the sidebar labeled “Its All About The Batteries.” The author misuses the terms energy and power of the battery. This sounds like a technical nit, but it is the same as confusing tank capacity with fuel flow in discussing a gasoline-powered car or plane. The two metrics are completely unrelated. Energy content of a battery is measured in kWh-kilowatt hours-and corresponds to tank capacity. Power is measured in kilowatts and corresponds to fuel flow, which in turn is related to HP.