-
Posts
1,865 -
Joined
-
Days Won
13
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Store
Everything posted by Schllc
-
While the technology could be better, I agree with some of the later posts. I’ve never run out of brake in my plane, but it is easy to skid a tire if you aren’t conscious. I have put a full gross acclaim down on a 2400’ runway, zero displaced threshold and water on both ends of the runway, without having to crush my brakes. if you’re needing that much brake power, you way want to look at your approach speed? in the event that sounds critical, please know that was NOT my intention!
-
That’s also the message you get when your magnetometer has failed.
-
you also need to have i believe minimum .34 version software or you wont have data logging.
-
The key to any discretionary purchase is setting proper expectations. Personally, I have never had a prebuy inspection for the ten aircraft I have purchased. This isn’t a recommendation btw, I have personally inspected and reviewed the logs of each plane, but each one I understood and accepted the risks. You can cross your fingers and do a prebuy, or cross your fingers and roll the dice. I have not bought hangar queens or tried to buy the “cheap deal., I’ve looked for planes flown regularly, and interviewed the owners. I think a plane flown regularly with good history minimizes the surprises, and my experience has codified that method. Aircraft that have been in a hangar or with big gaps seem, to be the biggest risk. Buy the best plane you can afford, and don’t think the low time, hangar queen will be the diamond in the rough. A well used and well cared for plane will offer the lowest risk.
-
Long Body Gross Weight Increase - Any Updates?
Schllc replied to irishpilot's topic in Mooney Bravo Owners
I think the acceptability of the price is going to be related to how much UL you can actually gain. given what everything costs in aviation I don’t think your guess seems crazy though. -
http://www.aviationdb.com/Aviation/AircraftQuery.shtm#SUBMIT
-
LOL, it’s always interesting to see planes and costs evaluated in rational economic terms. people buy planes because they want to fly, money is part of the equation as a function of what the individual can afford to waste on a hobby or interest. very few cirrus owner I have ever met are real aviation enthusiasts, those planes are primarily investments. Cirrus did an amazing job with marketing and helping people use them as tax shelters, the parachute brought the spouses into acceptance, and the whole culture they created is undeniably successful. The majority of the rest of GA piston are just folks who love flying and the idea of being a pilot. I am not suggesting a 750k J model with sell like hotcakes, but I’d be willing to bet they would sell better than all the cb Mooney guys here would predict. Lastly, one of the most frustrating parts of aging for me is remembering what things used to cost. The reality is 750k today is more like what 200k was worth in the late 80’s. the reality is unless the FAA was to be dragged out of the 1920’s and their internal bureaucracy was given intensive shock therapy and a thorough house cleaning, aviation is dying a slow death, and I’m just glad it’s still around for me to enjoy. I’d love Mooney to start making planes again, and if I hit the powerball, id waste a couple hundred million making a go of it!
-
I think that given the entanglement with the Chinese ownership, they haven’t been eligible to work on defense projects.
-
I’m really sorry I wasn’t able to make this, I am looking forward to meeting some of you guys. Also, Joe Cole is about one of the nicest guys you’ve ever met and a pleasure to deal with. I have recommended several people to him and would never hesitate to go back.
-
There is no “fix” as I understand, it’s just an idiosyncrasy of the configuration. The oil is in there and there is no danger in it getting trapped where the engine is starved for oil.
-
I have seen aluminum fail completely too, as well as steel, but at least in my experience, it was always with ample warning. I rode mountain bikes, I also built them and did all of my own work and I would always look at critical areas before a ride, and when a waddled out headset, crank bearing hosuing, or rear axle hangar was going you would know because the bearings would move and creak or make noises, or you could fed the wobble, or see a crack starting, the carbon fiber bikes I saw fail never really showed signs of weakness or damage before failure. I agree with you about the design, and as I said bicycle manufacturers don’t likely spend the time or money testing to the degree and airplane manufacturer would so this could likely account for my experience, and is a small sample. I would not go as far as to say I do not trust planes made of carbon fiber. After all I have more than a few hours in cirrus aircraft. I would not however buy one for myself. I prefer the things I understand better, and while it’s likely an abundance of caution it’s just my preference.
