Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 08/03/2019 in all areas

  1. I read the thread on the message board and felt compelled to start a new one, only because I have had this discussion with someone who recently opted for a new SR22 GTS. Last evening, I had the pleasure of flying that brand new SR22 GTS. I have about 25 hours +/- in the SR22 by sheer chance, I had thought about going from the Mooney line into a Cirrus years ago, but there were some issues with the Cirrus I didn't like. From my perspective, Cirrus is beating Mooney in sales handily for a few reasons. First and foremost, marketing. I attend a few industry shows and open houses at airports throughout any given year. I never, ever see a Mooney on display. Yet Cirrus representatives seem to always be there. Mooney is notoriously missing from most air shows and airport open houses. I have been to three this summer, no sign of anyone from Mooney, but Cirrus was present at all three events. When it comes to ergonomics, I think Cirrus has done a wonderful job. Their aircraft are well appointed, comfortable, and the interior is well designed. The side stick is a bit odd, but you quickly get used to it. I am a huge proponent of the throttle quadrant being controlled by levers. My 1974 E Model had levers. My new Ovation has vernier controls. I prefer the levers. Cirrus has a quirky lever that controls throttle & prop through a mechanical linkage, but it works. Their mixture control is a lever. The interior layout in the Cirrus is better than the Mooney, period. The seats are much nicer, the layout is user friendly and everything is easy to reach. The fuel selector valve is on the center console, not on the floor. (In my former E Model it was under my right heel, so who am I to complain?). The Cirrus handles well, lands easily, flies pretty smoothly. I have always liked it. It's a good airplane, and if you ask me, if Cirrus is getting people to buy their product and get into airplanes, more power to them. That's a good thing. Now I am in a unique position, as I have a near new Ovation, so I can compare. But why are we comparing? That's the question we need to ask ourselves. We're comparing oranges to nectarines. Both round, both fruit, both taste good. That's where it ends. The Cirrus lacks a few things which I don't like. Starting with retractable gear, nosewheel steering, speed brakes & true prop control. I suppose the SR22 line doesn't need speed brakes. Then there's the performance - you guessed it, we rock. My Ovation can smoke an SR22 GTS in all performance categories, spare landing. Climb rate, cruise speed and handling? The Mooney has that Cirrus beat hands down. Keep in mind we're talking an Ovation, a normally aspirated IO-550G against a turbo 550. Something else I noticed last evening flying the Cirrus - while the cockpit is very nice, we have more room in the modern day Mooneys. The new owner of this SR22 has flown with me in my Ovation, and she noticed it too. I am not sure about useful load, nor do I care. The Mooney is a far better bang for the buck no matter how you dice it. Landing the Cirrus is a piece of cake. Landing the Ovation, you better be on your game or else. Now there's no question that Mooney manufactures a better product, so why are people gravitating towards the Cirrus? Besides the obvious I have outlined above, which are correctable shortcomings, there are two primary reasons - first is culture being marketed by Cirrus. They're going after a younger audience who might have very well learned in an SR20 at a flight school. Mooneys don't exactly make it into flight schools very often, although my flight school years ago had an E model, which is likely why I am flying an Ovation today. The younger crowd loves the digitization of the cockpit, and Cirrus has done an excellent job designing it. The other reason Cirrus is selling airplanes at a good pace is that you can go from being a low time pilot into a Cirrus pretty easily. The transition isn't as cumbersome or challenging as going from a C172 into an Acclaim or Ovation. You really can't do that, it's not practical or feasible. Cirrus has designed a plane for people to transition into once they get their certificate, it's just that simple. Now for the hidden shortcomings. Cirrus owners haven't a clue about what the maintenance expenses are going to be. Those SR22's will kill your wallet on maintenance. Further, the Cirrus concept is that you will buy one now, and buy one in 5-10 years to replace the one you have now, similar to an automobile purchase. Brilliant marketing concept, and again, they're marketing this product phenomenally well. Finally, let's remember the Mooney is a High Performance Complex aircraft. The Cirrus is NOT a Complex aircraft. You don't need a Complex endorsement. One other dirty little secret they never tell the owners about those lovely Cirri - you pull the chute, you total the airplane right there and then, and there's no guarantee you're going to survive once the parachute is deployed. But they need that parachute for more than the reasons you know about; the sink rate on an engine out is about as bad as it gets. It comes down well, and if the engine poops out, you might as well be flying the Space Shuttle, because that's the kind of sink rate this thing has. The glide ratio is horrible, I think it's about 8:1. Another good reason why they have that parachute. If Mooney wants to compete with Cirrus, they need to go back to manufacturing the 201 or the 252 Encore, better the ergonomics and market the line with enthusiasm. You can transition into a 201 or Encore fairly easily in my opinion once you have a few hundred hours of experience. To me, having flown both as recently as yesterday, the differences are glaring, and overcoming the shortcomings on the Mooney line are easily achieved. Mooney Aircraft sell themselves, once you get into the cockpit and fly them. And therein lies the problem, there's nobody committed at Mooney who is pushing the product line out to the public.
