News

The Dual Garmin G5 Glass Panel Solution

ByHank Gibson May 8, 2017

What’s the most cost effective glass panel retrofit? There are several options out there (and it seems like more coming each Sun ‘N’ Fun or Osh Kosh event), but the consensus is the Aspen EFD 1000 or 1500, right? At $12,000 installed, it’s about $8,000-$10,000 cheaper than the Garmin G500 (though you can make the argument that when you add a second screen and SVT to the Aspen, the price is about the same).

I am here to blow your mind. What if you could get a glass panel retrofit that is a complete AHRS system with airspeed and altitude, plus a slaved HSI that auto slews to your GPS and a 4 hour backup battery so you can throw your steam attitude indicator away, for only $4,600, plus installation?

I am not crazy.

The Garmin G5 debuted last year when the FAA relaxed it’s regulations to allow more experimental avionics into certified airplanes. The single G5 was a big hit. The 3.5 inch screen fit nicely into the hole that the traditional attitude indicator left, giving pilots a glass attitude, airspeed and altimeter options for less than $2,500.

In March, Garmin brought out the HSI version of the G5. Equipped with a low cost magnetometer, the DG/HSI version is a complete replacement for the traditional DG/HSI. The unit also displays ground speed and distance (received from the GPS information), while auto-slewing to the GPS flight plan, so the CDI needle will move on it’s own, eliminating the annoying need for the pilot to set the course on the HSI (and ridding the GPS of the message that pops up reminding the pilot to set the course).

The dual units provide a complete backup Attitude in the case of a display failure. The reversionary mode you get with the Garmin G1000 and the Garmin G500 is also present in the dual G5s. This eliminates the need for a backup steam gauge attitude indicator, freeing up panel space for an engine monitor or some other toy. The G5 units can also be equipped with 4 hour backup batteries in case of electrical failure.

The price for the dual G5 setup is very reasonable at just under $4,600 plus installation (which, according to Garmin, should be pretty simple as the units act as plug and play instruments). The AHRS unit is available stand alone for under $2,200 while the DG/HSI unit standalone runs just under $2,600.

For more information, check out Garmin’s website.

Flying WAAS GPS Approaches
ByHank Gibson August 30, 2021August 30, 2021

When flying a WAAS GPS approach, there are several different levels of WAAS signal that a GPS receiver can get. The most precise is an LPV signal. LPV stands for Localizer Performance with Vertical guidance. An LPV approach has the lowest minimums of all the WAAS GPS approaches, typically in the range of 200-300 feet AGL. A GPS glide path (GP) is guaranteed with an LPV approach and the minimum altitude is a decision altitude (DA).

Just like a localizer, an LPV course width get’s tighter and the CDI becomes more sensitive the closer the plane get’s to the runway. Even though the LPV approach minimums are so low and the approach is down to a DA, they still aren’t considered precision approaches by the FAA (which leads to some extra planning when selecting an airport as an alternate that only has GPS approaches, since the AIM specifies only the LNAV minimum are to be considered if an alternate airport only has GPS approaches, bringing the 800 foot ceiling requirement to bear)

An LNAV/VNAV approach is still a WAAS approach that has a GPS glidepath, but is slightly different than an LPV approach. An LNAV/VNAV final approach course does not get more sensitive the closer the plane gets to the runway. The smallest course width on an LNAV/VNAV approach is 0.3 miles either side of center. LNAV/VNAV approaches will, most of the time, have higher minimums than LPV approaches and can have minimums no lower than 250′ AGL.

The third type of WAAS approach is strictly a non-precision approach with a Minimum Descent Altitude (MDA). These are designated LP approaches, which stands for Localizer Performance. These are like old school Localizer only approaches that, similar to the lateral portion of an LPV approach, the course width tightens the closer to the runway that a pilot is. There is no glide path by definition of an LP approach, though there is a caveat.

Now, by looking at an approach plate that is a WAAS approach, but only has LP minimums listed, a pilot would assume there would be no glide path. Depending on what type of GPS unit the airplane has, that pilot could be wrong. Garmin Perspective units (Cirrus G1000), all GTN 750s and GTN 650s, All G1000 NXi units, most Garmin 430W and 530W, and all Avidyne IFD 550/540 and 440 units will display an advisory glide path on an LP approach, designated LP+V.