-
While in college I built, rode, and raced bicycles. This was during the infancy of mountain biking and huge leaps were being made in frame and component design. The demands for lighter materials, was at the same time bicycles were being subjected to much more hostile stresses, and aluminum and carbon fiber rushed to the front of the pack. All of a sudden frames started failing. At first in was aluminum, in the high stress areas like the crank housing or headset(where the forks go to the handlebars), or the rear axle frame mounts, this material fell out of favor and carbon rose. But then random failures started occurring and without warning. We are talking total catastrophic failure. Unlike with aluminum which would have a slow decline to the point you knew a failure was imminent, but even then a large degree of function remained so you could get home, carbon fiber just failed completely rendering the bike unusable. if you look today you will see most are made of aluminum or steel. I would not suggest carbon fiber is inferior or unable to be used reliably, but I will submit that the homogeneous nature of their construction will always be a challenge to properly inspect, and the failures will be much the same, albeit hopefully much less frequent. There is very little strength left after the modulus of elasticity of carbon fiber has been exceeded, but more importantly that value after failure is unpredictable and wildly varying, while metal is much more predictable. To be fair, bicycle companies don’t have to document and test things the way aircraft manufacturers do, but the base nature of the material is the same….
-
All standard fare for an uncontrolled field.
-
You can likely sell the 345 for close what they cost new. Last time I checked you can’t get a new one for over six months. I paid 7k for a remote version used a few months ago.
-
I’ve had the worst luck with lending and borrowing. If I lend I expect it to be returned as lent. I’ve had people keep the items, return broken or damaged. I have never, and would never do that. I have in fact many times, gone out and purchased the item new because I was too ashamed to return it in lesser condition. For this reason, I prefer not to borrow at all, unless I don’t have a choice or it’s cheap enough for a one use thing that I’m not concerned, or it’s not easily broken or damaged. I still lend, but mostly because I don’t know how to say know without feeling like a jerk. I do have an agreement with a few fellow acclaim owners, where we all have extra parts and if one of us is in a bind we send the part and then the recipient replaces with a spare as soon as they can. It’s worked out pretty well. I sent a buddy a turbo, and he sent another one a cylinder. I have a spare turbo, wiring harness, plugs, prop governor… between the four of us we have quite a few goodies I agree, most Mooney space guys in my experience are good people.
-
Flying with oxygen : recommended also for 20.000 plus feet?
Schllc replied to Raffi's topic in General Mooney Talk
especially at night -
Flying with oxygen : recommended also for 20.000 plus feet?
Schllc replied to Raffi's topic in General Mooney Talk
Anyone who is planning to fly in the flight levels should do the hypoxia training to see how their body reacts. It will be very edifying, just seeing the diversity of the effect it has on people. -
Probably tried to put in the the for sale section and realized you have to pay…
-
Flying with oxygen : recommended also for 20.000 plus feet?
Schllc replied to Raffi's topic in General Mooney Talk
I would suspect after all the reports I have read, that if there was an accident that occurred where a mask was not being used over 18k the FAA would find the pilot at fault and a contributing factor to the event. And, probably, rightfully so, almost all the accidents I read about can be traced back to the chain of bad decisions. How does that saying go, “There are a lot of old pilots, and a lot of bold pilots, but not a lot of old and bold pilots”. Bold of course being a euphemism for many things…Or something like that… I think for the most part the self policing is effective, even if its Darwinian. -
Flying with oxygen : recommended also for 20.000 plus feet?
