Tried to do a quick flight with the famil to get airfield nr200 in my logbook.
Starts were unsuccessful so i put the airplane back in the hangar and connected it to a charger.
The guy who booked the plane after me said someone put a small heater in the engine bay and he didn’t have any problem starting.
Airfield nr 200 will now just be at work next week so nothing to share with the family.
Great to use the current weather for some IFR training @boscomantico!
Dan wrote:
So yes, the whole is resolved by the use of EnglishSo far, I could chat in (Standard) German once on the ground at most airfields in Romandie, especially those close to the language border (Ecuvillens, Bressaucourt, Gruyères, Neuchatel etc.). I do try to use my basic French though and in return, most try to speak German as well. It only gets complicated in Valais, where a lot of Romands can’t understand a single word German (or feel insecure to use it), and only a few basic words English. Even the fuel truck drivers I met so far in Sion, didn’t spoke English or German at all. (They seem to understand some English though, but I got only French answers in return.)
Lesser know is that the Ticinese also have their own Italian dialect.Interesting, I wasn’t aware of that!
I do know that they speak a pretty unique Italian dialect in Val Poschiavo, south of the Bernina pass, which has its roots from the Lombard language.
Dan wrote:
have several SBs
How significant are these for you under your CH approval? Is it just guidance hence purely voluntary?
Agreed, you should work for CH-tourism ! Keep making us envious!
Buckerfan wrote:
unusual phenomena
Great and succesful analysis! I enjoy doing a similar one when in a headwind with the P210 for any trip over 150nm. The Jetprop’s performance is of course much higher but I guess the big difference is we fly the same FF and same power at all altitudes, but the Jetprop obviously lowers FF higher up (although looking at your numbers, power seems to remain quite high as you climb)
In your case, there was a 30KTS advantage in GS by flying low, which meant, at the relatively low GS of 180KTS an increase of almost 40% in GS. Curious to know if FF is also only 40% higher, hence obviously paying off, or you just took a small mpg penalty or even an advantage!
I don’t fly often at night, in a single piston aircraft without a chute there just aren’t many good option if you have a problem, but I really enjoy it, and as I needed to go to Coventry and the best conditions were on Friday at sunset, I went ahead. As usual it was magical. I’m always struck by how difficult it actually is to spot traffic which is just below you, and how finding the runway without GPS is even harder than during the day.
Antonio wrote:
In your case, there was a 30KTS advantage in GS by flying low, which meant, at the relatively low GS of 180 kts an increase of almost 40% in GS. Curious to know if FF is also only 40% higher, hence obviously paying off, or you just took a small mpg penalty or even an advantage!
Curiously, with the PT6A that the Jetprop has, high speed cruise at FL120 was burning 33- 34 gph, only a little bit more than the 31 or 31.5 I burn at FL250-270 where I normally fly. So in MPG over the ground I was considerably better off flying at the unusually lower level due the strange headwind. I had never cruised at that level before – all my usual flights are either IFR above FL240 or VFR at 3 oor 4,000 ft transitiing underneath English controlled airspace. So I had never paid much attention to the issue before. At low level VFR the engine is burning up to 36 GPH, and I am flying at 160 kts IAS. You have to remember that the JetPrep redline is 170 kts IAS due to structural limitations, although it certainly has the power to go a lot faster. In fact a Jetprop will surpise you by exceeding the IAS redline in a 1,000 fpm climb! A PA46 Meridian, with the beefed up wing etc is permitted fly a higher IAS and a higher FF.
I see…so it is barely a 10% FF delta. Big mpg advantage flying low in your case!
Antonio wrote:
How significant are these for you under your CH approval? Is it just guidance hence purely voluntary?
Our NAA requests a list of Time Limits for all items subject to recurrent inspection or replacement, and the listing and execution of those SBs is mandatory. Even in our homebuilt world of renegades .
On the FOCA webpage, one can enter his (or her’s) callsign, and get all ADs referring to the engine (1 for mine), prop (6 for mine), or fuselage (and nil for mine).
As for the SBs, they are published by Van’s Aircraft with the following statement: Service Bulletins typically do not mandate immediate action from a regulatory perspective but do strongly recommend future action. Timeframes and methods to comply may vary and are described in each document. These are items that represent an important or critical need and should be reviewed and complied with per the contents of each document in the specified timeframe. Van’s Aircraft strongly encourages all owners and operators to comply with the information in these documents.
Since the SBs also cover cracks developing in all models in the tail section of the respective fuselage, it is certainly a good idea to follow given advice, if solely in one’s own interest 
Thanks for that mini-report @Buckerfan, all very interesting stuff. And a superb travelling machine you have
