JohnB

Allright update! I have learned so much about CO in the cockpit in the last 2 weeks. First, from Lycoming, slip joint leaks are common, particularly with new engines as the seals typically fill with gunk over time which seals the slip joints. So further investigation was required. Thanks to Al at Air San Luis in San Luis Obispo Airport, he was able to find the leak in one of my heater hoses and replaced. (See attached photo) Now no CO in my cockpit! Huge thanks to lots of people including All of Mooneyspace, and some awesome lifelong friends!

Looks like mine was #1, exhaust leaking into engine compartment. Hmm That also probably explains why the number didn’t go down when I held the portable monitor outside of my side window. Great point! Mechanic also found that one of the JPI probes going through my firewall wasn’t sealed properly which he did. Wouldn’t explain the high number by itself and the last probes were put in years ago, but that probably contributed Yes exactly correct Dan. Exhaust issue and small leak in firewall from JPI probe.

Update- by pressurizing the exhaust system, and applying soapy water to detect bubbles technique as suggested by the awesome Don Maxwell, mechanic found the leaks, which were large amounts of CO leaking past my slip joints throughout my exhaust system. Since the exhaust and engine are nearly factory new, lycoming was contacted. I don’t actually know how high above 137 my ppm went, as I stopped looking at the monitors then and focused all of my concentration on landing. I am hugely grateful for having a monitor on board or I may have never known. If I can figure out how to upload the video, I will.

Thank you for looking, mechanics are in high demand/ short supply at SBP so I have learned! Have one looking into it, nothing jumping out at the mechanic yet. And nice speaking with you today! Thanks! This is a tough one, would love it if this were at my home base where I could fly it around and put my monitors all over the plane, but its a 3-4 hour drive to SLO for me. No new cone wires, exhaust pipes new. Very interesting theory including door seals which I didn't specifically check, but whatever it is, is got a pretty high 137ppm CO level. Hoping he finds something that can drop the level a bit so I can at least hobble home and do the rest of the searching later. Thanks everyone!

Great question @hais, I agree with @PeteMc and did that, overhead vents wide open, side floor vents were already open, and anything that comes from the engine (cabin heat, center console cabin vent) completely closed. Opening the side window has helped me in the past when I get CO from surrounding jet traffic, once I'm completely clear of them. I did think about slowing and opening the left side window and using right rudder to slip, so that if it were coming from the engine out of the cowling, a slip away might stream those fumes to the right side of the airplane preferentially and leave the left side more able to receive fresh outside air. I didn't try that as was not in any textbook that I'm aware of but just a thought I had to try something to reduce exposure. Paul, that's great to know both! The SLO mechanics seem pretty busy! Thanks! Will definitely post the cause once it's figured out. 2 is now the new minimum for me. Yes Sue, Blue, Good call on getting more than one device I think. The logic behind me wanting TWO digital electronic readout devices now after yesterday's event is that these units require recalibration every 2-5 years and it's easy to forget and if you do forget, might not be accurate or in my case finding a mechanic who can swap out the panel mounted one. Also if I know an actual accurate CO PPM number, I can make better decisions about it. In thinking about this scenario if it happens again, I would use the ppm numbers to guide my decisions, for example if I see 10 ppm or so, I'm probably not going to interrupt my trip if not too far and then have my mechanic look at it when I get back to home base. If 40+ PPM I would do what I did in this case land at an airport with services, if 400+ PPM I'm probably going to look for the nearest flat surface to land on or glide to (i.e. if I am at 16k feet and have good places to glide to and get a 400+ number, I might shut engine off and glide rather than risking that time of exposure) None of this is written in stone, but that's what I might do if this happens again (which I of course hope it won't!)

