The odometer on my 1993 Eclipse recently ticked past the 200,000 mile mark while driving back from Las Vegas.

Well, I guess “recently” is a subjective term. That was in 2006. Since then, I’ve piled on another 30,000 miles.

Everyone teases me about how long I’ve had the vehicle (it was purchased new for just over $10,000), but I’ve never cared enough about automobiles to spend the time or money on a new one every few years. So I just laugh along with them, knowing that many people spend more on their car payment than I do on my mortgage. It doesn’t hurt that I get to bypass an exasperating dealership experience.

Speaking of mortgages, the subprime meltdown has led to a dramatic change in the content of many financial rags. Instead of “Top Ten Exotic Vacations”, we find things like this tome from CNN:

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — By keeping your car for 15 years, or 225,000 miles of driving, you could save nearly $31,000, according to Consumer Reports magazine. That’s compared to the cost of buying an identical model every five years, which is roughly the rate at which most car owners trade in their vehicles.

Calculating the costs involved in buying a new Honda Civic EX every five years for 15 years - including depreciation, taxes, fees and insurance - the magazine estimated it would cost $20,500 more than it would have cost to simply maintain one car for the same period.

Added to that, the magazine factored in $10,300 in interest that could have been earned on that money, assuming a five percent interest rate and a three percent inflation rate, over that time.

If you were to stash that $20,500 in a Roth IRA and never add another cent to it, in 30 years you’d have $357,712 (assuming an annualized return of 10%). That’s from driving one car for 15 years. Do it twice and you’d end up with more than half a million dollars in 30 years.

And that’s from driving a Honda Civic. If you’re thinking about a Lexus — even an entry level model like an IS250 — you could easily double the savings. The depreciation alone on the cheapest Lexus is estimated at $13,000 over five years. A Mercedes C-class has a five year ownership cost of more than $46,000!

Hey, if you’ve got the money to burn, fantastic. But there are so many people around Orange County who are stressed about paying their mortgage while they drive around in a late model Benz. The first time an expensive repair comes along which will cost “more than the car is worth”, they dump it in favor of a new ride. Talk about false economy — what they should really be comparing it to is the cost of a new car. The true cost of a new car.

Enough about that. My Eclipse won’t last forever… I think. I basically stopped doing any maintenance on it a few years ago, yet it continues to run. I attribute that longevity to the car’s extreme simplicity. No power steering, power brakes, power seats, power windows, or power doors. Unless the engine blows up, there’s really not much that can go wrong with it. ¡Viva la Eclipse!.

I’ve been debating what to replace it with when the time comes. Despite my happy experience with the Mitsubishi Eclipse, I’m not considering another one. The car was a major bargain when I bought it in 1993, but the prices have ballooned since that time, and I don’t really care for the styling of the new models. They lack the impressive cargo capacity of my current Eclipse.

An even larger issue is longevity of the brand. Many of the Mitsubishi dealers in Orange County seem to have closed their doors over the past few years.

The Consumer Reports story mirrors something I’ve noticed: there aren’t that many American cars from the early-mid 90s on the roads anymore. But there are plenty of old Japanese cars. I’m thinking something like a Honda LX coupe might be just the ticket. The styling of the 2008s isn’t as impressive as I’d hoped. The original concept car Honda shopped around to all the major auto shows last year was far more exotic than the final product.

When I spent the night in Midland, TX recently, I noticed that virtually every car on the road sported an American badge. I’m sure some of you might wonder why I wouldn’t support domestic auto production by “buying American”. My philosophy has always been that the very best thing I can do for our auto industry is to buy the vehicle I truly feel is best for me. If that turns out to be a Japanese or German model, then so be it.

Buying American for its own sake is penny wise and pound foolish. If American companies are not making the best cars, I am actually helping them by not buying it. Sales will be lower. If they’re smart, they’ll ask why, seek out the market leaders and make changes to their own product line. If they’re not smart, then they’ll fall by the wayside and leave market share to those who can produce a superior vehicle.

I’m not even sure what qualifies as “domestic” anymore. Take the Honda Accord: it’s assembled in the U.S. by Americans, many of the parts are from the U.S., and Honda stock is held by countless mutual funds, institutions, and individuals in this country.

I first saw this on the wall in a restroom at Cable Airport. No joke. For reasons I can’t begin to fathom, someone had taped a photo of this aircraft to the wall:

It’s called Turbine Toucan, and it’s just another ho-hum aerobatic biplane, just like my Pitts. Except that it boasts something most modern jet fighters can’t even claim (no, I’m not referring to the paint scheme): a positive thrust-to-weight ratio.

