The Malibu & M-Class Owner’s and Pilot’s Association recently released their MMOPA Vision Video. It is a great video detailing the history of the Piper PA46 & the history of MMOPA. The PA46 would have ceased to exist without the founding of the original Malibu Coalition.
Checkout the video above (and Texas Top Aviation’s Hank Gibson even gets a cameo!).
In July, a Cirrus SR22 suffered an engine failure in Houston after departing KIAH. The CAPS system was deployed and the airplane came to rest in a neighborhood on the north side of Houston. This makes CAPS save number 53 for Cirrus and no fatalities. The initial NTSB report is below.
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Tuesday, July 07, 2015 in Houston, TX
Aircraft: CIRRUS DESIGN CORP SR22, registration: N422PB
Injuries: 2 Minor.
This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators may not have traveled in support of this investigation and used data provided by various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.
On July 7, 2015, about 1137 central daylight time, a Cirrus SR-22 single-engine airplane, N422PB, descended under the canopy of the cirrus airframe parachute system (CAPS) and landed in a residential neighborhood at Houston, Texas. The pilot and passenger sustained minor injuries, and the airplane was substantially damaged. The airplane was registered to and operated by AIRCCS, LLC; Humble, Texas, as a 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 business flight. Day visual meteorological conditions (VMC) prevailed and a flight plan had not been filed. The airplane departed George Bush Intercontinental/Houston Airport (IAH), Houston, Texas, at 1133 and was destined for Austin Bergstrom International Airport (AUS), Austin, Texas.
The pilot reported that during initial climb, he noticed the engine temperatures began increasing and he reduced power in an attempt to lower the engine temperatures. When the airplane was about 900 feet above ground level (agl) the engine began detonating, and soon after there was a complete loss of engine power. With no suitable forced landing areas the pilot deployed the CAPS ballistic parachute system and the airplane impacted terrain and came to rest upright next to a residence.
An initial on-scene wreckage examination showed there was adequate fuel on-board. At the facility where the airplane had most recently been refueled, refueling unit records and a review of security camera video showed that the airplane had been refueled with aviation gasoline and not with jet fuel. Postaccident fuel quality checks of that fuel facility were satisfactory.
The wreckage was moved to a different location and will be further examined. Several avionics components containing non-volatile memory (NVM), including engine performance data, will then be removed from the wreckage for examination and an extraction of useful data is expected.
At 1053 the Automated Surface Observation System at IAH reported wind from 160 degrees at 15 knots gusting to 20 knots, visibility 10 miles, scattered clouds at 3,000 feet agl, broken clouds at 25,000 feet agl, temperature 31 degrees Celsius (C), dew point 24 degrees C, and an altimeter setting of 30.03 inches of Mercury.
Are oxygen cannulas rubbing your nostrils raw?
Is turbulence giving you back problems?
Would you like to be above the bumps, breathing without tubes stuck up your nose or a mask on? Would you like a quiet ride?
Sounds like you need pressurization. Need more convincing?
What’s that you say? You don’t have a multi-engine rating? You don’t want to spend the money on a turbo prop?
Have no fear, there are options galore for you to choose from in the single engine piston marketplace, both certified aircraft and experimental.
A word of caution, though; once you go pressurized, you don’t go back….
Here is my review of the certified, pressurized single engine piston options.
In 1983, Piper shocked the world with an amazing airplane. The pressurized, Continental TSIO-520 (310 HP) powered PA46 Malibu hit the market in the fall of that year taking the piston world by storm. A six seat, cabin class, pressurized single engine piston that easily cruised at 190-200 knots while only burning 16-17 GPH. It was awesome. It even had an air stair door that felt like getting on a private jet.
I love the original Continental powered Malibu, specifically the ’86-’88 models. Piper initially had hydraulic flaps, which were clunky and had several issues (most notably, the hydraulic system would randomly kick offline while the flaps were in motion at very in-opportune moments). Piper switched to the electric flaps in ’86, making the ’86-’88 year models very desirable.
