Bob - S50

I'll add a couple comments about minimum sink best glide and give a reference. Minimum sink, which gives you maximum time before you hit the ground is Vy. Yes the same Vy as best climb. So if you want as much time as possible to prepare for landing then that's the best speed. Best glide is a little bit faster than Vy. So if you want to glide as far as you can, go a little faster than Vy. How much? Don't know, but not much. The POH for my J lists Vy at max gross as 88 KIAS at SL and best glide as 91 KIAS. Here's an article for you to read if you like: See How It Flies - John Denker

See my comments in blue above.

Look at it this way. Before you need the GI275 or G5 battery you have to lose your alternator and drain the ship's battery. When that happens you no longer have Nav, Comm, or transponder either. If you are VFR who cares? But if you are IMC, ATC can't see you, you can't squawk 7600 or 7700, you can't talk to anybody, and your only possible navigation source is your tablet. You have a lot bigger problems than being limited to an hour of battery life. And don't you heat the cabin which keeps the batteries warm?

Wait list is closed at PLU, no new sign ups. Short waitlist at S50 but probably a couple/few year wait. Might check TIW because there is no indication of how long the list is on the website.

The G5 can only work as an HSI for the KFC200, not an AI. The GI275 can be use as an AI and/ or HSI. You could install a dual GI275 and be compatible with the KFC200 and a future GFC500. No backup required but you could add a G5 if you wished.

We have the FuelStik Master too. I do not consider it inferior but rather superior. With that said, how long ago did you write? There are lots of companies that are slow to respond due to Covid and I suspect this is a one person company. If nothing else, you might try taking stick and end caps to Home Depot and see if you can find a piece of PVC pipe that might work. Might take a little modification work to get both caps to work but you never know.

As others have said, yes you will most likely be able to run LOP without GAMI injectors. We do in our '78 J.

Very common, at least for the IO360, to spit out anything over 6. At oil change we fill to 6. We keep two quarts of oil premixed with Camguard in 1/3 quart bottles than can added to the engine through the access door without needing a funnel. That also allows us to add oil before we need a full quart.

Which GPS do you have. It makes a difference. For our GTN650 we only buy the navigation database subscription every year. We MIGHT buy a one time update to the obstacles and safetaxi every few years. We also only buy the United States since none of us fly to Canada or Mexico. $299/year.

I generally agree that it is usually cheaper to buy an airplane equipped the way you like than it is to buy one that isn't and then do the upgrades. However, if the equipment is not quite what you want, it's cheaper to do it yourself. For example, if I was looking for an airplane I'd want a GTNxxx or Avidyne GPS. If the airplane had a GNSxxx, that's an expensive piece of equipment that I would not personally be happy with. While it is very capable, there are several features of the newer GPS units that make them much easier to use for IFR flights. In that case, I'd rather the airplane did not have a GPS at all so I could install what I want. Same with and engine monitor. While a JPI 700 would work, I'd rather have a 730 or better. I'd want ADS-B OUT and IN. So if someone installed a unit that paired with a 40 year old mode C transponder that only got me OUT, I would rather have no ADS-B so I could yank the old transponder and replace it with a GTX345 or equivalent. You have to know what your minimum standards are for your panel when looking at the installed equipment.

Ya, grammar and complete sentence construction is not always a given among aviators. I suspect what Jon meant to say was, "The engine ran very strongLY and THE AIRCRAFT trimmed out very well." Still looks like a pretty good value to me provided it doesn't have leaking tanks or corrosion and the W&B is accurate.