    9 points
  2. I had a long conversation at Oshkosh with the guy at Phillips who developed Victory and what he said it all came down to is that Victory has the Lycoming anti scuff and is certified. Camgaurd is not certified but in addition to anti scuff also has added corrosion resistance. Victory does not. The only corrosion resistance Victory provides is the same as any oil. He did a good job of convincing me to stick with classic 20W-50 with camgaurd.
    6 points
  3. In a day and age where buyers want capability regardless of actually ever using it to the maximum, transporting vehicles, of any type, without the ability to do everything for the family (or traveling couples) are seen as archaic and out of touch with buyer demands. For example, the latest Cirrus has seatbelts for five, ergonomics that equal a small crossover suv, , avionics that will dazzle all the way from a toddler to Grandpa, adequate speed to sort of brag about to your buddies and a chute to break your fall if you screw up—because let’s face it our wife has seen us screw up. The Mooney, of any vintage, is a pilot’s chariot. It’s all about feel, speed and efficiency. Although these traits are tangible, they are hard to buy into when most of the non flying public spend their days slogging around on the ground stuck in traffic in minivans and suvs. It’s simply hard to imagine it as a reality for non pilots. Cirrus has captured the imagination of how family air travel should be. On the other hand, Mooney is the art of flying. It’s not explainable until you experience it and selling richness in experience is trumped by utility in almost every aspect of people’s lives on a daily basis. In my opinion that’s the difference.
    5 points
  4. Somebody asked how new is my Ovation. It’s an Ovation 3GX, pre-ultra. I prefer the single door, I’m used to it after decades of Mooney flying. I have been in two Ultras, one Ovation and one Acclaim. A slight bit nicer than my Ovation, but the Cirrus interior ergonomics are noticeably nicer, just my opinion. i live in Northern California, and at the AOPA Fly In in June, no Mooney reps or factory new plane on display. That’s simply unacceptable from my perspective. The only AOPA event in the Western United States, and unless I missed it, we were not represented. Pretty pathetic. I attended an Air Show at my home airport (TRK) last month, Cirrus had multiple planes on display. Went to an airport open house in Carson City, Nevada in June, same thing, new Cirrus aircraft with reps on display. Cirrus is marketing their product line, Mooney is not. Therein lies the biggest difference.
    4 points
  5. So I am a Private VFR who has started instrument training and currently at 310 hrs. Flown 100 plus hrs in pipers, 12 in arrows, and 174 hrs in a sundowner including CO to Bar harbor MAINE (no AP) and back. Just Bought a 1966 M20E with LR tanks, updated PFD panel and Garmin 400 (non-waas) but coupled to a STEC 60, and a Mcauley Tri! Going to pick her up in middle america next week and bring her home to CO!! Taking my CFII but he has not flown a mooney before but is hedging in with 800+ hrs. Due to the wealth of knowledge among ya'll I am looking for handling tips! Thanks IN advance!
    3 points
  6. I think the implication that even once the incident reports are released that we(who don't fly formation) won't understand is a bit problematic. I learn stuff from every incident/accident I read about even if it has no correlation to the flying I do, I read about airlines, helicopters, etc. So even though this was formation flying that I will never do, I still want to know what happened, maybe there's an ADM or CRM takeaway for the rest of us, or maybe just a cautionary tale.
