midlifeflyer

I knew an experienced CFI who managed to do that during a pinch hitter flight. In that case it was a Cutlass and he did just enough that the nosegear retracted while the mains remained. He was mortified.

I can see it both ways. Enough damage to get an accident classification, but I suspect there are plenty of gear-ups like that which never make it to the NTSB because they are (ho hum, snooze) just another gear up. But when the pilot says they lowered the gear, it could take it out of the ordinary and into a safety investigation of “why did the gear collapse?” (I knew a pilot - also a CFI - who had a gear up sitting on the ramp. Initially claimed it happened on its own but came clean a few days later.)

Indeed we are. I hope to do it in stages, limiting myself to simpler operations and simpler aircraft. @Arthur, Sorry to hear. Father Time may set limits, but it's up to us to have the intelligence and strength to understand what they are.

We had a DA40NG in my flying club for a while. That’s the JetA diesel model. I loved discussing the special hot start procedure during checkouts: turn the key.

Personally, I like these for airflow (and usability for multiple generations bought it when I had a Mini 4, still using it with my Mini 6)

…until there is a new feature you would like to have and can’t (and not just because of cost). The non-WAAS G1000 with the KAP140 had it all in there too. We have one of those in our club and, yes, when I do transition training for a new member who got their private with a simple flight deck, they are amazed by all it can do. But most of our instrument rated members insist in the WAAS/GFC700 one for trips. I’ve flown and taught G1000 in Cessnas, Diamonds, Pipers, Bonanzas, and Cirruses (had the opportunity for a Mooney one but had a scheduling conflict). The different OEM looks and feels is inconsequential. But I alway have to grab a Pilot Guide and AFMS to see what “this one” is capable of.

Personally, I agree with @NickG. Yes I have flown G1000/GFC700 combos and teach in them. Yes, they are great to fly but they have a huge downside. Being an OEM product, the ability to upgrade, or simply do software updates, is controlled by the airframe manufacturer. With a G3X/GTN/GFC package, it’s within the control of the aircraft owner. Question for @N177MC: can you create random holding patterns in that flavor of G1000?

Sorry to say, but I think you have a significant budget vs desired performance issue. That 7 month old isn't getting any smaller, so those vacation missions mean 4 people and a bunch of baggage. I'd really be looking at carrying capacity more than Mooney efficiency. I flew a lot in the Rockies in my 20 years in Colorado and, on a nice day with only my wife and I, there were a bunch of options. But add kids and baggage, and I'd be looking at things like a 182 (RG or Turbo if you want some speed) or even a Comanche or Bonanza F-series with a big engine STC (I used to fly a Debonair with an IO 550 - about 5 kts slower than an Ovation with similar fuel burn). Whatever you do look at, be sure to look at the actual weight and balance form for the specific airplane, and run some realistic numbers.

If it helps, my first Mooney experience was when I rented a C at KAPA.

I’ve been in one.

No, but I'd say perceiving a nonexistent threat is.

I'll go with yours, not rear-ended, but he's blocking the 10 cars behind him. behind him. Safe? Perhaps. So is staying home in both cases. But I don't think I questioned the "safety" of blocking the runway or a taxiway or a road, and I think we're now back to unprofessional and foolish, aren't we?

We might just be disagreeing on the semantic use of "objectively." I don't think of a decision based on a mistaken belief to be "objective." IOW, "Well, I thought the light was green so I went into the intersection" is not an objective decision in my book.

I dunno @MikeOH. Sure, there’s gonna be the “whatta jerk” vitriol. Just this past year or so we’ve discussed a Mooney pilot flying into a tower while on an instrument approach, a Mooney pilot or two who seems to be clueless how to load and fly an IAP and indeed even how to fly headings and altitudes. Now we have a Mooney pilot who stops dead in the middle of a busy runway for no objective reason. (Doing what one thinks is safe because they don’t know how it works is subjective.) These kinds of events reflect badly on pilots. They reflect badly on GA. Worse yet, they reflect badly on Mooney pilots. So, yeah, I understand your feelings about it but I understand the human need to vent, especially in a Mooney forum, especially since it’s pretty harmless. None of us have the authority to take his certificate away, The controller tongue-lashing? Meh. A bit unprofessional but understandable and pretty mild. The Bozo go-around pilot piling it on? Uncalled for. But I think both are pretty irrelevant to the pilot knowledge /error discussion.

Agreed.

Agree. Not only unprofessional or foolish but the exact opposite of "Exit the runway without delay at the first available taxiway or on a taxiway as instructed by ATC."

I do it All. The. Time.

I was chewed out by another pilot. I was approaching on a 45 to my non-towered home base. Another aircraft called “right downwind.” I keyed the mic and said, “Raleigh Exec is left traffic.” Then “right base,” so I repeated. “Shut the f#$@%k up!” came the reply. “I didn’t want to declare an emergency.” I’ll let you folks decide whether it was deserved. Maybe I was wrongfully “playing cop.” I later captured the audio from LiveATC because it was pretty soon after the Watsonville mid-air and we are a little busier, so I was going to use it in an airport communications program. (I captured it mostly because of another communication with a different airplane once I was in downwind.) By a controller, no. Not even when I’ve made a mistake. Not even at a Bravo.

Question for you. Would they even issue a LAHSO clearance for that runway? Looks like only about 2500’. Yes, that Mooney was able to hold short, and lots of folks could too, but I don’t see that as being in the comfort zone for enough aircraft for it to be in Tower’s comfort zone either, especially at a busy place like FRG (yes, been there a few times). But to the second point. I made the comment about the pilot error in not clearing the runway on the video. Got a quick reply saying, but he wasn’t cleared to cross it.” So, apparently there is way and not just for the pilot in the video.

“LAHSO operations in effect” is generally broadcast on the ATIS but either way, the requirement for a specific airplane to “land and shod short of runway XX” needs to be part of the landing clearance. Otherwise the runway you were cleared to land on is yours from end to end, although subject to the requirement to exit without delay. “Without delay” in this situation without a specific taxiway designated would have been to cross the runway and turn off at the first available taxiway. Don’t confuse crossing a crossing runway with turning on to it. Turning onto a crossing runway requires a clearance. Sure, Tower “coulda” said to turn onto it - if it was empty and being used as a taxiway that day but they didn’t need to, so no absolution was necessary.

Pretty sure you mean “Farmingdale.” “Framingham” is in Massachusetts.

I agree he was just being cautions. The problem was he was being unnecessarily cautious due to a lack of knowledge and caused problems for others. That doesn't excuse either the controller's barking or the snarky other pilot, but it is the pilot's fault. Or, the pilot can chalk it up to a nasty controller and figure he did everything just fine and do it again next time.

Based on the video, I'd say there probably was more than enough. When they show both aircraft, the Bo is further away from the Mooney than the full length of the runway. I am going to disagree with the use of the term "expedite" here. This wasn't about not "expediting" exiting the runway. It was about coming to a dead stop on the active runway instead of exiting "normally."

I don’t know what if anything was edited, but all I saw was a pilot stopping in the middle of a runway for no reason instead of exiting the runway without delay (AIM 4-3-21.). With another airplane in short final, I can understand the controller’s annoyance (without condoning the harshness). Apparently, the pilot incorrectly thought they had to stop for a crossing runway or receive a clearance to cross it. If it goes beyond the phone discussion with Tower, looks like a good Compliance Program candidate.

They were. My first KNS 80 experience was entering waypoints for mountain passes in Colorado. Had to be high enough for VOR line of sight, but, having not that long before flown nothing more sophisticated than two VOR receivers, it was better than sliced bread!