I think you would be happy with a J. Looking at what's available on Controller, many of them cost more than you want to spend. Some have horrible useful loads. ALWAYS ask about the useful load. I'm also not a fan of the '77 model because of the fuel selector location and the lever engine controls vs the push pull with vernier. Of those available on the site today, I'd look at this one: '78 J, $70k That would leave you with $55,000 for upgrades. Dual G5's and a 2 axis GFC500 autopilot should be less than $25,000. Add a GTN650, PMA 7000BT audio panel, and GTX345 ADS-B IN/OUT and you should be pretty close to your budget with a well equipped airplane. You might even be able to use dual GI275's instead but that would cost several thousand more. Or you might be able to include electric trim for another $2500 or so. Advertised as 1024lb useful load but I'd want to see the history of changes to the W&B sheets. And if it's correct, the engine has been changed from an A3B6D to a dual magneto A3B6 engine which is a plus in my book. That would make an upgrade to a SureFly electronic ignition possible when funds permit. Forgot to include, you need to include a good engine monitor to the installation too.

Yep, so that means just about any altitude you pick will be within a few minutes and a gallon or two fuel burn.

Don. I didn't intend to give the impression that I always go for speed. I was just responding to his question about saving time by going higher. Just tried to point out that higher is not necessarily faster. And of course, if you want to go higher for a better ride for the passengers then you have to consider whether or not they like sucking on a hose. If there are no smooth altitudes, I'll pick the best I can find and then slow down to minimize the size of the bumps. My priorities, in order, when picking an altitude: Don't hit the ground. No ice. Smooth ride. Flight time/fuel burn. My favorite choices are 3500 or 4500 for short flights and 7500 to 10500 for long flights.

Every model has a trade off distance for both time and fuel burn. For time. If I climb 1000', how long will it take me to do that and how much slower will I be going? If it takes 1 minute and I'm going 30 knots slower I'll be 1/2 mile behind the plane that stayed at the lower altitude. Can I make up that difference in the descent? Depends on how smooth the air is and how much bouncing around I'm willing to put up with. Let's say that yes I can. Climbing 1000' will gain me about 2 or 3 knots in a K. If I do that for 2 hours, I'll be 4 to 6 miles ahead at the end of 2 hours which will save me about 2 minutes. That's about 1 minute/hour of cruise for each 1000' of climb assuming the winds are the same (which they rarely are). Also, every 1000' I climb will increase the time/distance I spend climbing and descending and reduce the time I spend cruising. Therefore there will be a diminishing return as I go higher and higher. A 5 knot less favorable wind would wipe out any benefit of climbing. On the other hand a 5 knot more favorable wind would add to the advantage. So bottom line, I would pay more attention to wind direction and speed than planning on higher airspeed to save me time. For fuel. Each 1000' of climb cost you about .25 gallons. You won't make much of that up in the descent because there is a much larger increase in burn rate during the climb than there is a decrease in burn rate during the descent. How far can I fly on .25 gallons? About 4 miles. If my speed increases by 2 knots on the same burn by climbing, I'd need to spend 2 hours cruising to make up the difference. I've found, that for fuel, the break even point is about 300 NM. All other factors being equal, much less than 300 miles I want to stay as low as practical. Much beyond 300 miles, I want to go high.

Think about it. Up to about 5500 to 7500', depending on what RPM you use, both the J and K will have about the same cruise speed at a given power setting. However, the J will have a lower fuel flow because of the higher compression ratio of the engine. Above that, the J cruise speed will plateau and then slowly drop off. It plateaus, up to a point, because the indicated is slowly dropping, but the TAS increases with altitude for a given IAS. The K on the other hand will continue to gain another 2 or 3 knots for each 1000' climbed. So by 12,000' the K will probably be 10 to 15 knots faster than the J but will be burning, I'm guessing, 1.5 to 2 GPH more. In the climb the J will probably average 700 fpm to altitude while the K will maintain climb rate of 1100 fpm all the way up to 12,000'. So the K will get up to cruise speed 5 or 6 minutes sooner than the J. Since that's only about 30 or 40 knots faster than climb speed, it will only be about 3 or 4 miles ahead of the J when the J levels off. By the time you subtract climb and descent distance, we are talking about something around 2 hours of cruising. If the K is 15 knots faster it will have pulled away from the J by another 30 miles. At top of descent, that puts the K about 35 miles or so ahead of the J. It will take the J about 13 or 14 minutes to fly that far so that's all the time you save with the K. But the K will have burned 18 GPH all the way up to cruise altitude and probably about 10.5 GPH at cruise for 2 hours. The J will have burned an average of something closer to 15 GPH in the climb and 8.5 GPH at cruise. So the K should burn about 2 or 3 gallons more than the J. Your trade off is 2 or 3 gallons to save 13 or 14 minutes.