Unfortunately for Piper, the Continental TSIO-520 was not the engine manufacturer’s best product. There were several Malibu crankshaft problems and engine failures, so much so that Piper decided to go with the Lycoming TIO-540 engine in 1989, creating the Malibu Mirage (all the current Malibu’s operating the -520 engine have been overhauled many times over, so there are no safety concerns with the -520 engine). The Lycoming powered Mirage (350 HP), cruises a little bit faster than the Continental powered Malibu, but burns about 5 more GPH. Piper still makes the Mirage, now dubbed the M350, complete with the Garmin G1000 NXi panel.
The 4 seat, cabin class back seat is very roomy (unlike a Bonanza or Saratoga). There is plenty of rooms for bags, both behind the back seat and in the handy nose compartment, which is wide enough to fit golf clubs, minus the driver. The 1600 pound useful load (880 pound payload with full fuel), allows for a lot of people and gear to be loaded on board. The airplane is a little stingy on CG, though. You do not want to have a CG that is out of the rear limits.
The airplane is fun to fly. It has a heavy elevator, similar to a Bonanza, which requires a lot of trim on landing. It’s very long wings cause it to float a bit on landing if the pilot comes in too fast. It’s very docile in stalls and extremely comfortable for cross country flying. The air conditioning system works very well, though it is still hot on the front seats when sitting on the ramp on a Texas July afternoon.
Many of the airplanes have upgraded to glass panels. Most are still equipped with the King KFC 150 autopilot, some with a Yaw Damper, some not. The KFC 150 is a good autopilot, but when Garmin certifies their GFC 600 for the PA46, that will be a popular retrofit.
If I had my pick, I would buy an ’86-’88 Malibu with an upgraded Continental TSIO-550 engine. Climbs a bit better and does a bit better in cruise than the original -520 engine. See why here.
I would rate the PA46 line as the best pressurized single engine piston option out there.
The P210 was introduced by Cessna in 1978. It also came with the Continental TSIO-520 engine that the Malibu was certified with. Climbing at about 700-800 fpm (equal to the Malibu), the P210 cruises at around 190 KTAS as well, burning around 17-18 GPH. Like the Malibu, the P210 had a Continental TSIO-520 power plant, but, unlike the Malibu, the P210 makes the pilot work to keep the CHTs cool. With smaller cowl openings and a tighter cowl, cooling isn’t as good as the Malibu.
Even though the P210 has six seats, the forward facing, Cessna style 3 rows aren’t quite as comfortable as the Malibu. The single door on the pilot’s side makes loading and unloading a bit of a chore (especially compared to the air stair door in the Malibu). The third row of seats isn’t extremely useful, as the ceiling is lower and the proximity of the second row of seats decreases the amount of leg room, making it uncomfortable for a full size adult. Most operators remove the pilot’s side second row seat to add an aisle to get to the back row for people and bags. It also has a smaller cabin then the Malibu.
There is less baggage in the P210, with the singular baggage compartment accessed through a baggage door behind the cabin. The Air conditioning system is also not as good as the Malibu.
It’s hard to get the P210 out of CG and overloaded. A useful load of 1500 pounds (with 90 gallons of fuel, it drops to only 960 pounds) allows the airplane to be loaded to the gills without being overweight.
There are some engine upgrades out there for the P210 (the Silver Eagle conversion puts a Rolls Royce turboprop on it). The best piston conversion is the Vitatoe Conversion that swaps the engine out for a Continental Turbo-Normalized IO-550, which is a much better engine than the -520. You still have to monitor the CHTs, but cooling is less of an issue. These are much higher priced on the market, though.
Because of the size of the cabin and the true reputation the P210 has of being a maintenance hog, I would rate it below the PA46 line.
There are 3 pressurized, single engine piston airplanes out there today: the Piper PA46, the Cessna P210, and the Extra EA-400. Extra is the famous German aerobatic aircraft manufacturer that created the Extra 300 and 330. In the early 2000s, Extra tried it’s hand at the pressurized single market with the EA-400 (Extra also tried to get into the single engine turbo-prop market with the EA-500, but the project fizzled before much progress was made). Sadly, only 27 EA-400s were built before the company ran into financial trouble.
