Corvus

I agree to a point, but the reason I bring this up is if you bought your C E or F, to meet your mission goals, you know that a vintage aircraft can be had for a good price, but we sign the paper knowing that price is partly due to living under the shadow of the mighty J. So if you decide to spend the money to turn your vintage aircraft into a modern avionics showcase, you will reach a total investment point where you would saturate the investment in the aircraft (quickly) to the point where you would be money ahead selling your current aircraft and adding the upgrade funds to buy a nice J with the same avionics you would have purchased for your current airplane.

That's not to say its a bad idea to upgrade, provided it is approached with the mindset that matches the airplane.

Hey guys I am looking for a set of decent yokes for my 74 F. I have the PC system and want the yokes with the cut off switch located in the pilots side yoke.

While any decent set would work,

I would be very interested in a set that has PTT switches installed.

I like the GTX330 as well and it would certainly be high on the list of options to consider. Is it the only unit that will interface with the 430?

I like Garmin stuff, I bring up other ideas for two reasons.

1.) Garmin has become the 800 lb gorilla and there are elements of railroading customers into what appears to be a planned obsolesce business model. If I am not mistaken there is a population of G1000 systems out there that are stuck in unsupported purgatory. Another example is requiring new racks for panel mount units if you want to upgrade to the current Gen stuff, that is of course a small part of the price when upgrading, but all the same, it says a lot about the thier state of mind IMO. That puts a little bit of a bad taste in my mouth.

2.) (theoretically speaking) Other manufactures have had time to come up with competing systems that need to offer something above the Garmin product to pull people away from them into their product lines. It is going to take a strong product and a strong price point to do so. I am about as loyal to Garmin as they are to me.

The KT74 is an intriguing idea...

The plane is equipped with a GNS430, KX-155 KN-64 KT76A

Like I had said, I am not interested in a major refit, I have no plans as of now, just merely entertaining the conversation My apologies for being a little vague, I was mainly gauging thoughts on the AXP340 as a replacement for the KT76A, but didn't want to limit thought input to just that alone if someone saw a valid reason to bring up something related.

@cruiser that is an interesting point, I haven't really kept up on the details of the pending changes, or how deep the potential impact will be when things flesh out.

Hey guys I was looking to see what your thoughts were on upgrades for the vintage aircraft. I'm looking at about 5 years of ownership of this aircraft and then moving up. So going for a G500 is a bit silly. But on the other side of the coin, I like the idea of getting rid of my KT76A and maybe killing two birds with one stone and spending the money once to meet ADSB compliance. Anyone have any experience of thoughts on the new avidyne systems? They seem to be taking advantage of garmins planned obsolescence. ie. the IFD440 slides right into the same exact slot as a GNS430, where as the New 650 requires a new rack etc.

Thanks for the input, charging system is functioning and aircraft cranks strong after a few days of sitting. So the big stuff seems to be in order. Plane has logged another 10 or so hrs since I posted this without further incident, so knock on wood, maybe the door wasn't completely latched and it went unnoticed.

Low as in it has enough power to do preflight checks, but once the starter is engaged, there isn't sufficient power to engage the starter. I mention it being low as opposed to dead because I am in agreement, it wasn't charged on the previous flight, or something is slowly draining it. I haven't checked the interior lights, but are they always hot?

A few weeks ago, I had a "low battery" out of the blue. I gave the go ahead to replace the battery as I am not one to mess around with a battery in marginal health, even it the battery is not the direct cause. That seemed to take care of the issue. The plane went into annual and was test flown about a week ago by the previous owner after the annual. Everything went fine and it was returned to service.

I went to fly it yesterday and once again the low battery showed up again.

It's a bit of a challenge to figure out common factors as the plane is flown by several different people.

Anyone have any experience with a slow drain?

Aircraft is a 1974 M20F

I would think the level playing field idea is a good idea. otherwise I could see this spiraling into pulling all of the seats out except the pilot seat, adding weight as far back as possible to get the CG pushed aft and numerous other little tricks.

How far are you racing? Or are you just going to get up into cruise flight side by side and push all the money knobs forward and lean for best power?

I was taught that the pro's clean up the airplane once off the runway.

I cycle the flaps down on preflight to listen to the motor and mechanism, for straining, binding, jumping etc. and I leave them down for passenger loading to keep them from getting stepped on.

I came across this and it reminded me of this thread.

http://www.iconaircraft.com/video-icon-aircraft-a5-angle-of-attack.html

Very sad, based out of my home airport. Thoughts and prayers.

Yeah, we get to keep the Mooneys. This being a mooney site and all, which sourrounds an airframe that gets a tremendous amount of performance and value out of modest specifications, I wanted to keep that sort of spirit here. So, part of the 12 foot rule "may " have been selected based on the idea of keeping the faster cabin class aircraft from pushing the mooney out on the ramp. I know, shameless.

1.) Acclaim type S FIKI, long range tanks, and since we are dreaming a useful load of 1600lbs.

2.) Maule M-7 on tundra tires.

3.) Extra 300

4.) Lake Turbo renegade with reversable prop.

5.) Nemisis NXT

Honorable mentions: Riley rocket 310, modern cub(cub crafters or carbon cub), Agusta A109 Grand New

The lake sounds like something else, thank you for sharing. I didn't know that they had that bad of a glide ratio, but I guess that makes sense upon actually thinking about it. It kind of reminds me of a joke about the Schweitzer 300 "The helicopter comes from the factory with a brick, part number and all, but it's not called a brick on the parts sheet, it is called the emergency deployable autorotation glide path calculator."