Schllc replied to Raffi's topic in General Mooney Talk
I don’t feel foolish for the random act of the grommet being yanked out. That was the one link in the chain that wasn’t a factor of my negligence. I had a pulse oximeter I didn’t utilize enough, I didn’t set up a backup mask or cannula, which I did have with me, I didn’t have any checklist to confirm my function. I was alone. Any one of these other items may have been ok, but all of them was just a lack of preparedness and awareness, that happened to coincide with an equipment failure. I didn’t say I felt foolish to be self effacing or elicit sympathy. The story reads like so many of the accidents we read about, only it ended well. It is easy for confidence and arrogance to be conflated. I am fortunate and I will not forget the lesson. -
Flying with oxygen : recommended also for 20.000 plus feet?
Schllc replied to Raffi's topic in General Mooney Talk
The precise flight conserver has altitude settings. Presumably this increases that flow rate right? I have never used the mountain air or any other ones, but they appear to have fixed rate disbursement. -
Flying with oxygen : recommended also for 20.000 plus feet?
Schllc replied to Raffi's topic in General Mooney Talk
That seems incongruent, because if the oxygen is flowing when you are not inhaling it is obviously wasted, but when inhaling distribution is the same as constant flow. I took a trip a few years ago from Florida to Oregon and back. I flew with a friend and very little of that trip was below 19k. We used conservers the entire time and never had any issues with saturation. What does oxygen wasting mean? Are you saying conservers deliver less o2 above 15k? I would like to read the source of this, can you share? -
Flying with oxygen : recommended also for 20.000 plus feet?
Schllc replied to Raffi's topic in General Mooney Talk
16-19 really is the sweet spot for the acclaim. You get a little more speed up higher, but seldom enough to make it worth the trade off. -
Flying with oxygen : recommended also for 20.000 plus feet?
Schllc replied to Raffi's topic in General Mooney Talk
Years ago I was flying home and while planning my flight realized there was a 70knt tailwind at 25k, directly on my tail. Pretty hard to pass up in a plane capable.. I was alone, had the nice blue silicone mask with a microphone, so I filed for 25k and off I went. I was cruising along and I looked down in my lap and saw this little black disk. At the time the plane I was flying was an ultra with the precise flight conservers, and I thought the disk looked like the adjustment dial on the outside of the unit. After a few seconds of fiddling with it, I realized I was trying to put it back together, but it wasn’t apart…. By the grace of god I realized that what I was doing made no sense whatsoever and I engaged the vertical descent for 1400fpm and still to this day do not recall the next two or three minutes. What I do recall is being level at 8,000 ft with atc calling me asking intentions. I hit replay on the g1000 and listened to me responding to them and taking instruction. I did not sound like myself, but I was responding. I do not remember any of this… After my wits were about me again I looked down and realized my arm had gotten wrapped around the o2 hose going to my mask and had inadvertently pulled the grommet out of the front of my mask at 25,000ft. The disk was the grommet, and if one was completely cogent, would never had mistaken it for anything else. I don’t know how long it had been pulled out, or how long it took me to notice something was wrong. The flight recorder only goes back about 2.5 minutes on a constant loop, so that’s all I could listen to. I don’t know how long the entire event lasted, but I did realize how close I came to being a bad story. There is certainly more elevated risk at those altitudes, and one must be very vigilant, aware and have some routine to check yourself very regularly. I personally stay 19k or below if I am alone, and will only go to 25k with someone else and if we pick up enough time to really make a difference. This isn’t my recommendation or suggestion, it’s merely a personal minimum in my Mooney, or any non pressurized airplane. Things can deteriorate much quicker than you would like to believe… Last thought on this story… I was embarrassed by this. I felt foolish, like my arrogance and confidence led me to a bad choice that could have killed me. I finally opened up and told the story to a pilot friend of mine and he told me I should share, because perhaps someone could benefit from hearing my mistake. I sure hope it does, because I still feel foolish.- 121 replies
-
- 27
-
-
-
Think you’re a mooniac now, just wait! congratulations!