midlifeflyer

There were a few Mooneys at the last meeting I attended (at least three including the Ovation I flew). Which of the two October meetings is at your home base?

To be super-technical (and give you a lead when playing Trivial Pursuit: Aircraft Edition), the FAA has never defined POH. The FAA refers to an AFM, an FAA approved "Airplane Flight Manual." The Pilot Operating Handbook is a "consensus" format for owner manuals originally created by the General Aviation Manufacturers Association in 1975 to standardize the presentation of both FAA-required and manufacturer-desired Information. The Preface to GAMA Specification No 1 provides much of the background.

Well, I guess I found my right seat technique. As a number of you advised, it wasn't easy. It really was designed as a thumb release button. Turns out that whether it was hand strength, dexterity, whatever, I could not release the bar with my left hand. Left forefinger and middle finger together did not leave enough in the rest of my left hand to push/slide the bar collar and release it. What I came up with was to use both hands. From the right seat, it was pretty easy to reach over with my right hand and release the bar "normally." Once released, my left took over to easily complete the retraction. Extending the gear, as I expected, was a non-event. Thanks for the tips. They really helped.

It's a pilot proficiency course sponsored by the Mooney Aircraft Pilots Association. Multi day ground and flight instruction by instructors well-versed in Mooneys and their "gotchas."

Let's make sure we are not confusing "activating an approach" from a GPS navigator standpoint with switching to "APR mode" on an autopilot. @Knuckledragger00, if you want to fly the approach, the approach needs to be activated. If you want the autopilot to fly an approach with vertical guidance, you need to activate the approach and put the autopilot into APR mode. That is going to be true of every combination on navigator and autopilot I know of. Activating an approach works the same on the Garmin navigators, whither GTN, GNS, or G1000. You can activate the approach in a number of ways. Selecting "activate" is one. Punching Direct to a waypoint on the approach is another. Activating a leg on the approach is a third. If the Nav unit provides vertical guidance, it will give it to you. So, in the G1000, once the approach is activated, the glidepath G indicator and the associated diamond will come in as you approach the FAF. On a traditional HSI, the GS needle will activate. But unless the autopilot is switched to APR mode, the autopilot will not capture the glidepath the navigator displays. Here's a screenshot. It is the GPS 3 to my home base, TTA. 2100 is the altitude from before IKTOW until intercepting the glidepath at HEDYY. If you are following along, the autopilot has been actively flying the airplane in NAV and ALT mode since before IKTOW. But I did not press the GFC700's APR key to tell the autopilot I wanted it to capture the glidepath at HEDYY. You can see the result. Well past the FAF, only a half mile from the runway, and still at 2100. If I had changed to APR Mode on the GFC700 well before HEDYY, we would see a white GS on the nav line (second text line of the display) which will flash and turn magenta as the glidelpath is intercepted and captured by the autopilot.

Have you looked into the insurance cost issue for the step up. It shouldn't be a problem but I've seen some, let's say, interesting underwriting decisions.

My favorite part of the discussion in that link: Pilot must develop a different sight picture when landing these new Mooneys. Where 5-degrees worked before, 8-degrees is necessary now. This just takes practice and the help of a competent instructor familiar with long-body Mooneys. It's absolutely true. The properly landed Ovation lands quite nose high. But I just tell people to pretend they are in a Cessna 172 or 182. It's almost identical.

I have almost the same take on this as the others. But I also have a different problem with it. If you think about it, it's unclear. I'm not sure it really says anything to alert the controller what you want to do and that it is different . "Turn left to intercept, then direct to the FAF" doesn't compute. It's either turn left direct to the FAF or turn to intercept the FAC. Controller would probably take it as a poor read-back if she noticed anything at all. "Turn left to intercept the final approach course and maintain 3000 until established" would be clearer and is in aviation-speak too. I'm personally a fan of the read-back-what-I-think-it-meant idea but one has to be careful about its use. Most common place is after a vector for traffic being told to "proceed on course." You can see discussions galore on the subject of whether that means direct to the next waypoint or intercept the original courseline you deviated from. I don't get into that. I just read back the one which seems most appropriate. So far I have't been corrected or yelled at. On this one, I'm a little more hesitant to take the risk the controller did not notice my change. What if the controller actually wanted me to remain high - for other traffic. So I would offer the alternative, but make it clear it is an alternative. In an earlier post, I used "How about we...?" as an intro. You might find other phrases just as useful. "Unable 3000 until the FAF. How about..." would be a pretty good quick one to makes sure the controller is paying attention (and right in line with Bush's article).

This also applies to VFR. Some years ago at my former home base, a student pilot was soloing. Upon landing, the pilot received, "turn left next taxiway." Unfortunately the location of the ground roll and the pilot's inexperience made that difficult. More unfortunately, the pilot's inexperience led to trying instead of "unable." Airplane ended up in the median weeds and the runway was closed until it could be towed out.

I read that one years ago. Definitely a keeper.

you mean I should wear my Bonanza gloves? (Personal joke. Emergency gear extension is a crank and you rub your knuckles repeatedly on the carpet when turning it. I carry gloves in my flight bag when I fly in one.)

Agreed. The direct KEHSO would have come much earlier. I keep mentally going back an forth on what the controller probably intended to do. That's why either thought is only a guess. My crystal ball never worked that well.

I'll (we all will) be curious to hear what they say when/if they get back to you. But it is experiences like this which teach us to question.

I listened. My bet is on just a mistake. I'm guessing the intention was a FAC intercept. Edit: Thinking about it more, I wouldn't be surprised if she was going to give you Direct KEHSO, but she was late. There was that tiny bit of hesitation in her voice.

I disagree. Here's why. @DXB is familiar. Even if not, in the scenario I know I am way high. My approach briefing tells me to expect lower earlier or even the IAF at MAZIE, but that could be traffic (although if I were a stranger, I'd be asking for lower). But my approach briefing* also tells me to expect direct KEHSO straight in (if a little earlier) or, at worst, an intercept to the FAC well outside. Direct PACKS, maintain 3,000 until PACKS makes no sense (speed brakes notwithstanding :D). It does not take a lot of time or arguments to suggest a heading to join the FAC. "How about 180 to join the FAC?" or even "how about a heading to join the FAC?" takes about the same amount of time as the "normal" readback. As it is, this is the kind of drive and dive which could easily lead to problems. Passengers ears hurting fro the rapid descent; going missed; maybe worse - that will be a bigger problem to busy airspace than a few extra seconds to clarify. * I see too many discussions suggesting he approach briefing is a bunch of numbers. Personally, I think the most important part of the approach chart is the plan view.