• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About JLang

  • Rank
    Jr. Crew Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,522 profile views
  1. So I found the culprit: one hose from the carb to the airbox was disconnected. Re-ziptied. I am a bit skeptical it will hold due to the small overlap. Is there a trick to better secure? Again, thanks to all for the suggestions.
  2. Great suggestions, I appreciate it. I should be able to check these out tomorrow eve.
  3. Thanks for the responses. '07 SW. I did check the choke, and it was fully forward. I believe the only related maintenance during the recent annual was the carb sync, I will check the hoses; I did not see anything during my quick inspection after the first occurrence but did not specifically look for this.
  4. So flying from Michigan to Chicago area today, starting descent from cruising altitude, I reduced throttle from 5200 to about 4200, and also pulled carb heat, as I usually do. After descending, pushed carb heat back in with throttle, and instantly the engine got very rough. Only pulling carb heat out fully restored smooth operation. After trying several times, I filly left carb heat pulled out and landed that way. When taxiing, pushing carb heat in had no effect; still ran smooth. Before taking off several hours later, checked the function of the carb heat flap and looked for any obstructions in the intake and didn't see anything. Warmup and extended runup were fine, with only normal rpm drop and smooth operation. Return flight was uneventful, again until descending from altitude. This time I did not pull carb heat. However, when I pulled throttle, it again got very rough. When increasing throttle again after descent it got even rougher, but when I pulled carb heat it instantly smoothed out. Again I decided to land that way, and when pushing carb heat in during taxi, there was no effect. This does not sound like carb ice to me, which from what I learned makes the engine run rough when carb heat is pulled, until the ice is gone. This was the opposite. I did recently get the plane back from annual, including carb balance, though I have had several flights since then without experiencing this. Thoughts?
  5. I am interested in how the Green Creative 57978 subjectively compares to the Soraa 00957. Does 15 deg vs. 25 deg help that much? I tried the Soraa but changed back to the stock halogen after only one night flight. Much less light than stock. No warning light is nice, but being able to see the runway is nicer...
  6. So I I knew I was, at most, only partially nuts, so after digging I found the pic I mistakenly thought was Andy's. It was from DesertFlier's "for sale" post: DesertFlier, hope you don't mind me hijacking your post, but the Barnstormer pics showed large hanging pockets between the seats. This is much larger and nicer than my small factory sleeves. Roger, you said you are familiar with this plane, do you know where the hanging pockets came from?
  7. Andy, don't I remember seeing a nice, large map storage folder (sleeves?) between the seats in one of your pics? I can't seem to find the pic now...
  8. Sounds like you are making my point for me. If, as you correctly state, nothing here is Flight Design or Rotax approved, and this is a discussion forum, and you always double check relevant information against other sources, then why do you have a problem with a poster who provides valuable information but chooses to remain anonymous? Edit: ignore me, I'm an idiot. I replied to DougG, when I thought the response was from FredG. The similar "G"s confused my lame brain...
  9. I guess I don't get it, either. If you physically took your plane to a mechanic and he/she refused to provide a name and credentials, then I would agree with the hospital analogy. But this is an open internet forum -- nothing here is official, even if it comes from someone who does provide their name and certifications. As a newbie I have found the advice here invaluable, from many sources. When I did my first oil change, I printed out a post from Roger for reference. Roger provides his credentials, but I used the information because it was well-reasoned, made sense, and I from past forum use have a positive opinion of Roger's expertise. But could I use that information in any legal capacity; i.e. logbook entry or justification of method used? Of course not. Like most here I have also gotten plenty of good advice from "non-credentialed" posters. FredG, a few months ago you gave me some advice about flap use, which I found helpful. I used the advice despite the fact that you are anonymous and provide no credentials because it was logical and made sense and I had a good opinion of your previous posts. I can think of several scenarios where a poster might wish to remain anonymous, for reasons unrelated to the usefulness of the information. I would hate for that person to stop posting in response.
