gsxrpilot

PM sent.

If you'll put a City or Airport locator in your public profile, then I can add you to the MooneySpace Map and you can see who's in the area.

Very nice stable element. I was leading the element behind you. Pepper flew a perfect profile, exactly as briefed. So consequently my job was super easy bringing my element along 15 seconds in trail. You guys look great.

To add to what @Davidv said... He was watching the other plane as they were in formation, (the other a Cessna 182 shooting pictures of the Bo), this would have meant a couple of things.. They were slow, not a cruise speed at all, but slow to match the speed of the C182. We fly formation with the Mooneys at 115 or 120 knots. I'm sure they were slow as well. He wasn't aware of where he was in relation to the shore. The Lead plane is responsible for navigation. He admitted he wouldn't have been so low and far from shore if he'd been navigating. I'm sure it took a few seconds to realize what was happening, a few more to get oriented towards shore, a few more of disbelief, and now you've got 1500 out of your 3000 left to work with. That's the scenario that sounds plausible to me...

Obviously your plane your money. Having said that if I were looking at your plane 3-5 years from now, I wouldn't care about the paint or interior. If I'm paying for paint and interior, I'd rather pick out the colors myself. But I would care about that panel. So just me, but I'd spend the money on autopilot, WAAS GPS, Coms, and Engine monitor. Just my $0.02 My first choice for engine monitor would be the EDM-900 as it allows you to remove ALL factory engine gauges. It's once and done. No more engine gauge issues... like your Tach which reads 200 low. You could save about $2000 by going with an Insight G2. It will give you all the stuff you need in an engine monitor to log data, fly LOP, know fuel flow, etc. But it doesn't replace anything except your factory EGT and CHT gauges.

Done!

I certainly do have concerns about his decision making. But I've watched the video he did with Matt Guthmiller, and I've read everything he's posted on Beechtalk. He did say/write previously that next time he wouldn't take off with the debris in the fuel and he's also said that he would have life vests onboard next time. He also said that he never intended to be that low, and out of gliding distance from shore. He also said another place that he should have logged a few more hours in the plane that close to maintenance work. All of those indicate that he's learned quite a bit from the experience. We all (or at least me) make mistakes and often they look like completely bone head mistakes upon further review. The fact that he's young, a youtube content creator, prematurely successful entrepreneur, or has long hair, doesn't bother me at all. The truth is that I have a similar long and adrenaline filled resume. But I'm old and so it all predates youtube, Instagram, and quality video cameras in every pocket. Since it seems we're based at the same airport, BJC, I'll likely meet the guy one of these days, and I'd likely fly with him. I might convince him to go up with me and learn some proper formation flying procedures, which would have possibly solved the one problem of being too low and too far away from shore.

This little guy is my attempt to express "tongue in cheek", a wink, and all those things that get missed in this type of written online exchange. And partially because I've been getting so much shit from the community over the MooneyCaravan and formation flying.

I attended the APS course in Ada, OK. It was interesting the conversation in that course about Mike's theory and process. They said that Mike had actually been to Ada and sat through the APS course three times. And that they are all good friend with Mike and communicate regularly. And while they agreed that high CHT's are problematic and should be avoided, they disagree with Mike that an engine can be safely and reliably flown off CHT's or TIT's for turbos. And they gave several reasons for this. One thought is that Mike is trying, rightfully, to make these concepts as easy as possible so that everyone can easily understand and follow. But he might have "dumbed it down" a bit too much. And unnecessarily so. It's been a while since I've flow a NA engine, but with my turbo engine, I could easily fly it with low CHT's but still be burning through cylinders. The 252 cools so well that keeping CHT's down is easy. But "most" turbo engines don't make TBO without cylinders. I believe that by flying based on %HP and degrees LOP or ROP, (staying outside the Red Box or Red Fin) I've been able to maintain a good running engine to near TBO without any cylinder work. Fingers crossed...

Fixed it for you...

Yes! Whatever you do, don't pay retail. Mr. Fox, Barnstormers @AvionicsSource Beechtalk Ebay There are ways to do it cheaper...