For our J our fixed costs have been about $8000 or $9000 per year. That's about $3000 for hangar, $3000 for annual, and $2000 for insurance plus some other small expenses. We save $30/hr for hour related expenses, so my operating cost is roughly $80/hr.

I'll take Willie at his word that if icing is a factor he'll take Southwest. I'd get the J unless you can find a smoking deal on a K. With you solo and even with full tanks, you will have a pretty nice climb rate in the J. Probably average 700 to 800 ft/min up to 10,000. Before you buy any Mooney, always ask about the useful load. I've seen J's as low as the low 800's and as high as a bit over 1000 lbs. K's are no better and maybe worse. Our J is 1003 lbs. With that said, using your numbers, for my J I would figure as follows. At 11,000', LOP, I'd figure on about 150 KTAS on about 8.5 GPH. At 12,000' I'd figure 150 KTAS on about 8.2 GPH. I think your K calculations must be off. While it might be a few minutes quicker because of the higher average climb rate and cruise speed, there is no way it can do that while burning less fuel than the J. On a 377 mile trip I wouldn't think the K would be no more than about 10 or 15 minutes quicker but burn a few extra gallons to do that. Looking at SkyVector, and using the route: CWARD2 SLI V459 LHS T259 AVE PXN6, that's 397 miles (20 miles further than you planned) and the highest MEA is 8800' so you could legally fly at 9000' and 10,000' (8500 and 9500 VFR). That would let you spend less time climbing and cruise a little faster. I'd figure 157 KTAS on 9.3 GPH. SkyVector (with my airplane's numbers) says that would take 2+37 (no wind) and burn 25.6 gallons. That includes 10 minutes and .5 gallons of padding I build into the assumptions. Assume the return trip would be similar that's 51.2 gallons and 5+14 round trip. Since the plane holds 64 gallons you could do the round trip and land at home with about 1+15 of fuel on board.

No.

The only thing I might say differently than what you've read above is that you may need to change your speeds for the pattern and landing. It all depends on how you fly your plane. I have no idea what speeds you normally fly. I adjust my speeds based on weight but I have no idea what you use. For ME (also a J), assuming you are only burning 5 gallons before the first landing, I would fly final at a target speed of 73 KIAS and about 85 on base. As others have said, expect a longer takeoff and landing roll. You'll have more energy to kill on landing not only because of the higher weight, but also because of the higher speed.

We just had ours changed a couple weeks ago. We had put a bit over 1000 hours on the plane since we changed it last time about 6 years ago. Hard buggers to find. Our MSC ordered them and it took a couple months to get them. Total cost, installed for us was about $1300.

TruTrack is independent of the AI so it doesn't matter what AI you have.

All you need is a single AI, a T&B or TC, plus a slip indicator. You may replace the T&B or TC with another AI as long as it has a different power source than the primary AI. A backup battery is considered a separate source. If you install two GI275's, you can remove the rest of the entire 6 pack.

I assume it was only a suggestion and did not affect the outcome of the exam. I'd fly the airplane in a manner that increases my odds of successfully finding and landing the hundreds or thousands of times that my engine does not fail, rather than the one time that it does fail. If I lose an engine in the soup, inside the FAF, a little extra drag from full flaps will be the least of my worries. The biggest argument for using less than full flaps until the runway in sight is to reduce the amount of pitch up caused by retracting flaps when you have to go missed approach. That's much more likely to happen than losing an engine.

Since you said you were looking for an early model J, for me personally, I would avoid the '77 model only because of the fuel selector placement.