    3 points
  7. This post concerns me... It’s ok to be confident that what you are doing can be done safely (and it can - I have no issue with either formation flying or the coolness of the caravan as an event... being concerned with safety for an event is NOT the same as being so risk adverse as saying you shouldn’t do it.. well except for the people that are afraid of Fisk, apparently..). However though I am not concerned with the overall safety of caravans or formation flying, the more posts I read the more I am concerned about whether the Mooney Caravan is responding to this Incident adequately and improving rather than digging in their heels. I am sympathetic - the 130 posts here do feel like an attack on the caravan and it’s probably easy to try to get a little defensive. But don’t let defensive stand in the way of acknowledging what happened... The Caravan just had a near miss of a fatal event. If the rumors are to believed - there are several procedural, pilot qualification, and training issues that do need to be fixed. You keep repeating concerns about insurance - which says to me it’s possible that something happened that might have either deviated from what’s covered by the caravans insurance or an individuals owners’ insurance coverages. I have been avoiding posting these rumors here out of consideration for all the legalease, but this is not some freak-event, things went wrong and everyone is really lucky no one got hurt. I’ve worked on accidents before, and I’ve worked with “not concerned” managers, and things don’t turn out well in that sort of safety culture. Google “normalization of deviance”, for one. “not concerned” is a sign of an indifferent safety culture. Until root cause is found and corrective measures are taken you should be concerned. I am not saying cancel the event, stop caravans, or abandon formation flying. But even professional aviators in the military have a safety stand down after a near miss - they don’t just go on with “not concerned” and keep doing what they are doing. Same thing in the spaceflight business. A bunch of amateurs trying to prove the professionalism of the operation should not be ignoring what the professionals do. Be concerned, a professional aviation operation would be.
    3 points
  8. I've owned and flown both. I currently fly a '95 Bravo. The top overhaul at 600 hrs for Acclaims is no small issue, cost wise. I found the Acclaim generally easier to fly (no cowl flaps, mine had the GFC 700 autopilot, G1000, etc). It does perform better too but the delta is not enough to matter on most trips. The climb rate is impressive with the Acclaim and I miss that with the Bravo. However, the sweet spot for value vs speed and capability is either the Bravo or a 252. In general your bank account will decide for you.
    3 points
  9. We do it all the time in my line of work... when fighters are executing aerial refueling.
    3 points
  10. Personally I think this is where it's starting to go wrong. It's sounding to me like all of a sudden being able to discuss incidents is bad practice and gags are good practice. I think the opposite is true. One of the things I've always found refreshing about aviation is that information about incidents isn't suppressed, it's shared, because it helps to keep everybody safer. This is true even before the results of official investigations are published. Even the feds often publish preliminary reports. It sounds to me like that paradigm is being shifted here. I hope not, because I think it sets a bad precedent. In some other areas (e.g., auto racing with some large organizations) it is normal practice to lock down information, forbid photographs, discourage discussion, etc., etc. Even after investigations are over information isn't widely shared for privacy reasons or whatever. One result is that the same mistakes get made over and over again, and another is that there is nothing to prevent errant speculations and misguided action going forward because the relevant information got suppressed. So I think some of us are a little alarmed to see a potential culture shift happening in a direction where the effects are demonstrably counter-productive.
    3 points
  11. No need to Alan, the only wingtips you had rubbing were in the trailer you were towing.
    3 points
  12. But that's not what I'm reading in your posts. I absolutely agree that one should train to the level that they can fly an approach to minimums. But that is not the same thing as setting personal minimums and treating them as minimums. You keep coning up with these scenarios where supposedly you "have to" fly an approach to minimums and "bust" personal minimums, like, All I'm really doing is pointing out that the answer is exactly the same whether the applicable minimums are your or the FAA's. It involves realistically assessing one's capabilities, making good decisions and situational awareness. Not, what I see in most of these discussions, a knee-jerk, "if the FAA says we're allowed to go this far, I must be willing to go this far every single time or I'm not a real pilot, and you better get a chute (your words)."
    3 points
  13. 2300 and 18 to 20 mp between iaf and faf half flaps about halfway to faf just prior to FAF, gear down, prop full in , flaps, mixture full in, gear down, gear down. after FAF only worry about landing or going missed. if guaranteed landing may add more flaps but that's the only real config change I will make after the faf
    3 points
  14. When I detect the prop is no longer governing at the set speed then I push it forward.. also then set the mixture as well.