My airplane is stranded in San Luis Obispo (KSBP) with a CO leak from somewhere, so if anyone able to help locate a mechanic that can fix it there, or have options, would be hugely helpful. Here’s what happened. I’ve always been a huge supporter of having an electronic CO monitoring device at all times and it was needed yesterday. I was taking off from PRB to fly with friends and my portable CO experts monitor alarmed. Reading was 40 ppm which then went above and got a High display. Got to level flight, held the monitor through the side window. Did not come down. I then turned around and landed with side window open, cabin heat, cabin vents closed. I felt fine and let the device go down to 0 ppm on the ground. Luckily a mechanic was flying with us and we took off the cowlings and no leaks were noted on visual inspection, and another friend had a Sentry CO monitor which I took up in the pattern to see if it was a sensor issue problem and mine went off to high again, but the Sentry read normal. No notifications of any abnormal reading to ForeFlight from the Sentry unit and I tested it on the ground and it beeps and was connected and tested ok. So thought was maybe the CO experts monitor may be off since the Sentry read normal. To be sure I went to Lowes and bought 3 ( yes three) home CO monitors , Two had digital displays. Went up again towards SBP, babying the engine, watching my monitors. Noted that fuel pressure was lower and oil temp was warmer on idle than it usually was which I attributed it to being a very hot day. So got up, flight following to SBP and all seemed normal, with 0 ppm reading from all monitors on the short flight to SBP. Got 2/3 the way there and all seemed good. So I called flight following to ask for a clearance to my home base LGB. About a minute after I received clearance, ALL 4 of my CO monitors went off, (The CO experts one and the 3 Home ones) with one reading shot up to 137ppm rising. I then changed destination back to SBP with approach, opened the window, I did start to feel a headache at that time. Since I could see the airport I landed. Felt a little funny for a few minutes but quickly resolved. Still looking for a mechanic who can get to KSBP who can fix this, so any help would be appreciated. Have a few calls in but so far no luck. Im glad that I had my device as would have had no warning otherwise, and this may have had a different outcome if I didn’t have an electronic monitor and am HUGELY grateful to the Mooney and Bonanza pilots and friends who helped including Tim, Joker, Hoser, Susan, Buttercup, Steve, Chris and a whole lot more thanks! Once all this is done I’m going to insist on having TWO CO monitors with digital displays in operation all of the time. I have a panel installed guardian CO monitor that recently went inop as needs sending in as likely expired. Still have no idea what’s causing this, but hoping to get a mechanic soon there to fix. Assistance would be welcomed John

Havent bounced a landing in years. (That being said, I’m sure one will happen ) I do find that having an AOA and LHS ales landings almost too easy along with @donkaye’s landing video if you haven’t yet seen 50+ times, it’s worth it! I was on a commercial airline flight and the pilot really landed hard, which I’m sure was not intended, I thought…” I could do better than that!” LOL (Not!) still goes to show with even a gazillion hours, there’s some landings that just are not going to be great. But Don’s video, an AOA and a LHS dramatically cut down on the bad ones, even in vastly different weight and wind conditions.

It's a normal response. I think all previous replies are pretty much correct. Here's what altitude does to the heart. The major cardiovascular related effects associated with elevated altitude are: Immediate decrease in oxygen delivery to the tissues, which requires a cardiac response. Increase in pulmonary vascular constriction, which increases pulmonary afterload. Increase in sympathetic nervous outflow, primarily by an increase in epinephrine but also norepinephrine. Some, but not all of these effects are mitigated by using supplemental oxygen which I personally would recommend at altitudes above 9,000 feet, or lower if your physiology needs it. But even if you do use oxygen, your body will produce chemicals (i.e. epinephrine, norepinephrine as above) that will maintain pressures as your body is exposed to lower atmospheric pressures, but they will increase your heart rate. There are ways you can reduce this effect by making sure you are well hydrated before each high altitude flight, avoid caffeine (and absolutely avoid alcohol for sure), and physical conditioning / exercise to train your body also is very helpful.

I had the EXACT same angst when I upgraded to the Garmin EIS, as I learned if you install an EIS, you are not able to have any other instrument in your airplane measuring the same items as per Garmin's requirements. (I wanted to keep my EDM - 800, but was not allowed). I vaguely remember I had my installer check my EDM 800 tit probe vs the EIS probe and they were pretty much equal before he removed the EDM. I also have noted in flight that fuel flows were the same as my EDM was with the previous equipment TIT settings between 1600-1650. Having said that, and after using the EIS for several years now, it takes a bit of getting used to, but after you do, it is much easier to see alterations of temperatures, gives you more simple visual warnings, and can demonstrate a numeric TIT. However, if you do not feel comfortable with having only one instrument measuring TIT, you can keep the Moritz and go with whatever engine monitoring system you wish which some people have done.

