StevenL757

@Robert C., there’s no reason to give up. This can be solved without pouring a ton of money. I had the same issue with my previous engine. The SID 97-3F fixed it 100%.

I'll assume by "annual costs", you mean "annual operating costs". From my standpoint...putting 150-200 hours per year on my Ovation and owning for the last 10+ years, here's a breakdown... Depending on the condition of the airplane when you first purchase it, plan on $5,000 - $7,000 for your first annual. After that, and depending on what needs done every year, my annual inspections have dropped to, and remained, around $3,000 to $4,000 yearly. I take several days off every year to do an owner-assisted annual. To this date, I do around 70% of the annual under my IA's watchful eye. You'd be surprised how much you can learn Given I accomplish all the "red" (airworthy) and "yellow" (recommended/proactive) items every annual, I have little to no MX issues throughout the year...barring anything that happens to come up. That allows me to spend only on the "green" stuff (desirable, but least-important...lighting upgrades, paint touch-ups, cosmetic stuff, etc.) throughout the year TKS adds little to nothing on a yearly basis as long as you exercise the system every 30 days per the book. If, however, any pumps needs repairing or replacing, add that to your annual list. I don't have A/C on my airplane, so can't comment there Oxygen hydrostatic testing on the kevlar bottles is roughly $500 every 5 years. A new kevlar bottle every 15 years (they go EOSL at 15 years) runs anywhere from $1600 to $2400 depending on where you procure the bottle I won't comment on any loan payment you may or may not have, but for hangarage I spend $725 monthly for a non-heated "T" with electricity. My yearly insurance is under $2500 for a $280k hull value with a $1MM smooth limit through a top underwriter Add AVGAS costs for between 150 and 200 flight hours to the numbers Given your last paragraph, I would still build some contingency into the numbers I gave you. Although my airplane is pristine - inside and out (as well as the engine) - my IA and I can ALWAYS find things to put on the list, so make sure you build in extra each year...and throughout the year. Pretty generic information I know, but let me know if this is helpful. Steve

Exactly right. It's not an abnormal condition...simply a by-product of moving some lights in your airplane to LED. I believe there's a resistor (?) that can be added behind the annunciator panel to alleviate the condition. Personally, I chose not to implement it, as it really is a non-issue for me. Others' mileage may vary...

If anyone knows of other groups to which we could get the word out about this, I'm happy for the input and the help. Looks like we have 13 positive replies so far...26 lights total...and I'm guessing Whelen will want a significantly higher number. Thanks everyone...

I’m not on Facebook or other social media, but if you are, you’re welcome to share it. Steve

Not sure, but would be good to know. If you or anyone else has a presence on that or any other forum, it would be worth polling them also. Steve

All, Many of us having the below Whelen Model 70303 recognition lights installed on our airplanes have expressed interest in an LED replacement. To date, Whelen (nor any other vendor that I’m aware of) has been able to offer such a light. Although these forward-mounted wingtip lights are not part of an FAA-approved anti-collision system, they do serve a valuable purpose, and admit they look pretty cool too. The existing lights have a nasty habit of burning holes in the plexiglas covers; which, as we know, aren’t cheap to replace. Raised a poll above to garner interest in an LED replacement. Whelen has developed an LED solution for just about every light on every Mooney except for the 70303. Based on this poll, hopefully we can take a number back to Whelen that they would consider viable to allow engineering to develop it, test it, and bring it to market.

Ditto. Wouldn't have it any other way...

Absolutely. Same with my IA.

None of this seems to matter tho. There are still a disproportionate number of failures of Aspen boxes and EA100 adapters to warrant the FAA to issue an AD. I won’t turn this into a “this is better than that”, but one fact remains true: Rarely - if ever - does a G500/GADxx product have anywhere near these issues; nor do they fail to display anything for which they were intended. Appreciate this community is heavily slanted toward Aspen products, but you can’t ignore or dispute the Aspen high failure rate. For those in this group with them installed, I sincerely hope no one else is impacted; and for those who are or have been, that a solution is found...for your safety and peace of mind, if nothing else.

Warren, can you share anything more about whether your budget includes some of the items others have indicated? I can guarantee you won’t be finding a reliable C model with a modern up-to-date redundant cockpit that will reduce workload on the long XC trips you’re describing. Given your mission, I suggest reconsidering your target aircraft and/or upping your budget. Steve

Listen to @gsengle. I live on the island and can tell you that the LIRR train will be about as fast and less expensive (you’ll purchase off-peak tickets at the lower cost, as you’re likely not commuting in during rush hour) than an Uber or Lyft. Check with SheltAir at Republic. I used to be based with them when I was there, and they’re good folks to work with. Steve

I think you partially nailed it with your first point. Besides airman qualifications on a per-company basis, aren't some of the aircraft qualifications in our larger transport-category aircraft supposed to include at least two autopilots and a HUD to go down to IIIA, B, or C? In the Part 91 world, to meet the "airman qualification" equivalents as in the 121/135 world, only an Instrument Rating would be required for now. Someone more knowledgeable may correct and guide me here, as I'd love to know the answers better as well.

I'd have to agree, and to @jrwilson's point, they should be in control of their supply chain, and be more supportive of their customer base in order to retain business and acquire new. These days...especially in the aviation world...it's not wise to piss off anyone. It's hard enough to make money in aviation as an honest, hard-working, reputable company, and all it takes is one employee's attitude and lack of caring about a customer to screw it up. I'm sure many business owners on here (aviation-related of not) can relate. While I wouldn't base a purchase decision from Chief solely off one person's report (although he did report more than one bad experience), it certainly doesn't leave me with warm fuzzies about the company. Maybe someone from Chief is present here and could come along and offer some sort of constructive insight to help dispel a negative perception...? Steve

Same here. Without a doubt the best.