    3 points
  15. After 3 days away, was able to get back to the shop today. I cut the sub panel back and got it cleaned up. Relocated 6 grounding terminals.. Got the new cowl deck in a good spot and fit windshield to see where to trim the top of cabin away. You can see the first cut was conservative just so we could get the windshield under the skin for a closer test fit, then trimmed further to blend the radius. I trimmed the cowl deck some after setting final position with two cleakos on each side. Photos of final trimmed deck and cabin will come later. Next time I’m there, will work on the hydro plumbing, then can move on to putting it all together.
    3 points
  16. The thing I've noticed from the 130+ posts on this thread is that all the concern, and calls for changes in training, procedures, etc. are coming from pilots who do not fly formation, or did not fly with the Caravan, or have not attended Caravan Clinics. And also those who probably never will fly formation or attend Caravan training. Those of us that have, are not concerned. Many members of the Caravan formed up on their own and flew formation all the way across the country, home after Oshkosh. If you're not a formation pilot or member of the Caravan, you have nothing to fear, and wouldn't understand the explanation anyway. Or as I said before, come participate in a Caravan Clinic and learn why those of us who have are not concerned. This is all very much like the non-flying public who just don't understand why anyone would fly a small airplane. And no matter how safe we say it is, there is always another crash and the answer is, "well obviously not." I appreciate the honesty of @ilovecornfields just saying, I'm not participating in that activity. That's fine. Although if we ever met up at the airport I'd do my best to convince him to hop in the right seat and see what it's all about I might not be successful. And that's ok. We're not taking this lightly. But I'm 1000 times more likely to be killed by my Mooney with an engine out this weekend, than the chance this will ever happen again while flying formation with the Caravan.
    3 points
  17. Closed the deal today on Missile #42. Here are a few Photos of our new bird. Looking forward to being “A Missile Guy”... A Special “Thank You” to Jon & Seth for their wise council.
    2 points
  18. Made it home on Thursday having left Osh on Saturday -overnights in Potsdam (thanks Erik), Goose Bay, Reykjavik, England (one in the borders, one near London) To get home, 28 hours of flying, 428 gallons of gas, and a massive grin! https://share.findmespot.com/shared/faces/viewspots.jsp?glId=0gT9EaKbs8bVJFSfXDcEg2aobeRyGausd
    2 points
  19. Having a tough time reading through this thread- A couple of my observations- My experience LAST year at the Mooney tent parallels what has been said about this year. No interest shown or even disdain for being there. Wasn't an "inviting feeling there. Didn't make OSH this year due to previous commitments. We're all speculating on what Mooney SHOULD do for marketing and we all ASSUME that they are there to sell as many airplanes as anyone. What if? What if they have a different direction from China? What if China wants them just to hold place? Just thinking here as we are not in anyway privy to that conversation. We have no idea what their REAL marketing directions from China are. We assume a marketing position not yet in evidence just because that is what we traditionally see. New products vs cost to bring to market is an issue. It would be nice to bring new items to market and apply them across the board but with certification costs what they are, for a company selling 2 or 3 dozen airplanes a year, it makes no financial sense. As others have said, I too have spent many days in vendor booths marketing wares to, at certain shows, high net worth individuals and the general public as well. It's not too hard for me to see where improvements in just greeting people would garner huge benefits in both groups. They need to generate social media noise about the brand and they can do that by being at air shows around the country asking for SM postings. How well people are treated, whether or not they have "wealth", can go a long way to gathering good publicity. Good publicity is always needed. For those that can afford a new airplane, one item that I think most would want to look at (I know I would) would be company longevity. Granted Mooney has been a round a long time BUT how many prospective purchasers would be turned off by the checker board history on Mooney financially? Will the company be around longer than my warranty? Will it be a pig an a poke in 3 years? If I was going to spent 800K I'd look at that. This might be one reason why Cirrus sells so many more than Mooney. Has anyone ever tried to canvas Cirrus owners to see why they bought that airplane? Might be an interesting survey. With as passionate as Mooney owners are about the brand, to exclude them in the marketing message is short sighted. This goes worldwide. Anyone who has traveled outside the USA and talked with Mooney owners can see it there.