That is pricey, but might make sense for me as no one on my field does oxygen anymore, I could buy the filler tanks, maybe keep them in my shared hangar (another problem) , fly to a nearby airport to get filled (+ 1hr av gas), might be cheaper to fill my onboard oxygen tanks maybe once a year, and use this gadget for my usual flights less than 18k.

Curious, where do you keep your unit when running, back seat? Between your seats? Can you or do you run yours on aircraft power with an adapter? Seriously thinking of getting one as my long flights are typically between 10k and 16k, and places to refill my onboard oxygen are becoming less common.

There are a ton of references. Here’s one written in plain language but there are several more written in much more technical language if you would like to search online. http://www.faqs.org/health/topics/88/Color-blindness.html The problem with CO is that it causes extreme hypoxia. your color sensing cones in your eyes are much more sensitive to reduction in oxygen. Among many other acutely very bad things CO can cause by displacing oxygen from your red cells that deliver oxygen, making all of your cells hypoxic can cause unconsciousness, blurry vision, altered thinking and it can cause a condition where you retain the memory of different colors but cannot distinguish between them. This is why I think color changing dots are a bad idea to market, as some pilots think they’re safe flying with one. You would have to be extraordinarily lucky to notice any difference on the dots at the exact moment before a significant CO exposure began to affect your brain and your senses negatively. Bottom line, if you’re at all concerned about CO in your cockpit, you need to get an actual CO detector, not a color changing dot.

The color changing dots should be COMPLETELY removed from the market in my opinion as they give a person false assurance they are doing something that will help protect them. It won't. Yes they might change colors at some point in case of CO poisoning, but one of the very first of your senses that goes away in case of CO inhalation is your sense of color discrimination. So even if you were extremely lucky enough to look at the dot in some kind of routine scan, or if somehow you felt like you needed to, YOU WOULD HAVE NO IDEA WHAT COLOR IT WAS, therefore the dot wouldn't be helpful to you, but may be helpful to the NTSB reporters if an accident occurred to determine the cause on the ground. As many of your senses and thought processes are proportionally impaired with increasing levels of CO poisoning, you need something that gives you the loudest, brightest, most obnoxious warning possible that will get your attention quickly no matter what you're doing as you don't have very long to make decisions with a significant amount of CO in your cockpit.

My 430W had display outages and flip flop issues when I purchased the plane, and i paid for the $1,500 overhaul, and it has worked perfectly now for well over 8 years. They do a great job on the overhaul. Highly worth it. Keeping my fingers crossed that they will keep the overhaul option going for quite some time., but once the overhaul option goes away or it has any other issues, that will be the time i might want to upgrade to a GTN 650.

Of all of my upgrades i've done, all glass GTN750, G500Txi, Aspen evolution secondary backup, I kept my 430W as my second radio. It still works perfectly well, and communicates well with all of my other avionics. Yes I could upgrade it to a GTN650, but the only thing I would really gain is touch screen vs knobs, and a bit bigger display screen, and I kind of like having a knob option for the second radio. I didn't see spending the extra $$$, replacing something working perfectly, and exchanging for more touch screens in my plane which can be a bit of a challenge in lots of turbulence. The things you wont be able to do, is you'll need to update the 430 card separately from all of your other avionics, as you cant sync a card update or Flightstream update to all devices like you can with the newer avionics, and some of the approaches like visual glide path approaches to any airport and VNAV features, wont work on the 430 for redundancy, but I use my other nav equipment when that happens. If you do replace your 430W, they have a very good resale value as they're still a great unit.

Well given all of the wide responses here and concerns, I asked my insurance broker about my friend's insurance shock at 70 and he gave me some very useful advice which I'll share. I have already inquired whether my insurance carrier has an age cap. Regarding age, you’re still a ways off from being surcharged. Most carriers start increasing rates based solely on age around 65-68 years. Usually after 68 most carriers won’t quote new business. i.e. at that age we would essentially be stuck with your carrier at that time. Some carriers have a max age limit, but most will write pilots indefinitely so long as there are no losses or medical issues. In general the rates start really ramping up after 70. Of course it all depends on the type of aircraft as well. Single engine piston aircraft aren’t scrutinized as much as a multi or pressurized aircraft. Our market is still in its hard cycle so what happened to your friend is not surprising, albeit frustrating. In another two years or so we should see our market begin to soften up a bit. The floor won’t fall out, but hopefully senior pilots will be granted a bit more grace than they have in the last 2-3 years. Generally speaking though as we approach age 65 we want to settle down with a carrier who will be a good fit for the long run. Absolutely feel free to share my comments. The best thing for senior pilots to do is start the age conversation now with their broker (like you are) and not wait until they have a surprise like your friend did.

