IvanP

If it gets scrapped by the insurance, you may have the opportunity to bid on it at auction.

Cabin door seal can also play role in this. I had a bit of a gap on the top of my door and had the same issue with my CO monitor. In climb the monitor would show increased CO levels. Seems that he gap would create airflow from bottom up and brought some exhaust gases in the cabin. Closing the door gap and fully opening the top air vents for T/O and climb to direct airflow from top to bottom improved the situation. I still get a small increase on the CO monitor but not much.

Yes. GTN 750 works with KI 252 HSI for LPV GPS approaches. I have this setup in my Bravo and it works well. The glidelsope indicator behaves the same way for LPV GPS approach as in ILS. In fact, the GTN 750 can output vertical guidance on the HSI for visual approach as well if you want. I do not know what interface the setup uses betwhee teh GTN and KI, it came with the plane when I bought it couple years ago, but I can attest that it works. Teh GTN will also drive the KFC 150 for coupled approaches with lateral and vertical guidance.

This is an old incident that was discussed here some time ago...

Not necessarily. Years ago, shortly after I transitioned to Mooney, I almost landed gear up in my E. Interesting chain of events that led to this almost mishap. Got cleared to land at a busy Class D airport with parallel runways, was on short final and heard the controller cleared another plane for takeoff on the same runway and saw the waiting plane moving. Went around, rather rattled, claned up the plane and had to fly large pattern for traffic. Got cleared to land, but in my rattled state of mind I did not put the gear down. Just as I flared few feet above ground, the gear warning horn blaring finally registered in my brain and I realized that the gear was still up. Poured coals on it and went around again for a decent landing. Notwithstanding the controller's screw-up, I can only blame myself for this as I failed to regain composure before coming back after the first goaround. Very valuable, and fortunately cheap lesson as no metal got bent and only my ego was bruised.

Hector at Aero COmfort can make a custom cover for you as well. Mine were messed up when I sent my yokes in and he relaced them.

The microswitches that were in my yoke when I took it apart were labeled: ISXI-T MS24547-1. Multiple sources (Online COmponents, TTI, etc.) and relatively cheap (~ $10-15) This is for KFC150, but I believe that the same trim switch was used for KFC150 and 225. It may also be the spring in the assembly that is tired and causing the switch to stick. Be careful when pushing out the pins to release the springs.

Hector at Aero Comfort did this for my yokes 2 years ago. Very happy with his work. Around 1 AMU if I recall correctly.

Grind it to a halt. Once the prop hits the ground, I am not taking chances.

It probably balanced the plane nicely. I almost bought a Rocket couple of years ago, but the deal fell through and I ended up with a Bravo. While I liked the Rocket, I really like the way the longer body feels.

Speedbrakes on my Bravo are my friend if I need to slow down fast while maintainig sufficient MP to avoid shock cooling. VLO on Bravo is 140kts, VFE is 110kts. In most cases I can slow her down to 120 kts even without the speedbrakes while maintaing about 20in MP. Gear down at about 120, then add flaps at 100 or so when turning base or just before FAF if flying instruent approach. If steep descent is needed, then speedbrakes first, gear down at 120 and flaps at 100.

Was this weight added after the batteries were relocated to the tail section? I flew a Rocket that had both bateries far aft in the tail couple of times and it felt a bit nose heavy with just one person in it, but overall a nice flying machine. I do not think that teh owner added any more weight after relocating the batteries. Accessing the batteries was a different story .

Valid point on the accident prevention. However, short of some severe instance of disorientation of the pilot flying and the aircraft approaching dangerous attitude, accident prevention in IFR practice flight in VFR conditions can be accomplished by simply communicating the need for action and/or removing the view limiting device. Fighting over the controls is more likely to cause problem than to solve it. I have acted as a safety pilot for others and, in some instances had to intervene to maintain safety of the flight, but I limited the intervention to verbal alert to correct attitude, heading, etc.. Unless previouly agreed upon, I would never tamper with the aircraft systems as a safety pilot. The DCA situation may have been different if it was instructional flight. The instructor arguably had the responsibility to take over, but I do not believe that the comparison is appropriate here.

I think it may have something to do with common courtesy. When I am a guest in someone else's plane/boat/car, I do not manipulate the controls or systems without prior permission and I would expect the same courtesy from those riding in my conveyances. Even on training flights with CFI, I set clear limits on what they can do in my plane. You may feel differently and that is your prerogative, but do not be surprised when someone voices disapproval of your actions. Granted, your colleague probably did not have to respond as angrily as you described, but that was his choice.

