Schllc

I was at Bragg from 88-93. All in the 82nd are required to be jump qualified and stay current. So if that’s the case, they all need to meet the same standard. I saw it as a logistical, facility, lethality, and morale issue, it wasn’t discriminative. You also know you were carrying 45-90 pounds on top of personal gear. The female physique and many men are just not suited. Most women can not meet the standard to begin with, and the need to provide separate facilities is much more of a hardship in actual deployment than people understand.

It was repositioning the switch and cleaning contacts. the door was not actually opening, I was just getting erroneous indications that it was.

I completely agree with you. 40 years ago I went to airborne school. We ran with boots, pants and a canteen in our pocket, and did six minute miles. If you got out of step twice in a week you either quit or went back to the beginning of the school and started over. But the women ran in a separate formation, in shorts and running shoes, and were so much slower we lapped them on a 2 mile track. DEI has been around a long time… it’s idiotic create a standard, meet the standard, progress don’t meet the standard, you’re washed out there is no benefit to anyone to lower a standard. I meant that for this particulate I incident, I didn’t hear anyone suggest the pilots or controllers were dei hires, merely that they were understaffed because of the required dei quotas.

All the talk I heard about DEI referred to the inability to hire people because of dei quotas. this problem is isolated and systemic at the same time.

I wouldn’t plan on it anywhere but my how drone. If you think about how much force control to go from full throttle climb, to near 90deg in 67 seconds mean there was a relatively quick change it attitude. No way that felt natural in that time frame. Rapid and large cg shift would cause that. I saw the layout of the plane with the stretcher. I don’t think weight of the child in a bed would be enough, but if one or two adults went with, it could be, but I admit, I am not familiar with a Lear 55 envelope.

It’s already an obstacle and the controllers there have a very unfriendly culture. if you go over ifr, they keep you inordinately high, direct you all over the place, and then slam dunk me for APF, it so bizarre it feels like they intentionally inconvenience you for sport. 15nm from your destination at 10k isn’t fun, especially when they tell you to descend and slow down at the same time. If you fly vfr I have had them ask APF tower to have me call them after overflying, well over their airspace, and demand I contact them. While I understand the courtesy of calling if I am 500’ over their airspace, why when I fly 2500 over, do they insist on talking? what is the purpose of “airspace” if you can’t transition outside/over of it?

I know it’s overly simple but the helo could have had a bad baro setting. Or both aircraft could have for that matter. Even so, not sure why the controllers would have allowed them to get that close in an approach corridor.

Based on that question, I would take someone who knows a little about mooney’s, or at least airplanes to look with you.

Your batteries are directly beneath the hatrack and very easily accessible. get a stool and prepare to contort and scrape some knuckle but it’s very straightforward. The charger lines come with an inline fuse and both ends are finished to fit battery lugs and charger cord. the battery minder seems to work well for me.

Installing the cables for the batteries is about as easy as it gets. you can run the dongles to the tks door, or the hat rack with a grommet. the parts usually come with the chargers and takes less than two hours to install everything. the gauge of wire to the cigarette lighter is pretty small, I would be very suspect of the efficacy of that method, or the safety.

Is that something you could forward so I could help Brian K figure out how do this for everyone?

That task is so specialized, I would be very hesitant to try someone that doesn’t have the history of those two shops. I think someone said that WW only does mooney’s. that is a pretty important detail for me. I am scheduled there for April, and have seen the shop, as well as examples of work. It’s top notch.

Well, only one of these is sort of really related to the G1000, but I agree with the other posters, I’m very dubious that all of these things failed like this, it sounds like something may have happened to affect these components. I have owned more than a few g1000 mooney’s over almost 10 years and I have never had any autopilot issues. I did change one magnometer as well as one mdf. But in all honesty being able to swap out a display or an lru in a one or two day repair is worth the cost for the convenience, at least to me. I would also believe it’s arguable that if it was Johnny’s old plane, it is probably one of the best maintained planes in the fleet.

Thoughts?

I always loved that paint scheme. After you reposted your picture, I asked them to mock up a black roof. Let’s see what it looks like.

Updates on development….

While i realize that over inflating the seal could possibly damage the door hinge. I have used these systems in a mooney before an it is not hard to keep from over inflation. just get to altitude and pump till the noise stops. The seals are very flexible and will not cause harmful pressure on the door. I have tried all the door seals available, tweaked endlessly and added supplemental weather-stripping and had improvement, but nothing like the inflatable seal. I am installing one in my plane in two weeks.

I had this issue on two different planes. Both times it was the indicator sensor, not the actual door opening. Adjustment fixed it both times. I did not do it myself however. Brian K fixed the last one for me. mine was only failing in the initial phase of take off and climb. It usually self corrected before reaching 3k

Mr Braley posted his personal cell phone number in this thread, and offered to speak to me. I took him on his offer. He answered my call today and spoke to me very candidly and cordially for a little more than 30 minutes, and would have spoken longer I am sure. I got my questions answered, some food for thought, and understand he is a busy man and wanted to respect his time. My description of the the conversation was this… He was well informed, direct, and willing to discuss anything openly and honestly. He will talk to anyone who wants to have a civil conversation, and while ours didn’t get close to anything else, I certainly got the sense from the man that he would engage that way to a point as well if requested. Overall, I would say if you really are curious about this situation, and want to get the answers directly from the source, or at least really listen to the other side of the story, he will likely take your call and share what he knows.

Great, because I have an Aerostar with wet wings as well! I do not have borescope pictures but it is going in for some significant maintenance shortly, and will include changing the style of fuel caps, so I will have a pretty large section open for inspection. Paint isn’t happening until the summer.

I don’t want to make assumptions, but it sounds like you are suggesting that tanks that have not leaked yet with 100LL have issues that have not manifested until g100UL was introduced? This may well be true, but if the wrong sealant, or poor workmanship was sufficient for 100LL, why would gami push it over the edge? I suppose I am resigned to the reality that this issue will likely be pushed on us prematurely, regardless of the challenges, so I would think most of us just want to know what the issues actually are. I am getting ready to paint my Mooney. I have zero evidence of any leaks this far, and my inspections of the sealant show it to be in very good condition. The plane was likely sealed around 2006, given it is a 2007 year model, and given that it’s been 20 years with no issues, no repairs to be suspect of, I see no reason to reseal my tanks prior to paint. I also have no reason to believe the Mooney factory would use the wrong sealant. What I have done is ask scheme designers who is helping me write a paint specification, and they contacted Gami for help tailoring the paint spec. This is to ensure I don’t use “substandard”, products and methods, and to avoid having paint failures if I have to use gami’s fuel in the future. There has been so much discussion regarding wrong paint, bad sealant, improper materials etc etc. I would hope you guys can provide some guidance so if I do have a paint failure, so it won’t be a result of the interaction between my work and your fuel. Bottom line, what is the “right” sealant, paint, primer should I use to avoid adverse reactions with your fuel?

This looks like it’s modeled after the original ultra scheme, but you sharpened it, and made it look better. that looks nice.

Any way you could send me an example of that?

That’s almost as bad! LSU!! But no way I’m painting my plane purple!

Definitely wanted the orange to be copper/rust vs orange. interior is going to be a caramel brown with black headliner and carpet.