This thing weighs 2000 lbs and the turbine engine puts out 3300 lbs of thrust. That’s an amazing 1.65:1 ratio, enough to accelerate in a vertical climb. Indefinitely.

Even fighter jets with positive thrust-to-weight ratios — of which there are few — can’t match Turbine Toucan’s performance in this department. The F-15 Eagle, for example, is about 1.12:1. Even the latest and greatest generation of jets like the F-22 Raptor (at 1.26:1) and F-35 (1.22:1 with 50% fuel) can’t compare.

Among aerobatic aircraft with reciprocating powerplants, only the most pumped up Sukhois and Edges approach the performance of that magical 1:1 ratio. I ran the numbers on the Pitts S-2B and was surprised to find 0.95:1, because it sure doesn’t feel that sprightly on the uplines. Maybe I need to go on a diet?

Eh. More likely it’s due to the high level of drag from the Pitts’ biplane design. That’s my story and I’m sticking with it.

This isn’t the first time someone’s had the bright idea of putting a big turbine engine on a featherweight aerobatic airplane. Wayne Handley did it back in the late 90’s with his Oracle Turbo Raven. Equipped with a 750 hp Pratt & Whitney PT6A turboprop powerplant, that monoplane sported a 1.47:1 thrust-to-weight ratio. Still not up to the Turbine Toucan standard.

Handley frequently demonstrated a vertical climb where he would stop in mid-air, hover, and then accelerate upward again. I never had the opportunity to see the Turbo Raven in person, but from what I’ve been told it left quite an impression. I think of it has a GA equivalent of vectored thrust. Handley would take off directly into a half Cuban, then perform a vertical half-roll and push over into a steep descent which ended with a landing in the exact same spot he’d departed from 60 seconds earlier.

Sadly, the Raven was badly damaged in a 1999 accident (see video). Wayne Handley was injured but has since recovered and still trains aerobatic pilots at his private airfield in central California.

Being a biplane, I can’t help but wonder if the Turbine Toucan will beat the Turbo Raven’s time-to-climb records. Toucan has a higher thrust to weight ratio, but will certainly be hampered by higher drag. The Raven climbed to 3,000 meters (9,842 feet) in one minute and nine seconds seconds, a rate of 8,560 fpm.

Initial testing of the Turbine Toucan yielded an 8,400 fpm climb rate at about 50% power, but that was based on a sea level climb to 4,500′ MSL. Even with a turbine engine, as the airplane climbs, thrust will decrease. Drag will decrease as well in the thinner air, so I think it’ll be close.

As a biplane owner, I’m going to have to root for the Turbine Toucan. (Sorry, Wayne!)

What on earth is going on at Socal Approach these days? It seems every time I fly, they find a new way to confuse, infuriate, or disappoint me. Sometimes all three.

It really pains me to say that, because my cousin was an air traffic controller and I have the utmost respect for ATC. Hell, when I was a kid, I used to hang out at Anchorage Center’s facility on Elmendorf AFB. It’s not easy controlling traffic in the Los Angeles area. They are beset with personnel shortages, a plethora of trainees, a dysfunctional relationship with FAA management, and high levels of traffic.

I try to help them out as much as possible. Speaking clearly, eliminating excess verbiage, being patient when they’re busy. But a guy can only take so much, and in my experience Socal makes more mistakes now than they ever have.

Just the other day I launched out of SNA on an instrument flight plan. My clearance was to depart the airport and fly heading 220 for radar vectors to the Seal Beach VORTAC. This is the standard boilerplate clearance when departing John Wayne Airport under IFR, and something I’ve done a thousand times.

I’m not two miles from the field before they start yelling at me for not following the Orange departure. This is a head scratcher, because the Orange departure is a VFR procedure.

As soon as I explained that I was IFR, not VFR, I received five different squawk codes in the space of 4 minutes. As if this wasn’t enough, I was then handed off to Los Angeles Center while at 2000 feet MSL and less than 10 miles from the airport!

I am not making this up.

I questioned the handoff and got yelled at for doing so. OK, I shouldn’t have phrased it the way I did (”Is the TRACON being evacuated?”), but still. I would have asked for a phone number, but things were so screwed up on their end I wasn’t sure whose number to ask for. I was basically “lost com” while talking to ATC via a functioning radio.

Eventually I got in touch with the proper Socal controller, who yelled at me for not being on the frequency sooner.