The concept sounds cool. A fully composite, pressurized, liquid cooled, cabin class piston. The engine was the Continental TSIOL-550, liquid cooled power plant. Liquid cooling means no concern about hot CHTs while you are climbing. The problem with the engine is that there are so few liquid cooled Continental engines out there, finding a mechanic familiar with one could be an issue.
I have never flown an Extra 400, but there are several floating around out there. Most have steam gauges and the STEC-55x autopilot. The price on the only one on Controller right now is comparable to the P210N but above the Continental powered Malibu.
If you are in the market, an Extra 400 might be fun to test fly and who knows, you might fall in love with it!
There are a handful of experimental pressurized singles out there. I have not flown any of them, so I can’t be a good resource on recommending them. Here is the list, however.
Lancair Evolution Piston
Lancair IV-P
Lancair ES-P
As far as availability on the market goes, there are 8 Malibus on Controller (1 1986 model) ranging from $315,000 and down, 24 Mirages ranging from $705,000 (equipped with the Garmin G1000) and down, 25 P210s ranging from $405,000 and down, and 2 Extra EA 400s, priced at $369,000 and down. Check out the available Experimental Lancair options here.
Have you decided to upgrade, but don’t know what to buy or how to buy it? Check out Texas Top Aviation’s Acquisition Services. We’ll get you the best airplane for you, your mission, and your budget. Contact Us today to find out more information.
I have used a few different sun shields in airplanes in my flying career. I have found one that I really like. Bruce’s Custom Covers knocks it out of the park for usability and ease of storage.
Let’s start off with functionality. Like other window sun shields, Bruce’s Custom Covers fit very nicely into the airplane glare shield and side windows. Depending on the type of airplane you have, some of the window covers use the suction cups and others don’t. I recently had 2 customers order from Bruce’s, one that owns a P210 that uses the suction cups for all windows, including the glare shield, and the other owns a Cirrus which doesn’t use the suction cups on anything.
They work great. They do the job of blocking the sun and keeping the cabin much cooler while the airplane is sitting on the ramp.
The thing I like best about Bruce’s Custom Covers is their storage. Other sun shields require you to roll them up and lash a tie around them. Bruce’s, on the other hand, come folded very neatly in a black canvas bag. The folded covers don’t take up nearly as much room as the rolled up covers, plus they are really easy to just fold up and store.
Bruce’s Custom Covers also sells plugs for cowling, pitot tubes, etc., as well as aircraft exterior covers.
Bruce’s Custom Covers gets my recommendation for anyone wanting to get some new sun shields. For those of you in Texas, you know you need them!
Ever wanted to be a Cirrus owner, but the economics of being a single owner just don’t make sense for you? If you’re in the Houston area, you now have a chance to join a Cirrus SR22 partnership at the West Houston Airport, KIWS.
The group, CirrusShare, is a 4 member group, but one of the members is looking to sell his share. The airplane is a 2007 G3 SR22. It is in excellent condition, with dual WAAS 430s and air conditioning.
If you would be interested, please contact Texas Top Aviation for more information.
Figuring out the pattern altitude at an airport should be pretty simple, right? But, in this day of helpful technology, most pilots actually get it wrong. How can you always get it right? Well, it just takes about an extra 15 seconds. Here’s how.
As outlined in the Aeronautical Information Manual, section 4-3-3, “traffic pattern altitudes for propeller-driven aircraft generally extend from 600 feet to as high as 1,500 feet above the ground.” Further, in the Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge on page 13-10, it states: “1,000 AGL is recommended pattern altitude unless established otherwise.”
Okay, so for piston driver’s, we’ve got it narrowed down to 1,000 AGL (Above Ground Level for those who don’t like acronyms). But wait! There’s that very important phrase at the end of the last quote: “unless established otherwise.” That means not all airports have traffic pattern altitudes of 1,000 AGL, or else they wouldn’t put that line in there!
How do you find out what the TPA (Traffic Pattern Altitude) is for a certain airport if it’s not 1,000 AGL? Great question! Your first guess is probably to look on Foreflight. Though this is a good start, it is not the full answer.
