Mooney in Oz

Am I assuming correct that the G5 should survive and not be taken out?

Hello Chris. I don’t have anything to add re your fuel selector query. I just want to say welcome back, I’ve missed reading your posts and hope to see more of them in the future.

What they told you is simply not true. There may be more, but to my knowledge you won’t get 2 features of the GFC500. Those are coupled VNAV vertical approaches and Smart Glide. An uncoupled VNAV is easy. You just manually control the descent using the vertical wheel on the GFC and you will still have coupled lateral guidance. The IFD provides VNAV guidance that is displayed on the G5 and G3X if fitted. It all works well together. Plus being ex airline, I prefer the IFD with its FMS logic. The GTNs are also a great bit of gear. My IFDs were installed years before I upgraded to the Garmin stuff and I wasn’t prepared to spend thousands of AMUs to get 2 extra features. No doubt Garmin will add extra features in the future, but for now I’m very happy with my lot.

Although the below accident resulted in a fatality in Australia, I thought I should post the details here for the information of all Mooney owners, particularly J or M owners to check with your mechanic as to the condition of the O-ring seal of the engine driven fuel pump outlet fitting. Particularly those whose engines and fuel systems that have not been overhauled for many years or aircraft that have lived outside for many years resulting in O-ring deterioration. Yes, this humble O-ring can cause an in-flight catastrophe if allowed to deteriorate to the point of leakage. Today, I received an email Safety Advisory Notice link from the ATSB regarding the crash of a M20J on 17 October 2022 at Luskintyre NSW. During flight, a fire started in the engine compartment resulting in the pilot attempting to land at the airfield. He could not make the airfield and landed in a field just 300 metres from the runway, colliding with trees resulting in a catastrophic fire. Sadly the pilot died from his injuries 10 weeks later. Upon receipt of the email, I immediately called my mechanic who advised that he checks this O-ring for condition and leaks using pressure from the electric fuel pump at every annual. Please ensure your mechanic does the same. The Safety Advisory Notice link - https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/safety-advisory-notice/2024/condition-replacing-o-ring-seals-age-catches The full ATSB report - https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2022/aair/ao-2022-049 Both are well worth the read.

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/387644 A nice looking Mooney Mite in the news footage. Good outcome for the pilot with only minor injuries.

It does and I hope he scored you well for good judgment.

I have a containment bag and fireproof gloves purchased from Amazon that I keep in the reachable front passenger rear seat pocket. Hope I never have to use it.

I had the same twitching issues as you describe. Since I had Rev 5 Gain Addendum installed, my J flies rock solid with no more twitch. IAS mode in climb and descent is also vastly improved. Very happy.

Garmin own a long body. N430G - a 2001 M20R, registered to Garmin International Inc in Olathe, Kansas.

Anyone know more about this one? https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/386654 Happened last Sunday.

I agree. IMO the greatest danger in landing on a road vs a field is not traffic, but power lines that are near impossible to see, which can and has in the past ended badly. It can happen into a field as well, but less likely than a road. Then there a those that landed on a road that for whatever reason, experienced controllability problems, such as the recent Challenger biz jet attempting to land at Naples resulting in fatalities and either last year or the year before, the M20K that veered off a highway and crashed into a building, which sadly also ended in a fatality. I can’t remember where this was, but some here would. I remember some commenting that overflown fields were available. If you have no choice as this Lancair pilot seems to have had, then you can only do your best. Good to see a successful outcome.

