AIREMATT

Sounds like they made it out at least.

You are subscribed to the FAA's GovDelivery service for Airworthiness Directives and Other Airworthiness Information, which are also posted in our Dynamic Regulatory System (DRS) at https://drs.faa.gov

Here it is again for you.

Thanks for all the knowledge and advice you share with the Mooney owners Don. Appreciate it all! Dan

Always nice to have a translator in the other plane to help you out:).

Not all familiar in the air either sometimes in some foreign airspace. Plenty of distractions with language barriers, lack of technology, different ICAO terminologies and foreign boundaries requiring pre-arranged permissions that lead to distractions and preconceived bias that are hard to get your head to see through sometimes, especially when on the back side of the body clock…

I think you meant can’t…

What business isn’t right now???

Might depend on how it’s equipped too. All new panel and avionics with a new engine and interior might be different rate than 50yr old radios and instruments with high time engine and old interior and exterior.

If you do have the butterfly, check the pivot hinge bar. It is a different metal that disintegrated in mine and prevented the butterfly from even reaching the shutoff port to close the heat off. If you don’t get it fixed before the warm weather, it will be very uncomfortable in flight…

The experimental version is 2 revisions ahead of the certified version. Both of those revisions have the IGRF update included. Why aren’t the certified versions updated to at least solve the IGRF update? The experimental version also came out Dec. 9, 2022. The certified version is dated Jan. 5 2022. Certified IGRF still has no update. Does the experimental world get more attention from Garmin than the certified market? Curious…

Found this today. Had to Google to find it. Garmin web still shows Version 8.0 current if you follow the links from their G5 page. This link went direct to the page showing 8.17 current. https://www8.garmin.com/support/download_details.jsp?id=10355

Title should have specified shortest X-C flight logged:)

Every time you update your logbook email it to yourself. Keep copies on the email server if your other software crashes.

Sounds like it is part of the Nav Database update for the G5 since they don’t list it by specific model for the differences. Based on software versions it may fail to update it also says. Plane is still in annual or I’d go see what mine says as of New Years. I might be in the same boat. https://support.garmin.com/en-US/?faq=hBDN10RJp5ABaza3SZGG09&productID=570665&tab=topics

https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-safety-briefing-magazine On the left side of the screen is a menu with the Subscribe option at the bottom of the first section. There is also an Link in the first paragraph to download the document. It will save it as a PDF from that link.

Great idea to post it here Don! If you do go to the link, sign up for the Email and get it every month when it comes out. Info varies from month to month. There is something applicable to everyone each month, but everything isn’t applicable to everyone each month. Pick what’s applicable to your operation and learn or review from it.

I know Windows Vista works too.

Generally it is non-precipitation visible moisture and 1mile visibility. Any precipitation and 10C or less corrected for Ram effect would necessitate using the engine heat/anti-ice. Fog, mist, haze with greater than 1 mile visibility would not necessitate using engine heat/anti-ice.

I think that is a published segment of the approach-albeit an area rather than a line, but a useable minimum altitude that as long as I’m cleared for the approach, I can stay above up to my last assigned altitude to stay on top of clouds in smooth air, or out of icing conditions, or because I choose to for any other operational reason. If I need to be lower to make the approach a normal comfortable profile I can opt to start down to the TAA altitude when I am in the sector and cleared for the approach. I have just seen some writings in other sites and Mooney Flyer saying we are expected to or must descend to the TAA when in the sector rather than it being pilots discretion after being cleared for the approach.

Thanks Paul, That’s the reference I was missing. Included below:

Unfortunately, that reference and AIM Fig. 5-4-10 explanation say the same contradicting thing word for word as my 2 examples from the IPH. MAY descend to the minimum, and SHOULD descend to the published altitude.

I’m trying to find the one correct reference to the sector altitudes on an RNAV approach approach with Terminal Arrival Altitudes published for each sector. Here are the references from the Instrument Procedures Handbook that I have found: One says we may descend to the altitudes for each sector we are entering and the other says we should descend to the altitude shown in the sector. Does anyone have a tiebreaker reference anywhere as to whether the sector altitudes are minimum or mandatory altitudes. I’ve seen many opinions on which it is, but no sources to confirm it. Thanks, Dan

Our yellow arc is 150-189mph. 165 in smooth air is a comfortable descent with about a 3”MP reduction from cruise if below 5,000’. Wish I had your speed limits, but I have the old spar before they beefed it up in your model.

We have the older 100mph flap limit on our pre-1970 C’s. Plus, it’s hard to get down if it isn’t smooth without reducing power. I don’t mind being in the yellow, but when bumpy, the mid to upper part of the yellow arc is uncomfortable for sure. Definitely need the carb temp. It will be in the next upgrade cycle for the panel.