  10. Wait, what? My brain is jarred by that statement, on several levels. The implication is that you've had more than 100 flights this past winter (you are only commenting on the "last 100"). Here in almost-always overcast, windy, generally crappy Michigan, that's inconceivable. On top of that, you fly around some of the most stunning scenery in the world, and have the photographic skill to document it. I think I need a hug...
  11. The recent question about taxiing with doors open prompted this: doors unlatched in an emergency? Engine out, either forced landing or chute deployment. I don't see it mentioned in the POH, which I would interpret as a recommendation to keep latched, but I believe in general it's commonly advised, so that the impact doesn't jam the doors shut. FWIW, the 3rd party Checkmate checklist I have says to open doors during power out forced landing, but not chute deployment. I have never unlatched the doors during flight, but my guess is that doing so would lead to an immediate and semi-violent door flying open and hitting the wing. Does anybody know if this is true? If so, doing so in a forced landing would be at least unnerving, and possibly dangerous; the last thing you need. However, if you have popped the chute, you're no longer in any control, and this is irrelevant; I would think this is advisable. Thoughts? Direct experience?
  12. The point I was trying to make is that the use of one does not preclude the proper use of the other. They both do different things well. Safety-wise, it's no choice; the sight tubes are required, both legally and practically. But as optional equipment, if the Dynon is present, set it up correctly and use it -- it can provide helpful info. In my training my CFI often emphasized the importance of the instrument scan, even with VFR flight, and corroborating information from each instrument. I see this as a good example (assuming the Dynon is present), especially in turbulent conditions, or with more than 20 gal.
  13. I gotta defend my fellow Michigander here. I think CTMI’s main point has been misrepresented, which is that the Dynon can be a useful tool *in addition to* other tools. Like any instrument or tool, the operator must understand its limitations, and also understand its failure modes. In the few months I’ve had my license, I’ve had several 4+ hr flights with no fuel stop. And since I’m 135 soaking wet, I tend to start with 30gal or more whenever I plan to be up more than 2 hrs. I figure, why not have the extra range if I end up needing it? As noted, the sight tubes don’t help above ~20 gal, so I find the Dynon useful to help confirm my flight planning assumptions about fuel usage. If after 45 min the Dynon shows 23 gal left, and my flight planning was 28 left at that point, then something is up. Perhaps it’s the Dynon itself, but I’m not going to wait for the sight tubes to show before I assume my fuel usage plan was inadequate and plan accordingly (including, in this case, trying to figure out why). Andy, I am sure you know this, since your posts convey nothing but the epitome of a conscientious pilot, but for the sake of wet-behind-the-ears folks (like me), I would not extrapolate too much confidence in your 0.2 gal accurate sight tube test. That’s a sample size of one. A characteristic of any gauge is not only accuracy, but also repeatability and reliability, under all conditions. The sight tubes are a great tool and wonderfully simple, but even with calibrated marks I think we should assume at least a few gallons uncertainty. Perhaps Tom or Roger can comment, but my suspicion is that the bend of the tubes might change slightly as they age – more of a kink at the end after time? – especially if they are cut a bit short.
  14. I've vented before about the lacking FD documentation, especially for my CTSW POH. Placard (2007 CTSW): 3000 rpm CTSW POH: 3200 CTSW Flight Training Supplement: 4000 CTLS POH: 4000 Rotax Operator's Manual: 4000 FWIW, I've been using 4000; I figure Rotax should get the tiebreaker, and a higher RPM will more easily show rpm differences.
  15. For those advocating "flying onto the ground," which I understand to mean touching down well above stall speed, even in non-crosswind conditions, how do you keep it on the ground? In my limited time flying the CT, if I touch with any excess speed at all, I bounce (even lightly) back airborne almost immediately, before I can get the flaps retracted. You can dump the stick or touch the brakes, but that loads the front wheel.