The 12 foot height rule was just sort of to keep things interesting and in check in a slightly unusual way. Other wise we would eventually end up with a list that included a BBJ and a space shuttle. Which would be a little boring. And being that a good time is being had by all and it is interesting lets just say, bonus points if you can fit it in the hanger.

I have about 1500 hours in the bell 206 series, nothing autorotates like one, in fact some of the most fun I have had was doing "splash downs" (full down auto rotations) to the water in a fixed float 206. Then there is the 407... Although it is built on the 206 type certificate, it's in a league by itself and describing flying one can only be really truly done using extremely crude language in sentences that sound like they were constructed in the mind of a 5 year old on a sugar high.

And I checked out the antilles super goose. WOW, that thing is cooler that the other side of the pillow.

I have got it pretty bad for the Lake amphibians, I would love a pirep on your buccaneer.

This is based on a conversation I had recently with someone who was big into bicycles and they stated that every enthusiast really needs 5 different bikes. A cruiser, an XC mountain bike, a road bike, a downhill bike and so on.(I forget the last one stated) my mind wandered and I wondered of this was also true of aircraft. Obviously not, given cost considerations and reasons for owning aircraft, but lets say the costs were set aside and you had a big hanger that could fit 5 sort of GA sized aircraft, and you have access to a nice long runway. What would your (up to)5 be? Oh and just to make it interesting, they must be hangered and strangely enough, the hanger can only accommodate up to 12 foot tall aircraft. shucks.

I haven't had any issues with oil temps either with my stock oil cooler location, but I am a fan of the relocation for effeciency and protection. I really like the idea of the second light in its place. I'm not OCD, but I like the redundancy, the extra illumination, and to be honest there is a a nice esthetic quality to the symmetrical landing light arrangement.

I am envious of that second landing light /oil cooler relocation.

My F is based out of Palo Alto.

My intent with the limitations was not to keep it from being futuristic or exciting. It was just to keep it more of a fun thought exercise that would engage minds a little more than simply saying you would want an acclaim or a TBM 850. And also to keep it from turning into a bogus airplane that is outside of the realm of "reasonable" reality. ie 2500 lb useful load, 500 knot cruise on 3 gallons an hour.

I wanted to have a little fun and see what your ultimate mooney looked like. Maybe a few rules to keep it sane. Basically we are talking about this plane plopping itself in front of you. Now with that being said, you gotta still pay to maintain it. And let's keep the world of physics in check. for example, a useful load of 2500lbs....well...that's gonna be a stretch, but if you think it realistic, say at STC to approve the MGW up a little. Maybe your ultimate mooney has an STC/kit for a second cockpit door. Maybe you want a manual E model with all the speed mods and a G500. Maybe you want a Rocket with FIKI....you get the idea.

Have fun, go nuts.

If it is worth any clarification, a second pilot is typically required to help manage the aircraft, there are a lot of cockpit chores on a big aircraft. Is a second pilot part of the the decision making? Absolutely. But as was pointed out just because someone is there doesn't improve safety by virtue of their presence. The rest of the system of dispatchers and maintenance personal are as much in place to help expedite operations as they are to make it safer. At the end of the day it's the pilot(s) that make all of the safety of flight decisions.

 

• Part 135 is riddled with procedures , and the feds are all over you , the currency standards are unbelievably rigid , and for the most part an ATP is the price of admission.....Aside from bernullis principle , there are no similarities.......

 

the US part 91 pilot enjoys a lot of freedom and tend to use the full operational envelope that is given to him. Sometimes venturing outside of that envelope. 

 

The employer of the part 121/135 pilot imposes a much smaller envelope and a second pilot is most of the time there to be a cop. just in case..

haha, good one

3. Strive to manage workload and be ahead of the aircraft- Set things up well in advance, and do it when your workload is lower. If you start cramming in cockpit chores that you could have had done, you lose situational awareness. which is often attributed the start of the chain of events that lead to an accident. the farther ahead you can be, generally the better.

4. fly conservatively and make conservative decisions- It may be a common misconception that professional pilots are the sky equivalent to race car drivers, capable of routinely pushing thier machine to the limits all in the name of profits, but I think the average guy would be surprised at how conservative and methodical things are on a professional flight deck. Weather radar is used to avoid things by a healthy margin, not to see how close you can get. Use what resources you have accordingly. the best philosophy is avoidance of bad weather. The most conservative decision is the best one. If you have to fly at night

5. Practice flying the same way everytime, all the way.- when you go out and practice traffic patterns or approaches, they should be dead standard. Fly the full approach at the speed you would fly it were real. A lot of guys rush around, bouncing from approach to approach for practice, this leads to cutting corners and an inaccurate mental picture of how the approach should go.

6. It is asinine to fly airplanes without an Instrument rating- Probably not a real common problem here on mooneyspace given the mission profile of the plane, I would expect the majority here have instrument ratings but if you dont have one, before you do anything else, go out and get one and commit to using it frequently. Having it "just in case" and then only getting recurrent on an IPC ride is unwise. it is very dangerous, because a pilot can think they can rely on it to get them out of a jam, and in all reality they are in no position to be using it at that point, they are perishable skills. again probably more advise for the guys who fly brand C and P on the weekends to go get a hamburger, but all the same, it applies.  

7 Train and practice- as mentioned currency is big. Basic airman-ship is important, don't let the autopilot do everything for you, handfly often, those skills are also very perishable. Fly conservatively in the traffic pattern, and hold yourself to a high standard. Fly with a CFI every now and then who you trust. You may have developed some little habit pattern that needs correcting. Good airmanship leads to being able to do what you should be doing in terms of maintaining situational awareness, by being "outside of the airplane in VFR weather and being able to plan well ahead in IFR weather, becuase managing the aircraft is second nature.