The difference between the GSA 28 and GSA 87 as advised by Trek on BT & MS has got me thinking even more. His comments differ somewhat, but I notice his post on BT was 2 years before his post on MS and during those years there were servo replacements. I just wonder if during those 2 years when there were software updates and at least one hardware servo replacement update that I can remember following my own installations in December 2021, if any significant internal changes were made. Shortly after the install, all 4 new servos had to be replaced resulting from the SB recall. At that point the only issue I had was the pitch, which is now resolved with the latest Gain Addendum. This was way before the latest servo replacement within 5 years (which will be my second time replacements) that was announced last year, around the time of Trek's post on MS. This is only wild wondering on my behalf, but given Trek's post to MS, could it be possible that Garmin may have added some internal, hardware changes during either or both of the hardware replacements to bring the GSA 28 servos closer to the GSA 87 servos than we know of? Maybe a MSer with a contact or two at Garmin could inquire. I'm happy to be labelled the King of Wishful Thinking

Trek Lawler’s response on 6 May 2023 re GFC 500 and GFC 600 servo differences - hello everyone, I'm sorry for the delay in getting to any questions, as you can imagine the last couple of days have been pretty busy. To answer everyone's questions on the difference between the GFC 500 and 600 servos, the differences are very minimal, if you were to take them apart you'd notice the same motors and a lot of the same components. the GFC 500 servos are very capable of flying twins if needed.

I’ve got to say it is a vast improvement, as it should’ve been when first released!

We all develop our own way of doing things and I do the following; On both the G3X MFD and iPad, I prefer to view only the lower part of the approach chart in expanded side profile so I can clearly see each sector altitude limitation. I primarily view the iPad approach chart that is set to landscape and easy to read. I use this method as I don’t want to be caught out during an approach in case the iPad fails due to overheating or for some other reason. I can therefore revert to the G3X approach plate to continue the approach. The G3X approach plate display offers redundancy and is not too difficult for me to read.

This ^^^^^

Flashlight (I had to Google the American version)

The purpose of starting this thread is to alert MSers whose Mooneys are powered by a Lycoming engine and with a Plane Power alternator. There is no criticism toward mechanics or Plane Power as it is a good, solid product with mostly no issues, however as with any aircraft component, wear and tear issues may arise after many hours in service. I recently had a discussion with fellow MSer @PeytonM about my (probably) 20 year old PP alternator with about 800 hours of operation. During my last annual inspection my mechanic discovered large cracks in the rear aluminium alloy housing attached to the back of the alternator that had the potential to cause problems. The rear housing is difficult to see unless you actually look behind the alternator. He sent the alternator off to have the entire unit overhauled, plus the rear housing replaced. Peyton who also owns a J with a PP alternator about 400 hours old, mentioned he had the main wire leading from the alternator break in flight, causing the alternator to fail. Despite the PP alternator is an 'on condition' part, my mechanic sends this type of alternator off to be overhauled at around 500 hours of time in service. I think this is a great idea. In between, I think it is a good idea to conduct your own periodic alternator inspections by simply looking with a torch and feeling wires in case of a pending failure, particularly if you conduct a lot of night flying.

N4044N must have performed like a weapon at those temps!

I notice in Dynon’s marketing ads of HDX panel pics, include either an Avidyne 540 or 440, so I would expect those to be on the approval list when the autopilot is released. The GTNs will also probably make the approval list, but due to Garmin’s proprietary fetish, I’m guessing you might not have full functionality, such as with the Dynon autopilot VNAV, which really is a non issue. I’m also guessing the GNSs will be approved as there are so many in wild.

@philiplane or others in the know - Does constantly flying around at low power settings risk cylinder glazing?

I have a G3X, G5, GFC500, IFD540 & 440. They all work fine together. Although the IFDs now have VNAV, the only function the GFC500 won’t do is capture the VNAV path despite the path indicating so on both the G3X and G5. This is no big deal as all you need to do is control the VNAV path by setting the descent rate info from the IFD displayed VSR and adjust the vertical mode wheel on the MSP.

I agree. It would make a great combination even better.

On my G3X, when conducting a RNP (RNAV) approach, I have the chart displayed on the MFD side with particular expanded focus on the lower part of the plate that displays the side profile to check advisory altitudes against distances. This display right alongside of all the information on the PFD I find to be very useful for situational awareness. it is a great combination on the one large screen.

See page 2. Bob Kromer.pdf