What does LP+V indicate? An advisory glide path is just advisory, but it is totally legal to follow down on a non-precision LP approach. The kicker is obstacle clearance is not guaranteed and the pilot needs to keep an eye on minimum altitudes at the different waypoints on the approach. The big thing I tell people is, when you arrive at the MDA and the runway is in sight, following the advisory glide path below the MDA could get you in trouble with obstacles. Don’t just hone in on your instruments when you break out of the clouds. Look out the windscreen and make sure you won’t hit anything.

If you arrive at the MDA on the advisory glide path and the runway isn’t in sight, DON’T GO BELOW THE MDA! Most autopilots won’t level off at the MDA, even if that altitude is set in the altitude pre-select, so this will involve turning off the autopilot before the MDA and manually leveling off, or engaging the altitude mode of your autopilot at the MDA.

One other type of GPS approach that you will encounter is an LNAV approach. This is a non-WAAS approach down to an MDA, but your GPS unit may still give you a +V. Most modern ones will.
HondaJet Nears Production
ByHank Gibson October 28, 2014October 28, 2014

We have all been hearing about the HondaJet for quite a while now. It’s been in testing for a number of years, but it sounds like certification and deliveries will commence early in 2015. Honda says they expect FAA certification in the first part of 2015 and deliveries will commence soon thereafter.

For those of you in the San Antonio area, if you’d like to get a glimpse of the first production HondaJet, it will be at Landmark Aviation at KSAT on Wednesday, October 29th. Cutter Aviation is hosting the event, as they will handle the regional sales for Honda. No flights will be conducted, but folks are welcome to walk around the airplane, climb inside, and give it a good once over.

For those planning on attending, RSVP is required. Contact Lisa Harris at Cutter to RSVP either by phone (602-267-4054) or by email (lharris@cutteraviation.com). Drinks and snacks will be served. The event runs from 5:30pm-8:00pm.
Beechcraft Flap Issues
ByAndrew Robinson September 8, 2015

There has always been something that felt wrong to me about how the walkway on many models of Beechcraft extends onto the right hand flap. I have never felt right about stepping onto the flap as I make my way into and out of my dad’s E33A Bonanza and therefore I generally try to step over top of it and place my foot on the wing instead. But does this effort actually make any difference, or am I just making my self look silly for no reason?

Well, as it turns out, it wasn’t such a bad idea. In 2007, a pilot flying a Beech reported a split flap condition. Upon inspection, it was found that there was damage to the actuation rod attachment as well as the nose rib and nut plates. Six other aircraft were checked and found to have similar damage. These findings were submitted to Hawker Beechcraft and in 2008 and they issued a maintenance alert regarding the issue. In 2011 the FAA issued SAIB CE-11-21 (Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin) to alert owners, operators, and maintenance personnel about the problem; specifically warning of the potential for cracking in the nose flap rib (part number 35-165050-84). And while its true that this type of damage is not limited to the right hand flap, it is known to be much more common on that side. Stepping over the flap instead of on it is recommended by both the FAA and Beechcraft as a solution.

Unfortunately, the flap cracking is known to span a wide variety of aircraft types. A 2011 “Safety Communique” issued by Hawker Beechcraft lists the affected models as:

-Bonanza 33, 35, and 36
-Baron 55, 56, 58, and 95
-Duke 60

Damage at the flap actuator point (Photo Courtesy of AOPA)

According the the FAA, the cracking can been found most commonly on airframes which are between 4,000 and 6,500 hours, but has also been found on aircraft with as few as 2,000.

So, what do we do about it?

First off, although much of the damage is difficult to detect without dis-assembly, the paperwork from both the FAA and Beechcraft recommend taking a look at the flap yourself to see if there are any obvious signs of problems. They also suggest taking special care looking in this area during your preflight inspections.

Next, if you have an airplane which may be susceptible to cracking, talk to who ever is doing your maintenance work and have them look carefully during your annual inspections. I talked to one of the IA’s at our shop who has dealt with this issue before and he told me that most shops will remove the flap and send it away to a repair station to have it fixed. It’s possible that if you purchased your airplane used it may have already had this issue taken care of; a quick look through the maintenance logbooks should clear up any questions.

Repaired rib next to a damaged rib (Courtesty: AOPA)

Regardless of whether your airplane is known to suffer from this problem or not, do your best to avoid stepping on the flap when getting in and out of the cockpit. It is also a good idea to ask your passengers to do the same as this simple act could end up saving you big headaches and big money someday down the road.