    2 points
  20. Nobody's sworn to any type of secrecy - planes N numbers are right on the ASIS database. A majority of the carvaner's and a bunch of the Mooneyspace social participants laid eyes on the damaged planes, and the pilots are not anonymous. There's a 2019 Mooney caravan video on youtube with clips of 1) the formation element that had the accident flying together 2) damage visible on the two accident aircraft, and 3) even a cameo with the FAA guys inspecting damage to the leading edge of one of the aircraft. Nothing is hidden - the hush hush is just trying to be respectful of the pilot's wishes until the dust settles for their perceived (founded or unfounded) concerns. If the pilots said let's talk about this now and caravan said No No! I'd be one of the first to start talking. Since the pilots said wait please- we can do that for what - another month...? Once the pilots say let's discuss, well then... let's discuss. They're both on Mooneyspace... until then let's just be patient. On an internet forum. In an age where the waiting is the hardest part.
    2 points
  21. Both airplanes are appropriately certificated though one design is decades newer than the other. I’ve got time in both. Neither is better or worse; they’re just different. Mooney owners seem happy with their purchase and Cirrus owners seem happy with theirs. Anyone unhappy is free to switch. Can’t we just leave it at that? Skip
    2 points
  22. No where have I demanded any such thing. I am not wanting to investigate. I am not bullying anyone. Read my post. My point was that if you want to have a meaningful outcome to the root cause of all this there needs to be a culture that guides the process and I am concerned from what I have been reading that it may not be present for who ever is investigating. Never before have I seen a secrecy agreement with all the people who witnessed an incident. I do not believe that will help make the best outcome. I do not believe it is right to keep any of the information controlled and fed selectively to the investigators. I do not think any of the information will remain secret in the long run. So what is the point in hiding anything.
    2 points
  23. I would have expected you to say there would be no discussion until after everything is sorted out, not that it would never be discussed here. If the Caravan truly means to never discuss this incident outside of their organization, any changes to training or procedures that are needed (if that is the conclusion reached) here, that is disappointing. I agree completely. I don't care who was involved, but it would be nice to eventually know what the chain of events were that led to the incident and what is being done to prevent it in the future. I have not done any formation flying but would like to and have been considering the Caravan next year. I already have Oshkosh on the calendar. If the gag order extends past the point where everything has been resolved that would not encourage my participation in the Caravan.
    2 points
  24. Absolutely. They are separate yet interrelated. But no one owes explanations of either here... and trying to bully information with cries of secrecy and no safety culture isn’t a good look for Mooneyspace. Again I have nothing to do with the caravan, and have never flown formation. But I know we are living in a quick, grab for the pitchforks culture which I find disturbing, no matter who is doing it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    2 points
  25. And an engineer from a prior life with expertise in human factors. So? An Internet forum is not a part of the Mooney caravans or the FAAs process. I guarantee you that. Nor can you reasonably infer anything about them from the discussion here. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    2 points
  26. I’m an airline pilot, and know safety culture. You’re really over reaching. The right safety processes including an FAA investigation with hopefully people being very open are ongoing. You are not a part of that process. I am not a part of that process. This group is not a part of that process. That DOES NOT MEAN there isn’t a process. We don’t have a right to butt in when someone’s certificate may be at stake. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    2 points
  27. It's not a question of the battery minder not being able to power the relay. The relay requires very little current to operate. The way the battery minder works, is that it tries to sense the battery condition before applying power to the battery. Without the relay closed, it won't sense any battery voltage and will shut down. I use a separate ordinary 12V supply to close the relay and apply the battery minder once the relay is closed. Then it will do what it has to do - charge/condition the battery.
    2 points
  28. I think a TN’d and intercooled mid body with the 2900lb MGW with special attention given to weight, ergonomics and all the aero clean ups that made the Acclaim faster would be a world beater. Essentially a high compression, TN’d 252 but lighter and cleaner. 1200ish of useful in a plane that burns 10-11gph and has real speed an altitude capability. The Mid bodies have more than reasonable room for 4 adults and baggage. My 50+year old F manages 1060 of useful at 2740. Mooney should be able to refine that further. Modern avionics weigh less not more.