I've flown into Kalispel, (Glacier Park) in my M20C. It's a super easy airport in a huge valley with lots of room. I certainly wouldn't land short and drive. Stay nice and high in your J and you'll be fine. You'll only be over the mountains for about 10 minutes and the view is spectacular. The highest peaks on that route are only in the 9000 ft range. So even at 12,000 you'll be plenty clear of everything. In fact, you'll be on descent into Kalispel before you know it. I'd be tempted to cancel IFR around CTB and go the rest of the way with Flight Following. That way you have more freedom to go where you want to go. Don't miss those views from the air. And Kalispel is a really good airport.

I'd fly with him in a minute. But then I live a dangerous lifestyle also. I fly formation with other dangerous pilots.

I always say I wouldn't fly without an engine monitor. And this case is no different. It would be my first upgrade. But as the panel needs so much I'd seriously consider an Insight G2 instead of a JPI. It would cover CHT/EGT, LOP, FuelFlow, data logging and a few other things, but wouldn't replace all your engine gauges. But it's cheap. Of course for the extra $40K or even $30K you could probably fly an F that has all the work already done.

Nope. When I attended the APS class in Ada, OK a few years ago... they were going through the whole process on the whiteboard from takeoff, climb, level off, and cruise. It included setting takeoff power, leaning in the climb, setting cruise power and finally, going to LOP. It was all for NA engines. I put up my hand and asked if they'd go over the same for turbo engines. George just went to the whiteboard and erased everything between takeoff power and setting LOP at cruise altitude. He said, "that's all do you with the turbo". At the end of the runway, push everything forward. Sit back and relax for the next 20 or 30 minutes, put on the O2, and wait to level off somewhere in the flight levels. Then pull back to LOP and settle in for the trip.

Yes I did. But I would try to err on the side of too rich during the climb. I would often have a hot cylinder or two during the climb, so I'd drop the RPM to about 2600 and run a little richer in the climb. But still leaning during the climb.

I'll take the: Mooney compatible APU plug with battery cables and clamps 28V Battery Minder But I have no idea what to offer... give me a hint? :-)

I update my log book, (ForeFlight) once a quarter or so. I just can't seem to be bothered to do it any more often. I just use either what ForeFlight recorded for me automatically or I cross reference with my JPI data on SavvyAnalysis. The JPI data is my source of truth as I often forget about flights I might have made and left the iPad at home, or ForeFlight didn't get it for some reason. I know, terrible record keeping....

Your map, you make the rules.

This entire thread has descended into Q like conspiracy theories. I'm out.

All you old farts need to try a little harder to keep up. It's the 21st century and everyone is carrying a still and video camera in their pocket, of better quality than cameras that cost more than your Mooney did just 20 years ago. Kids these days know how to use them as well. And why not. This might be different if he were filming instead of running through a check list after the engine quit. But once in the water, filming the situation probably was a very welcome distraction from the cold water, jellyfish stingers, etc. I for one, can't find any fault with the recording of the event and the ordeal. There are certainly lessons to be learned and visuals to go along with it. That's good for all of us. Oh and by the way, posting videos on Youtube is a real career these days and can pay more than most of us have ever or will ever earn.

+1 for JD at 84R My 252 is going to JD for it's annual this month. From Denver. Houston is a lot closer.

Good job researching... I wouldn't trust that engine. I know, free country and all that, but it's a damn shame to let such a nice airplane just go to waste like that. I hope I have the good sense not to let the same happen to my Mooney. I should give someone power of attorney where if my flying ever drops below 100 hours per year, they have authority to make someone else a set of keys, just to keep it flying. Someone, maybe Derek, with deep enough pockets should buy that plane, hang a new engine on the nose and put $50K into the panel. You'd have to fly it for 10 years and you'd only get half of that money back, but you'd enjoy the hell out of that airplane.

Because we can. I made money on my M20C and would make money on the M20K if I sold it today. A C172 might be a different story as there are so many of them and they are still making them, or were making them. You can't buy a short or mid-body Mooney brand new anymore. And they are arguably more desirable than the long bodies. So buy right and you can maintain or even increase the investment.

I'm not sure the seats could be changed or retrofitted. But the removable back seats are a VERY nice feature. Especially if you don't often have people in the back seats. There are a few other things like the wing tips that could probably be added later. I think LASAR makes a kit. It's still a J, just not one of the most desirable years of the J.