For more information regarding the flap issues discussed above, talk to your maintenance provider and visit these links:

ABS Flight Controls, Flaps, and Trim System Inspection, Repair and Rigging Guide (See Page 17)

ABS Information on SAIB CE-11-21

Andrew Robinson is a 135 Charter Pilot and flight instructor in Pennsylvania. He flies Pilatus PC-12s and instructs in Beechcraft Bonanzas.
Beechcraft Bonanza Ownership
ByHank Gibson May 7, 2014July 14, 2026

If you walk up to any Beechcraft Bonanza sitting on the ramp at an airport and ask the owner, “How do you like your Bonanza?” be prepared to stand there and listen for 15-20 minutes while he brags about his airplane.

The thing about Beechcraft Bonanza owners is that they are almost a part of a cult. They will tell you up and down why the Bonanza is the best airplane out there. They’ll tell you why all the others don’t even come close. They’ll tell you about the payload, the six seats, the variety of configurations you can select from, the ability to land pretty much anywhere. By the time you walk away, you will probably be convinced to buy one yourself.

Bonanza’s are great airplanes. For those of you new to the single engine piston market, a good comparison for a Beechcraft Bonanza would be a Suburban. Not the flashiest ride out there, but extremely capable, comfortable, and family conscious. If you’re hauling a load, you’ll take a Bonanza over a Cirrus or Mooney any day. Have six people? No problem!

One of the best things about a Beechcraft Bonanza is the variety of designs. Four seats, six seats, long range tanks, tip tanks, turbo charged, normally aspirated, steam gauge, G1000, Aspen or G500 retrofitted, dual yoke, single yoke, leather, cloth, and a variety of different colors out there on the market make finding a Bonanza that fits your need pretty easy.

When it comes to picking out an airplane, the first question is always the mission. If you’re thinking about a Beechcraft Bonanza, you’ve already determined you need something with a good useful load. Do you need four seats or six? Depends on how often you’ll be carrying someone or how new of an airplane you want. Older Bonanzas have four seats, but a lot have had significant updating. Newer A36 and B36 Bonanzas have six seats, but are going to cost you more.

Do you need a turbo charged Bonanza? If you’re in a high elevation area or expect to visit the mountains a lot, then absolutely. If you want a better cruise speed and don’t mind a little less useful load, then go for it. If you’re more concerned about being able to load it up and you aren’t going to cross the Rockies often, then normally aspirated is what you want. You’re probably looking at about 160-170 KTAS with the normally aspirated whereas you get between 180-190 KTAS at altitude with the turbo.

Do you need tip tanks? Tip tanks have two advantages. One is the most obvious: you get to carry more fuel, therefore you get to go farther without having to stop (or when you stop for the bathroom, you don’t have to fill up with gas). The other advantage is you get a bump up in useful load. I talked to a Beechcraft Bonanza owner a few weeks ago who had tip tanks on his. He told me max gross on his Bonanza was 3,800 pounds and was eligible for an upgrade of up to 4,000 pounds and all it took was paper work for the STC. That’s quite a bit of load!

Are Bonanzas hard to fly? When moving up from a typical 172 or Cherokee that most people learn to fly in, it does take some adjustment. But, with good Bonanza training from a qualified Bonanza training instructor, then the transition is no problem. There are tons of resources out there to aid all future and present Bonanza owners in their foray into the Bonanza nation. With the American Bonanza Society and Bonanza Pilot Training, there is no lack of training, thoughts and opinions.

In need of an airplane that can pretty much do whatever you need? Then a Bonanza may be right for you.
Oh, Deer (Part 3)
ByAndrew Robinson March 21, 2017April 13, 2017