    2 points
  29. Background: In the 1990's I worked for the DOD as a civilian engineer in charge of radar systems that track Missile launches. In the 90's Theater Missile Defense was a top priority of the military. I have participated in 100's of missile firing efforts across the globe and I know how the military conducts exercises and the methods/procedures that are in place to insure safety and success. When I first attended a Caravan in 2015 as a passenger I was expecting to meet a group of folks who were all good pilots, big ego's, and had some experience and figured out how to do formation flying. I couldn't have been more wrong with my "outside" view of what formation flying was going to be. My first experience started with a flight brief by a Lancer Test Pilot. Not Lancair, this pilot was a Boeing B-1B Lancer Test Pilot who contributed to much of our training philosophy (as well as a long history of prior military and professional pilots input). The pre/post briefs were a carbon copy of what I had sat thru at Launch Control during my many years of missile testing at White Sands missile range, the only key difference is no one was wearing camouflage (while many I am sure have theirs hanging in the closet). The Formation clinics and flights are as good as any military operation I have ever been a part of. 2018 I flew in my first Caravan, and came back this year in 2019 and brought my son. I will be back in 2020, 2021.... My son was my passenger this year, and for 5 days in a row since we returned he is asking when can go up and do some 4 ship work. He loves it, I love it. The pilots give a lot of their free time up to help folks that are interested in learning. There are no ego's, those with experience are willing to help anyone and answer all questions. But mostly its about building new friendships, sharing knowledge, and fine tuning our skills as aviators. My only suggestion is for some of the folks here that have interest, doubts, fear, suggestions, concerns, curiosity - Come and attend a local ground clinic, you may surprise yourself with what you can learn. Maybe you do or don't take the next step and try it for yourself - it doesn't matter. The minimum thing that will happen is you meet a room full of folks that all love flying Mooneys and have a combined knowledge of 100's of years of flying Mooneys. I have learned more about recognizing and resolving mechanical issues, how to fly with no flaps, and how to get back to Stick and Rudder with my head up looking out the windscreen. Since I started formation flying my landings have improved dramatically. We use no flaps, i carry a little power, and this year when we landed at Osh on my Leads Wing, my son turned to me and said, are we down yet, I smiled!
    2 points
  30. If I recall correctly, you have the sequence backwards. They’d already decided to have a parachute to begin with and rather than undergo costly spin training, they convinced the FAA that spin testing would not be necessary thanks to the parachute.
    2 points
  31. According to the Surefly specs, it draws half an amp. That’s 22 hours with an 11 AH battery (OK, it’s not quite that simple and there are other loads, but the point is it’S not much of an electrical load). Skip
    2 points
  32. Honest question - not a rhetorical debate question - What does this Phillips Victory do that say XC 20W50 + camguard does not?
    2 points
  33. I consider the most important aspect of a turbo prop to be the reliability - they say the catastrophic failure rate of a turbo prop is something 100 times less likely than a piston engine. I would feel more comfortable flying a single engine turbo prop over hostile terrain than even a twin engine piston. The bonanza turbo prop is an entirely different purpose - it carries 6 people. It now can operate out of a 900 ft field. And consider that in some parts of the world avgas is not available. The bonanza turbo prop had two different conversions - one with an Allison RR and the other with a Pt6 by rocket engineering. The pt6 is too much of a fuel hog, even down rated, making the fuel load in the standard Bonanza not so great. A smaller turbo prop might have done the job - and more fuel. To speed alone - you are right - the ultra is faster. But to your point. A factory certified airframe could be strengthened to accept a higher redline. I am speaking in engineering terms - I have no idea how hard legally the requirements or how hard it would be for the factory to get that certified. In the case of an M20, the frame could be strengthened to allow the redline to be raised. In fact, the rocket engineering liquid rocket conversion (only 5 were ever done, with the liquid rocket - TSIO550L I think it was - 350hp), had airframe manipulations including gussets as I described. Anyway I find it entirely plausible that the M20 airframe could be manipulated with some extra strengthening engineering to raise the redline to make it better enjoy a RR500. ...but I think a diesel EPS rated at. 400hp at 15gph....this would be the break out modern airplane that could go coast-coast nonstop at amazing speeds. I want one.
