BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 19 Apr 2017, 15:23

Username Protected wrote:

What used to be on your nose gear?

Is that a gravel spin up kit
Mike C.

Yep, the gravel kit. I had it removed about 6 months ago as I never used it and it made using a tow bot difficult due to the extra width of the nose wheel.

Andrew

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Sep 2017, 14:55

New AIN video showcasing Tamarack winglets...

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... technology

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Jun 2019, 10:24

Username Protected wrote:

My point about pro-parts was if they agree to cover them they will support them. So if something happens to Tamarack they will continue the support.

Did they agree to cover them?

I don't think Pro-parts will assure support, it is just a way to pay for parts you can get, not to make sure the parts are available.

It was amusing to reread this thread in light of recent developments.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jun 2019, 00:57

Username Protected wrote:

[Did they agree to cover them?

I don't think Pro-parts will assure support, it is just a way to pay for parts you can get, not to make sure the parts are available.

Yeah they did agree to cover them.

Time will tell.

I got some circuit board for the air conditioning that is no longer made, not sure how Textron got one but they did. It took about 4 weeks but regardless, I got it.

Andrew

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jun 2019, 00:59

Username Protected wrote:

It was amusing to reread this thread in light of recent developments.

I’m not laughing...

Andrew

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jun 2019, 07:10

Username Protected wrote:

It was amusing to reread this thread in light of recent developments.

I’m not laughing...

Andrew

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jun 2019, 08:10

Username Protected wrote:

Two, if the active winglet system fails, and there are a lot of complex parts here unlike a passive winglet, you have to reduce your speed substantially. If Tamarack goes out of business or has reliability problems, your plane is crippled and perhaps unflyable with the system INOP and maybe even unable to be returned to stock status due to cutting structure for installation. The owner has tied their airplane's value and utility to the existence and support of a one product start up company. That doesn't have a good track record in aviation.

Mike C.

Unfortunately all of your concerns turned out to be correct.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jun 2019, 08:26

Mike,

Thanks for resurrecting this.

I "wasted" hours of college life in the basement of the library reading Flying Magazine back issues from 1960 forward. It was the best education for discerning marketing lies, violations of the laws of physics, and pie-in-the-sky certification and business dreams.

Historical perspective is invaluable.

Best,

Dan

Username Protected · **Posted:** 08 Jun 2019, 10:17

I don't agree with Mike on all of his thoughts on the SF50, but I do on many of them, and he has been totally spot on on this matter. He may have even saved some prospective owners a lot of grief had they read this thread before purchasing, who knows.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Jun 2019, 12:34

Mike,

Has Alex Gutierrez apologized yet? (See his post of Feb. 6, 2016)

Be patient, he is probably very busy trying to remove the Tamarack winglets from his CJ.

Bill

Username Protected · **Posted:** 10 Jun 2019, 10:17

Article from AIN on Friday, 6.7.19

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... bankruptcy

Username Protected · **Posted:** 10 Jun 2019, 17:56

Username Protected wrote:

It was amusing to reread this thread in light of recent developments.

I’m not laughing...

Andrew

Username Protected · **Posted:** 10 Jun 2019, 18:01

Username Protected wrote:

Well, in this thread Mike was called ‘rude’ and a social idiot, among other things, and it does appear to me that his technical position is now completely validated.

In my view he’s entitled to resurrect this old thread and point it out to us. I don’t think he’s cheering at your misfortune, nor at the fate of the accident victims, but he did take an unpopular stand, and, like it or not, he was right. Would you feel better if he’d used a different word than amusing? Perhaps if he’d said “it is informative to reread this thread in light of recent developments” you’d feel better about it?

BTW I’m sorry about your airplane being grounded, everyone here can relate. Glad you’re safe.

Does anyone on BeechTalk ever say, “Hey man, you were right, I was wrong, sorry I called you out, and thanks for your post”

Its called gloating, and most people would not think it was amusing either.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 10 Jun 2019, 18:26

I love when all the pilots with less than 50 posts weigh in. Makes my day. :thumbup:

It’s not about being right. It’s about convincing people to change their behavior. To avoid the pitfalls. That’s what earns respect in my book. Bwthdik?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 11 Jun 2019, 01:28

Username Protected wrote:

[Well, in this thread Mike was called ‘rude’ and a social idiot, among other things, and it does appear to me that his technical position is now completely validated.

Hi Mark,

I thought it was rude what Mike said about me, its that simple and I never called him a social idiot. Don’t make stuff up. In fact Mike apologised to me and I don’t hold grudges based on Internet forums...

I don’t believe his position is 100% validated and I sure hope it doesn’t end up that way but he has had some valid points. On the performance (not sure if that what’s you mean technical position) I never believed in the marketing information from Tamarack.

Andrew

CJ winglet certification obtained