Read Part 1 & Part 2

Throughout the whole event, I learned quite a few things both about flying and about myself. Here are some of the lessons which I have taken away from the accident:
1. No flight is routine: When I took off that morning I was about as relaxed as I could have been while going to fly. I was flying an airplane that I knew well, in beautiful weather, to familiar airports and even carrying passengers which I had taken on this exact trip more than a dozen times. The accident brought into startling clarity that anything can happen at any time. I had done everything right that morning (preflight, weather briefing, planning, etc) , and none of that did anything to stop the deer from jumping out onto the runway. All we can do is ensure the items we do have control over are covered and try to be prepared to deal with anything else that arises. This ties directly into my next point:
2. Making sure everything is correct: When you do go fly, make sure that you have all your paperwork and personal details taken care of. I can think of a few times over the course of my flying career where something wasn’t quite right with the paperwork, or perhaps I had forgotten my wallet and I was tempted to go fly anyway. “It’s 8pm on Sunday, I’m not going to get ramp checked.” Well, I can assure you that the paperwork and questionnaires which were required to be submitted to the FAA, NTSB, and Insurance companies would have uncovered any discrepancies in my logbooks, currency, or legality. It isn’t worth the risk of flying without having everything in place just in case something happens. It isn’t just a random ramp check which can get a pilot into trouble.
3. Ask for help: The story of my collision with a deer would have had a very different outcome if it weren’t for the help that I received from countless the people on the ground. If you’re ever in a situation where you could use a hand, don’t be afraid to ask for help. If I had simply turned around and landed back at Wings, I wouldn’t even have had any idea that my landing gear was missing! The people in the control tower, the maintenance guys, the approach controllers in Philly, the emergency responders, and many more people all played their part in orchestrating a successful outcome.
  Airplane sitting on the runway after the firefighters had checked it out
  Photo credit: www.lancasteronline.com
4. Dealing with the Paperwork: I have had dealings with the FAA before, but never for an accident. I was afraid that the investigation would be a witch hunt and I would have to defend myself while someone poured over all my planning and paperwork looking for potential errors. But, my fears were totally unfounded. Although I did have to answer many phone calls, write many reports, and fill out much paperwork, the FAA, NTSB, and Insurance companies were very patient in waiting for my responses and even complimentary in how the situation played out. I really enjoyed working with all of them and appreciated their encouragement and help.
5. Emotional Response: After the dust had settled and the smoke had cleared, I was left standing on the side of the runway with the passengers and my boss. I offered to fly them back to Philadelphia or continue to Pittsburgh and assured our Chief Pilot that I was feeling fine and ready to fly again. Fortunately, there wasn’t a need. Over the next week or two, I noticed a change in myself. I wasn’t fine. I have never had headaches, but shortly after I landed I developed a headache that didn’t go away for days. I had trouble focusing on anything and I had trouble finding motivation to do much but sit and stare at a wall. I wasn’t sharp and I caught myself making silly mistakes in my normally routine activities. I wasn’t depressed, or sad, it was just an unwanted mental and physiological response to the stress and shock of what happened that morning in the Baron. I didn’t feel like myself for quite some time and I even found myself a little on edge whenever I lined up for takeoff on subsequent charters for while afterward. Eventually I started to feel normal again, but it was a slow process.
6. Feather the Props: I can’t tell you what a difference it makes when those props go from wind milling to feathered. It became clear to me that feathering a prop could make a huge difference in deciding the outcome of an emergency situation.
7. Good training and checklists usage: This one is pretty straight forward, but it’s worth mentioning. Good training and proficiency make all the difference when the odds are against you. Make sure that you use all your resources when your back is against the wall, and that includes the checklists. Under the stress of the flight I had forgotten to close the cowl flaps and would likely have landed with them open without the aid of the Emergency Procedures Checklist. This would have resulted in unnecessary damage to the airframe.
8. No need to rush: There is no denying that I had things stacked in my favor that day. I had nice weather, extra gas, daylight hours, and even the luxury of landing at my home airport. But, regardless of all those variables, there is no need to rush into anything. Ask questions, find answers and come up with a plan. Obviously not all emergencies present the pilot with the luxury of time, but use all time and resources you have to your advantage.
9. Polish up those procedures: The deer accident really made me want to go out and brush up on all the emergency procedures which I hadn’t performed since my last checkride. The realization that I could need any of them at any time was really hit home after I hit that deer. Additionally, make sure you know who to call if something ever does happen.
10. Know the systems: Familiarity with the systems on the airplane makes it easier to troubleshoot and solve issues on the fly and makes it easier to spot a problem in the first place. Knowing how systems work and what their normal indications should be helps make decisions regarding when to divert and where to land easier.
The irony isn’t lost on me that the last article that I wrote for this newsletter dealt with how to avoid making gear up landings and the high cost required to repair one. I never would have imagined when I wrote that article last fall that I would be writing one only a few months later detailing my own gear up landing.