    2 points
  34. I think @M20F was mainly trying to say that one should know how to fly the approach to ILS / LPV minimums from an aircraft configuration perspective, even if one choses to avoid situations that require it. I hadn’t adequately considered how I would handle the flaps if I break out at 200. Now I have considered it, so the discussion was helpful. In the real world, if the forecast ceiling is under 500 at the destination, I ain’t goin’. If it’s at 800-500, I’m going only if it’s a big runway with an ILS or LPV AND there’s multiple outs if things aren’t going right. But what if I get there, and I’m perfectly on localizer and GS, and not breaking out at 500? I’m probably going to continue until closer to minimums. Then I’d better be confident in handling the aircraft all the way to the pavement, which I first saw at 200 AGL.
    2 points
  35. Here's the one produced by Mooney, albeit in a limited run of one.
    2 points
  36. Would only remove an EGT probe to inspect when doing other maintenance or when suspicious of the probe. By far, the most common failure mode of probes are the wires breaking at the base or the probe from maintenance activities (especially for CHT probes) and chaffed wire harness which can be repaired without replacing the probe. CHT probes should last longer than the life of engine but tend to get damaged during maintenance. EGT probes are less susceptible to damage during maintenance but eventually do loose their tip with hotter exhaust in Turbo's and LOP operations.
    2 points
  37. I love my armrest on my '64. A previous owner added some structure which I beefed up when I re-did my interior, see pictures.
    2 points
  38. Short final. Part of final gear down check. You push it forward in case of go around... that’s my flow. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    2 points
  39. My ‘94 J has an electronic tone generator and an overhead speaker for gear and stall warning. The only sonalert is for the autopilot disconnect. Skip
    2 points
  40. Get a Mooney specific CFI for your transition training. It will be the best money you spend. A Mooney is not a Cessna, or a Beech or a Piper.
    2 points
  41. Janat83, The link I shared has the following info: "Here is the settings I came up with and use for approaches in my 77 M20C. The beauty of this is how simple it is to use. I am 2400 RPM, 18" Clean Approach Level at 100mph (about 90kts). As soon as I intercept the Glide Slope - I do not touch RPM or MP, I simply Drop the Gear, Drop Flaps to TkOFf, and Pull Carb Heat. Wait a few sec and I have a nice 500 FPM decent. " I only use the top 2-3 LINEs in the matrix below for approaches, and of course the Missed Approach config on go around. I have 120MPH settings there as well but have not yet moved up to flying the approaches faster. Hope this helps sf
    2 points
  42. Like Byron, I spent time at Mena, AR, Tejas in San Marcos, Murmer in Houston, as well as a number of other paint shops. I even spoke to the infamous ArtCraft in CA. None came close to impressing me in knowledge, ability, total price or delivery anywhere close to Hawk in Tampa. Eight years ago I paid the same $10,500, and my former plane still looks amazing! Joe had a lot of fully depreciated equipment he didn't roll into his price back then. Now he has much more overhead to cover, so of course his price is higher. Whining about it, even for a frugal Mooney owner, is short sighted and disingenuous. Given Hawk's quality, $14,500 is a steal.
    2 points
  43. No, I'm saying the number 62 had nothing to do with this.
    2 points
  44. I always say my one rule is never pay retail. But that applies to parts, gadgets, avionics, etc. I'm always looking for a discount, something second hand, or just a good deal. Consequently my Mooney carries various bits and pieces from @Alan Fox and @Avionics Source, ebay, Barnstormers, etc. But when it comes to service, I can't think of anything more short sighted than counting dollars. Whether it's a steady hand on a paint gun, or a torque wrench, or a sharp pair of eyes that know where to look and then check twice to make sure its done right. When in comes to the human factor, I look for the right person, shop, craftsman, and never ask the price.
    2 points
  45. The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten.
    2 points
  46. 2 points
  47. I don’t think there will be a certificate action. As long as it wasn’t intentional, the parties are cooperative and demonstrate a willingness to improve, it will most likely be closed with retraining and a period of no violations.
    1 point
  48. A HOLD????? I would declare an emergency and ask for penalty vectors...…..
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.