Now I try not to fly angry, so I forced myself to let it go. But in retrospect, that might not have been the best thing to do. Something was very wrong down in San Diego, and I could have forced someone there to deal with it. Imagine if this had been a freshly minted IFR pilot on his first flight in the system. Or someone who wasn’t familiar enough with the area to know that they should be talking to Socal on 127.2, not Los Angeles Center.

It sounds like I’m really down on ATC, but I do realize they have their own challenges. Socal is the busiest TRACON in the world. As I noted, personnel shortages are a big problem for them right now due to high numbers of retirements, and it’s clear there are a lot of trainees working the scopes these days.

I’m not sure the towers are any better. A friend works as a tower controller at LAX, and said the quality of the new people working the cab there is “scary”.

This experience has reinforced something I teach all my students: trust but verify. Because regardless of whether you’re flying under visual or instrument flight rules, when all is said and done, the only person you can count on up there is yourself. So expect the unexpected and don’t let a controller bully you. If something smells bad, question it. Trust me, you’ll be doing yourself — and ATC — a favor.

From what I can see, it’s going to get worse before it gets better. If you want a controller’s perspective on this, I recommend Get the Flick, a blog written by a recently retired controller and safety representative from Atlanta ARTCC.

I once read that the most powerful supercomputers in the world are used to predict weather. Not cure disease. Not search for aliens. Not out-smart Wall Street. Predict weather.

And despite all that computing power, they really don’t do a very good job. I’m not sure if it’s a case of “junk in, junk out”, the so-called butterfly effect, poor algorithms, or what, but even short term forecasts for things like the marine layer are often completely wrong.

Right now it’s raining outside, but the weather is nothing like what was predicted. The forecasts were so dire that the National Weather Service issued a Special Weather Statement:

…UNSEASONABLY STRONG SEPTEMBER STORM TODAY THROUGH SATURDAY…

A STRONG PACIFIC STORM FOR SEPTEMBER IS EXPECTED TO MOVE THROUGH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA LATE TODAY THROUGH EARLY SATURDAY. THIS STORM HAS THE POTENTIAL TO PRODUCE WEATHER RARELY SEEN IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA IN SEPTEMBER. SHOWERS AND ISOLATED THUNDERSTORMS WILL OCCUR OVER THE REGION…MAINLY TONIGHT AND EARLY SATURDAY. LOCAL SNOWFALL IS EVEN POSSIBLE ABOVE 7000 FEET…MAINLY TONIGHT. WATERSPOUTS WILL BE POSSIBLE WITH THUNDERSTORMS OVER THE COASTAL WATERS THROUGH SATURDAY.

HEAVIEST RAINFALL WILL BE OVER THE SOUTH SLOPES OF THE MOUNTAINS IN SOUTHWESTERN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY WHERE UP TO ONE AND A HALF INCHES COULD FALL.

They’ve since changed their story to something that gave me a chuckle:

SHORT TERM (TONIGHT THROUGH MONDAY)…
EXTREMELY ANNOYING UPPER LOW STILL SPINNING NEARLY STATIONARY SOUTH SOUTHWEST OF POINT CONCEPTION. A COUPLE BANDS OF SHOWERS MOVED ACROSS THE AREA EARLIER THIS MORNING…BUT GENERALLY PRODUCED LESS THAN ONE TENTH OF AN INCH OF RAIN. THANKS TO THE UPPER LOW…SKIES ARE MUCH SUNNIER THAN PREVIOUSLY THOUGHT…SO TEMPS ARE MUCH WARMER THAN EXPECTED THIS AFTERNOON.

I wasn’t laughing about it this afternoon, though. My work is highly weather dependent, and plans were made, cancelled, un-cancelled, re-cancelled, changed, and then changed again, all because of this “extremely annoying upper low”.

While flying with Skytypers over the Red Bull Air Race in San Diego this afternoon, it was easy to see Mr. Annoying Low sitting off the coast. It was really moving fast, only the movement was northward rather than on shore. As a result we had high winds aloft, but no other significant weather to deal with.

So much for the supercomputers.

Speaking of the Red Bull Air Race, I don’t know how they got permission to do hard core low-level aerobatics right next to the primary Class B airport in San Diego, but it sure was causing the controllers a lot of headaches. Departures out of Lindbergh had been altered, leaving everyone stressed and confused.

I was monitoring Socal and heard two different airspace busts in the time I was flying over the Air Race. A civilian aircraft busted the Class B and was given a number to call. Ten bucks says that guy ends up on the bench for two months. The other was a military aircraft. He wasn’t given a number to call — the controller just asked him to leave the Bravo airspace.

We’ll be flying over the RBAR again on Saturday, weather permitting, of course.