The bottom line is that there is nothing a person can do to prepare for every situation which might arise throughout the course of a flight, and it’s also impossible to know which emergency you may have to deal with if a situation arises. All we can do is stack odds in our favor by making sure that we address the things within our control such as aircraft maintenance, careful flight planning, checking weather, and having personal minimums set in place to keep us from flying outside of our skill sets and comfort zones.

Additionally, ensuring that you are knowledgeable and proficient in your aircraft’s procedures will give you the best chance for success. When things start going wrong, keep calm, and ask for help. Work the problem instead of guessing or rushing into a less than desirable solution. No one wants to be caught in an emergency like a deer in a landing light!

Andrew Robinson is an airline pilot for Piedmont Airlines. He is a former 135 Charter Pilot and flight instructor who lives with his wife and 2 daughters in Pennsylvania. He instructs in Beechcraft Bonanzas.
Breathing…It’s The Difference in Engine Performance
ByJoe Casey November 27, 2018November 27, 2018

The PT6 engine that’s found on the Jetprop and Meridian is designated a -21, -34,-35, or a -42A. The Continental engine on a Malibu is either a TSIO 520 or a 550. What’s the difference? Why should I care? Most pilots don’t understand the difference, but it’s pretty easy to understand…and it’s all about breathing.

Whether a piston or a turbine, the engine has a ratio of fuel/air that works best. For a piston model, we can make adjustments to this ratio by adjusting the mixture. In climb we use a richer ratio to help cool the engine, and in cruise we lean the mixture to save fuel since we don’t need the extra fuel for cooling (due to higher speeds which cools the engine). In the turbine, the ratio is set and there’s nothing that can be done about it…except climb to a higher altitude. But, more about that in a second..let’s go back to the piston discussion…

Piston: A Continental 520 engine and the 550 engine are flown exactly the same. On takeoff, both will develop 310HP (38″MP with the 520, 35.5″MP with the 550). So, why would a pilot want a 550 in his airplane as opposed to a 520? The answer is breathing.

A 520 is named appropriately because the engine displaces 520 cubic inches of air with each complete cycle of all 6 cylinders. To determine the displacement, just figure the bore (diameter of the cylinder) and the Stroke (how far the piston travels in the cylinder) and plug the numbers into this formula:

CID = Bore X Bore X 0.8754 X Stroke X # of Cyl.

Here’s the bore and stroke of the Continental 520 and 550 engine:

TSIO 520: Bore = 5.25″ and Stroke = 4″
TSIO 550: Bore = 5.25″ and Stroke = 4.25″

So, you can see the two engines are exactly the same except the 550 has a little longer stroke, and therefore displaces a little more air. Said another way…it the sucks the air into the engine a little better.

So, with this knowledge, the ability for the engine to breathe becomes a little more clear. Both a 520 and a 550 will perform exactly the same until the point that a 520 simply cannot suck enough air and begins to develop less MP as a result. For most 520 engines, this will happen somewhere around 18,000 ft. But, it is dependent upon a myriad of factors including: health of the engine, altitude, temperature, and atmospheric pressure. When the 520 hits this point, the throttle can be full-forward, but the engine will not develop full MP, but some number that is less. I’ve seen a max MP at FL250 in a 520 Malibu to be about 31″MP. So, you can probably guess that the rate of climb will correspondingly suffer as the engine develops less MP. How do we fix this problem? Enter the 550…

Since the 550 displaces more air, the engine will maintain max MP to a higher altitude. When the 520 begins to develop less power at about FL180, the 550 engine will be able to continue to maintain 35″ at a higher altitude. Make no mistake…the 550 will also hit an altitude where is cannot develop 35″MP, but this altitude will probably be nearly FL220. So, the 550-powered Malibu will reach cruising altitude faster than the 520.

But, at cruise both engines are pulled back to 30″MP. So, either engine will deliver the same cruise speed because they are both able to develop 30″MP at any altitude. Does it really matter if you’ve got a 520 or a 550 engine? Answer: not much. Both are excellent engines and both will deliver the airplane to the destination, but if the chosen altitude is above FL180, the 550-powered airframe will probably arrive a few minutes earlier. Which would I want if I were purchasing an airplane? It’s not a big enough deal, IMHO. I’d select the best airframe/engine/prop combination and not put much weight into the 520 vs. the 550.

