Deb

Some ideas here:

14 CFR § 21.9 Replacement and modification articles. (a) If a person knows, or should know, that a replacement or modification article is reasonably likely to be installed on a type-certificated product, the person may not produce that article unless it is - (1) Produced under a type certificate; (2) Produced under an FAAproduction approval; (3) A standard part (such as a nut or bolt) manufactured in compliance with a government or established industry specification; (4) A commercial part as defined in § 21.1 of this part; (5) Produced by an owner or operator for maintaining or altering that owner or operator's product; (6) Fabricated by an appropriately rated certificate holder with a quality system, and consumed in the repair or alteration of a product or article in accordance with part 43 of this chapter; or (7) Produced in any other manner approved by the FAA. (b) Except as provided in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(2) of this section, a person who produces a replacement or modification article for sale may not represent that part as suitable for installation on a type-certificated product. (c) Except as provided in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(2) of this section, a person may not sell or represent an article as suitable for installation on an aircraft type-certificated under §§ 21.25(a)(2) or 21.27 unless that article - (1) Was declared surplus by the U.S. Armed Forces, and (2) Was intended for use on that aircraft model by the U.S. Armed Forces. FAA Legal Interpretation: Byrne Memorandum on owner produced parts: http://www.velocolutions.com/FAA-owner-manufactured-part.pdf AC 23-28: https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/advisory_circular/ac_23-27.pdf Some other articles/summaries: https://www.csobeech.com/files/FAA-OwnerProducedParts-DonDodge.pdf https://www.aviationpros.com/home/article/10387511/owner-produced-parts-how-they-affect-maintenance https://www.cessnaflyer.org/maintenance-tech/item/984-owner-produced-parts-regulations-interpretations-and-applications.html

You left out great guys and awesome mechanics.

Awesome work Patrick, thanks!

The preliminary NTSB report has been released https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/104442/pdf.

Terrific video with great learning points! Thanks for taking the time to make such an excellent video.

Oasis Aero in Willmar, MN is a top Mooney Service Center (320-214-9669); Eric Rudningen is a terrific A&P IA and a great guy. You can’t do better. We fly from South Florida to Willmar for our annuals.

The factory started manufacturing WAAS G1000 Mooneys sometime in mid-late 2007. There were a few GFC 700 non-WAAS airframes produced; all the S-Tec G1000 Mooneys were originally non-WAAS. The Bravos were all initially non-WAAS. Some of the early 2007 Acclaims were non-WAAS, but almost all of them in the US were upgraded to WAAS. The surest way to tell if if a G1000 Mooney is WAAS is to remove the avionics bay panel on the pilot’s side of the fuselage and look at the part number of of the GIA units; the GIA 63 (non-WAAS) is p/n 011-00781-00 and the WAAS GIA 63W is p/n 011-01105-01 or -20.

Apparently there’s a bit more to the story (from Avweb dated April 23) https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/bridge-stunt-leads-to-ads-b-revocation/: But a coincidental malfunction of her Cessna 180’s transponder with ADS-B-Out may have resulted in her being slapped with an emergency revocation of all her certificates instead of the suspension that normally accompanies such transgressions. Lunken said that after she’d crossed flying under a bridge from her bucket list she headed home and checked in with Cincinnati Approach and was told her transponder was off. She said she reset it and set a new code and it resumed working. In their subsequent investigation, FAA officials determined that she’d shut it off on purpose to stop the system from tracking her while she threw caution to the wind. Lunken, a longtime former FAA safety inspector and veteran flight instructor, vehemently denies the charge. “I know what I did in that cockpit and I did not turn it off,” she said. The agency used a new section of its Legal Enforcement Actions guidebook for FAA staff, which calls for revocation of a certificate for “operating an aircraft without activated transponder or ADS-B Out transmission (except as provided in 14 C.F.R. § 91.225(f)) for purposes of evading detection.” The section was added in a package of other amendments in January of 2020, just after ADS-B became mandatory in most controlled airspace and about two months before Lunken’s flight of fancy. The section is on page 9-14 at the bottom. Lunken said she took the 180 to her avionics tech, who said the transponder seemed to be loose in its mount when he took it out. It tested fine on the bench and after it was re-installed. The FAA interviewed the tech. Lunken said the tech was unable to tell them whether the device was malfunctioning during the flight. She said now it’s her word against the FAA’s on whether the intermittent ADS-B Out signal was a malfunction or a crime. She said radar tracks that were part of the evidence against her showed the ADS-B signal from her aircraft to be intermittent. She speculates she jarred the connections loose during a few bone-jarring landings in gusty crosswinds. “I had made several rather brutal landings at OH77 (the 32’ wide, concrete, crosswind strip just north of the bridge) and it was bumpy at low levels,” she said. “I did not turn it off.” In addition to the article @Hanklinked (https://www.flyingmag.com/unusual-attitudes-no-excuses-screw-up/), two months later Martha detailed the events leading to the loss of her DPE here https://www.flyingmag.com/unusual-attitudes-another-screw-up/.

It would appear as if at least one person from Mooney is an avid Mooneyspace follower !

Patrick (@patrickf) created an app for the Ovation which does exactly what you’re asking for. It’s a real tour de force. Here’s a link to the thread: https://mooneyspace.com/topic/27815-ovation-performance-charts-in-xl/?tab=comments#comment-458890 and a link to the app: https://oaa.app.link/Wbv8GfTJ6Q. This link might require the app Open as App.

We just spoke with Shana at Mooney and she said that Mooney was in between website providers.

This might be “clickbait.” From the site: THIS IS AN ADVERTISEMENT AND NOT AN ACTUAL NEWS ARTICLE, BLOG, OR CONSUMER PROTECTION UPDATE THE STORY DEPICTED ON THIS SITE AND THE PERSON DEPICTED IN THE STORY ARE NOT ACTUAL NEWS. RATHER, THIS STORY IS BASED ON THE RESULTS THAT SOME PEOPLE WHO HAVE USED THESE PRODUCTS HAVE ACHIEVED. THE RESULTS PORTRAYED IN THE STORY AND IN THE COMMENTS ARE ILLUSTRATIVE, AND MAY NOT BE THE RESULTS THAT YOU ACHIEVE WITH THESE PRODUCTS. THIS PAGE COULD RECEIVE COMPENSATION FOR CLICKS ON OR PURCHASE OF PRODUCTS FEATURED ON THIS SITE.

From https://www.aviationconsumer.com/uncategorized/ppl-training-courses-sportys-mzeroa-top/: An Easy Win Of the courses we reviewed, our top pick is the $199 Sporty’s Learn to Fly Course. Its content is engaging, intuitive, highly portable and provides the greatest number of study options for all aspects of initial training. MzeroA gets an honorable mention for its unique approach to learning, its robust content and its interactive style.

From Section II Limitations of the Ovation 2 GX AFM (original release 12-11-07): FUEL LIMITATIONS -WARNING- Takeoff maneuvers when the selected fuel tank contains less than 12 gallons (45.4 liters) of fuel have not been demonstrated.