Yes, you are correct about safety pilot being a requried crew member on IFR simulation fligts [14 CFR 91.109]. However, the regulation does not vest the safety pilot with the authority to tamper with or disable aircraft systems without the consent of the PIC who is the final authority as to the operation of the aircaft [14 CFR 91.3]. The PIC has the authority to set forth the duties and permitted activities of persons on board of aircraft. As such, I prohibit my safety pilot from manipulating the controls and switches unless we agree that training will be conducted that may involve simulated failures of various systems and the safety pilot is closely familiar with the systems in my aircraft. Perhaps I should have been more precise in my prior post.

While the training value of the unexpected "failure" of the AP during the practice flight cannot be denied, I believe that safety pilot should not interfere with the aircraft systems without prior consent of the pilot. Your intentions to enhance the training experience of your colleague may have been good, but your actions agruably crossed the line if you have not discussed with the pilot in advance that you would engage in such simulations. Unless I am on a training or proficiency check flight with an instructor or examination with DPE, the person in the right seat is a passenger, no matter how experienced they may be and how many rating they may hold. Part of my pre-flight passenger briefing is - "Do not touch any controls or switches unless I tell you to or become incapacitated" and I expect my passengers to follow this to the letter.

Should not be happening with 2 year old battery. Try to charge it with teh G5 off and see what happens, but the battery may be gone. They are not cheap. I recall that some G5s had an issue with power down. The unit looked like it was off, but it was not (close look at the display in a dark hangar revealed that the unit did not completely shit down - different "shade" of black on the display). Holding down the power button for 3 secs turned it off if I recall correctly. I do not have G5 any more, so my recollection may be a bit off here.

Definitely not normal to have the battery self-discharge from fully charged state to 1% in 3 months if the instrument was off. How old is the battery? I had 2 G5s in my previous plane that was sometimes siting for 2-3 months due to weather and work schedule. When returning the pane back to service after 2-3 months, I never saw less than 50% charge on the G5 batteries on start up. Few hours of flying and batteies were back to full charge. Turning the master on for couple of hours is probably not going to hurt anything. Just pull CBs on everything else in the plane that may be on with master so you do not run down you main battery (battrery minder helps if you have one).

Autopilots can fail just as any other piece of equipment. I like the convenience of having A/P available, but prefer to hand fly the approaches. My equipment is not even close to the latest and greatest out there and by being proficient at hand flying approaches I am ready and not dependent on A/P if/when it fails. I did my instrument training and rating in a plane that did not have A/P, so there was no A/P reliance factor involved. After I bought my own plane with A/P in it, I made it a point to split practie approaches evenly between hand flying and A/P to be prepared for either option. Setting up the A/P for coupled approach also requires practice (some systems are less intuitive than others). When flying IFR in busy airspace, it is not a good time for trying to figure out how to set A/P for approach. I mostly use A/P on long cross country flights to avoid fatigue.

Yes, more of the same stuff that we have seen. Kind of like some computer software companies approach - "this is not a problem, it is a feature of the program". George was trying really hard to convince everyone that swelling of o-rings is actually good for the fuel systems. Then why would the various manufacturers go to such great lengths to actually specify permitted variations of o-rings? My hope is that we will be given a choice of what UL fuel to purchase for our planes, rather than being forced to buy stuff that causes damage. For so long as other options are available I am not putting this stuff in my plane.

Thanks for sharing the story. Enjoy your new toy in good health.

Maybe the powers to be are taking the position that few folks crashing their little annoying airplanes does not matter because we are saving the entire planet from slow and painful death caused by lead emissions from 100LL. Sarcasm off... On a more serious note, what would be the result of o-ring failure in the Cessna fuel selector that Mike had shown in his video? I am not familiar with that design. would it cause massive leak and possibly fuel starvation or fire?

Amen to that. I recall flying practice approaches with a friend some years ago. Intercepted localizer and glideslope on what appeared to be a "perfect" ILS approach only to have the engine sputter on short final. Quick switch to the other tank fixed it, but the "perfect" approach was totally ruined by the pucker factor. We refueled and one tank was completely dry. "Never Again" story that we are both lucky to be alive to tell. Not much time to fiddle with fuel switch this close to the ground.

The electronic indictors have a small potentiometer that can be adjusted to show the correct travel. Check page 27-40-02 of the IPC. This assembly is in the tail of the plane so if only avionics were worked on it should not have been be disturbed, but it may be worth checking. It is also possible that the indicator itself is malfunctioning. The indicator is one box for both trim and flap indication. Check the plug on the back if it is secured. When you are running through the trim range, does the indicator stop changing while the trim is still running?

Good idea. Do you by chance know the specs for the O-ring. I could not find it in the IPC or MM. Thanks.