Let’s use an example. Look up KAQO, the Llano Airport on Foreflight. At the top of the page, the airport elevation is stated as 1,101′ MSL and the pattern altitude is stated as 1,902′ MSL. From what we just learned, 1,902′ MSL is not 1,000 AGL, so is 1,902′ MSL otherwise established?
On the Airports page with KAQO pulled up, tap the A/FD tab, second to last on the left. Scroll down to Llano Muni. Read the whole entry. Does it state in the entry that pattern altitude is different than 1,000 AGL? It sure doesn’t. So, because it is not otherwise established, pattern altitude at KAQO is 2,102′ MSL not 1,902′ MSL.
Where did Foreflight get that? I have no idea. Too often, though, pilots look at the Foreflight pattern altitude and don’t actually check the Airport Facilities Directory (A/FD). Then, they get the pattern altitude wrong.
What does it look like when pattern altitude is otherwise established? Look up KSGR, Sugar Land Regional, on your Foreflight app. Foreflight states the elevation as 82′ MSL and the Pattern Altitude as 1,000′ MSL. Is this correct? Well, tap that A/FD button again and let’s find out.
On the second line of the A/FD entry, it says TPA-See Remarks. Down in the remarks section, we find the following:
TPA-1000 (918) single engine piston acft, TPA-1500 (1418) for twin and turbojet acft, TPA-500 (418) for helicopters within 2NM.
Foreflight got it right this time for single engine pistons, but if you are in a twin, the pattern altitude is different. What’s the lesson here? Always check the A/FD and don’t always go by what Foreflight says. The A/FD is always right and usually has a little more detail to help set you straight.
One last thing. Both the AIM and the Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, when talking about pattern altitude, state, “When operating at an airport, traffic pattern altitudes should be maintained unless otherwise required by the applicable distance from cloud criteria in…section 91.155.” 91.155 defines basic VFR weather minimums. So, to fully interpret what the AIM is saying, we have to take into account the type of airspace we are in to determine if we can safely and legally operate at pattern altitude at a particular airport.
For example, let’s say we are at KCVB, the Castroville Airport. Pattern altitude there is 1,602 feet, which is 829 AGL. CVB is Class G airspace up to 700 AGL, then Class E above that. Let’s say there is a 700 AGL broken cloud layer. Pattern altitude is 829 AGL, so you won’t be able to get up that high with a broken ceiling. What altitude can you do pattern work at to stay legal?
Class G VFR weather minimums during the day below 1,200 AGL is 1 SM visibility and clear of clouds. So, legally, you could fly at 699 AGL (which at CVB would be 1,472 MSL) while in the pattern and be legal. Safe? Maybe, but probably not if you are skimming the base of the clouds. Is 1300 MSL a safer pattern altitude in this example? Well, that is 527 AGL, so probably not, since towers tend to stick up that high sometimes.
Let’s go back to KSGR and put a 1,000 AGL overcast ceiling there. SGR is Class D airspace and we already determined pattern altitude there was 1,000 MSL for piston singles. VFR visibility and cloud clearance requirements in Class D airspace are 1,000 feet above clouds, 500 feet below clouds, and 2,000 feet horizontally from the clouds with 3 SM visibility. In order to stay 500 feet below the clouds, you would be flying a 582 MSL pattern. Safe? Probably not, though it is legal.
To summarize, don’t take Foreflight’s word for pattern altitude. Cross reference the A/FD (it only takes 15 seconds at the most) to verify. If it’s cloudy, it’s really best to stay on the ground, but if you want to find out your legal pattern altitude with a cloud deck, cross reference 91.155. I don’t recommend flying below pattern altitude because it is there for a reason.
The Garmin G1000/Perspective combined with the Garmin GFC 700 Autopilot can be a great tool in descent planning. When you want to end up at pattern altitude a certain distance from the airport or you get a clearance to cross a fix at a certain altitude, Garmin VNV is a great tool. Here’s how to use it.
Let’s say you want to end up at pattern altitude 3nm from your destination, but you don’t want to descend down into the bumps before you have to. Here’s how to set it up:
Let’s say you are told to cross a fix at a specific altitude. Here’s how to use Garmin VNV to plan it out.