Turbine world: So, how about the -21, -34/35, and -42A compare? Here, there’s big difference, but it’s still all about the breathing. A -21, -34/35, and -42A are all derivatives of the famous PT6 family of engines, and all are designed to be 1000+SHP engines de-rated to fit the airframe. For instance, the -42A engine is 750SHP when mounted on a King Air 200, but the same engine is derated to 500SHP when mounted on the Meridian. Ditto with the -21 and -34/35 engines…all are de-rated. So what’s the difference? Breathing…

At the lower altitudes all will develop their maximum rated SHP, meaning they will all develop maximum torque. And, down low there’s plenty of air to breathe so the engine has no problem developing that torque at a low ITT. But, as altitude is gained, the engine must suck more air to develop the same torque, and the ITT goes up. At some point in the climb (depending upon altitude, temperature, pressure, and IAS) the engine will not be able to produce max torque without exceeding Max ITT. At this point, the engine cannot breathe any more (suck in anymore air), and the power (torque) developed falls off. With the -21 engine, the power falls off quite dramatically because the engine simply cannot breathe well. It is a smaller engine and more air cannot be forced into the compressor section. For the rest of the climb the engine is “ITT limited” and the performance will suffer.

The -34/35 engine is a little bigger and will develop maximum power (torque) to a higher altitude. And, when the torque does drop off (as altitude is increased), the rate of decrease is less because it can breathe easier due to it’s larger size. Guess what? The -42A will beat out the others and develop max torque to an even higher altitude. With this decrease in torque available also comes a welcome friend…less fuel burn. Altitude is the friend of any turbine pilot, and he/she will climb to the highest altitude possible to save on fuel.

The end result is the -21 powered Jetprop will cruise at 238 KTAS (in the summer) with a fuel burn of only 28gph. The -34 will have higher torque than the -21 and will develop more SHP and will have a higher cruise (260 KTAS in the summer) with a correspondingly higher fuel burn (32gph). The -42A will be breathing easily at higher altitudes, and will develop the most torque, but with a fuel flow of 39gph. The Meridian (with the -42A) will not out-perform the -34/35 Jetprop in cruise purely because the Meridian is much heavier.

Just remember…fuel flow in a turbine is always commensurate with its ability to breathe and a turbine’s ability to breathe is a function of the engine’s ability to breathe.

With this knowledge…let’s check your understanding. Answer this question: Will a Jetprop cruise faster in the summer or winter? Remember, cold air is more dense than warm air, and an engine will develop power according to it’s ability to suck in air. More air available, more power available. Answer: Winter.

A good analogy: I’m a Cross-fitter (meaning I do crossfit workouts a lot). In the gym we have various workouts that test a person’s ability to perform. Guess who usually does the best? Right…the guy who can breathe the best. A person is nothing more than an engine…we intake air and combine it fuel and burn it to develop energy. In Crossfit, the person with the biggest engine (muscles that can develop power) that can sustain power (good aerobic capability) will win almost every time. The only variables then are genetics (how well-made is the engine), flexibility (you’ve got to be able to get into the position), and skills (there are more efficient movements). A good Crossfitter will work hard on mobility, skill, and try to increase the bodies ability to increase capacity through a tough workout.

To get maximum performance, the pilot cannot change the engines skill or mobility (at least not without an engine change!), but a thorough understanding of the how the engine breathes will help him/her use the power that is available to the fullest.

Joe Casey’s aviation story began in 1990 with his first flight near Nacogdoches, TX in a Cessna 172. From lift-off, Joe knew he would have a lifetime passion flying just about anything that will leave the ground…He was completely hooked.

Along with being an FAA Designated Pilot Examiner (DPE), Joe is an ATP/CFI-AHMG and Commercial Rotorcraft/Glider Pilot in the civilian world and also a UH-60/AH-64 Pilot-in-Command/Instructor/Examiner Pilot in the US Army Reserves. His passion for the last 19 years, however, has been the PA-46 Malibu/Mirage/Matrix/Jetprop/Meridian. Has has amassed over 6,500 hours in various PA-46 airframes and believe it to be one of the finest flying machines available for the serious cross-country pilot with an eye for efficiency.

Now, Joe has flown more than 12,200 hours in just about every imaginable environment. Whether providing initial/recurrent training in the PA-46’s, TBM’s, instructing in NVG’s in a UH-60 Blackhawk, flying the King Air series of airplanes, giving tailwheel endorsements, or taking kids flying for the first time, he simply loves flying machines and the people who fly them.