Yikes. I wonder if you locked your Mooney's gear in an always down position , would insurers go for that? (just kidding I know they won't) Well thanks for sharing Don. It is somewhat encouraging that if gear is their only concern, but it is a possibility of being insured after 80 in a non retract. The only fixed gear I see close to our Mooney's speeds is a Cessna TTX which is very costly even compared to an Acclaim, but close in speed. Something to think about as the years go by, and making me appreciate my Mooney flying time even more.

So it is true, there is some age determined by insurance companies alone where this happens. Yikes! I once saw a 95+ year old pilot flying the heck out of a super cub. (Retired airline pilot) good to know for planning purposes, not that I’m 70 yet, but hey I’d like to fly well after then if I can, better get lots of flying in while I’m still young-ish. Thanks Don, Blue.

Hi all. I have a good friend who flies a twin who said that his insurance went from around $5,000 yearly to over $35,000 yearly when he hit his 70th birthday with no medical changes. And with no guarantees or probabilities of a renewal. Has anyone of us Mooney drivers ever got that kind of insurance shock? im hoping that’s only for his airplane a complex pressurized twin and not for our Mooneys!

Holy moly you’re right. Just looked on controller and the Bravos are listing from $160k to $240k range, where as the ovations start at $220k to $406k. Really? https://www.controller.com/listings/search?Category=6&ModelGroup=OVATION|TLS%2FBRAVO&Manufacturer=MOONEY that last ovation is probably overpriced but wow, if you ever want to consider going faster, and can get appropriate training, would seem like Bravo might be a good buy right now.

Quite true all. When I was in your shoes, I wanted to buy an airplane that I could upgrade to my liking, that I would not want to trade for a new one in 3-5 years, as you don’t get back most of the money you spend on upgrades. That’s my Bravo. As long as you get an airplane that will accomplish your missions as you fly them, you should be good!

Haha I’m in that class for sure. I would NOT be interested in trading for a non turbo airplane. I love my Bravo and the multiple flight missions I can accomplish that I could not do with an Ovation. That said, I live in California where there are mountains to get over routinely, and love flying in the non congested flight levels , but I’ve lived in FL and realize there are NO mountains there so an ovation is not a bad choice if your flying is mostly in Florida and not traveling to mountainous terrain, or flying over 10k feet, and you will save money on fuel costs with a similar speed advantage at low altitudes less than 10k. It’s just that a Bravo is such a good deal nowadays in price compared to an Acclaim if you really want an airplane that you won’t need to trade up. Ok, I could go 10-15 knots faster in an Acclaim, but at a price increase of over 600k. If I win the lotto, I might think about upgrading to an Acclaim but if I was going to spend that kind of dough , I’d probably want a pressurized turbo airplane. So cannulas and masks work fine for me!

Went up with a CFI who didn't latch the door properly and came open in flight. Landed and shut it. Next time that happens (if it ever does), I think I would like to try the close door in flight as in the POH, slow down, open the side window, slip and close the door. That seems like that would work well. That wasn't one of the choices on your poll but wondered if anyone has done that can share if it's as easy as it sounds?

Trillian!

I purchased two Jupiter X5 electric bikes ( http://www.jupiterbike.com ) which I am thrilled with. They BOTH fit neatly folded into my baggage compartment, almost if they were made to fit. Can use it as a regular bike, or hybrid or full electric (which is really helpful on hills), and has a 30 mile range (more if you use more pedal power). They do make a Jupiter X7, which is larger, but does NOT fit through the baggage door or even passenger door well. But the X5 is perfect for our Mooneys. Eternal thanks to Phil @mooneyflyer who first told me about these awesome bikes.