Schllc

28 hours of continuous use for two people and I didn’t use 1/3rd of the capacity

My current plane has the precise flight system which comes with flow regulators. this distributes oxygen when inhaling and conserves a LOT of o2. A side benefit is it’s a lot less stressful on sinuses, and you can literally hear it disburse so the constant fear of “am I getting flow” is gone. I find that noise wears me out more than lack of o2. I think it stresses all your senses which adds to fatigue. I just took a trip that flew for almost 32 hours doing 6-8 hours of flying every day, and I was never as tired as in my old plane. vast majority of the trip was between 16-18k. if I ever have another plane with o2 and it doesn’t have these regulators, I will purchase the mountain air system. Whatever it costs, it’s worth it.

My take away is that uncontrolled fields are the wild Wild West, and "if you aren’t in the mood" stay away from them.

I flew into an uncontrolled airport a few years ago in my hometown. had the whole family with me. Got on freq, made all my calls, flew over the airport at 1500’ to see the windsock and got in the standard pattern, making all my calls, then about 100yds from the threshold, a crop duster takes off, with a tail wind, coming right for me. I was close enough to see his face as he 90deg banked away less than 50’ off the ground. I landed without incident but was enraged when I recovered on the ground. I called the faa, and they said the same thing geebee said. The pilot also called me after the faa got his side and tried to explain his side to me without an apology. My response to the FAA is that someone did something wrong, if it was me I would like to know what it was but I don’t believe that to be the case. when I flew over I saw the crop duster parked and not running, he had to hear me in the pattern. It wasn’t my first close call at an uncontrolled field... My take away is that uncontrolled fields are the wild Wild West, and if you aren’t in the mood stay away from them. My suggestion would be to require all planes flying to have adsb and a radio, in this day and age, and with all the other feckless regulations, there is no excuse for an airplane to not have those basic items.

Amazing, 15% difference in size but four times gross weight. And 5x hp I flew one of these and without weapons armor and drop tanks the climb rate is 7k minute!! To heck with a turbine put a RR on a Mooney!!!

Threw a piston through the cowling. Also told me he lost 60gallons of gas, but never explained that part. I didn’t press him because he obviously had enough on his plate.

Not just on phones. It’s a problem on my iPad as well.

How do you get to your messages and profile? thats no longer on the menu that I can see

Flew from Nashville TN to Driggs ID today and I saw something I’ve never experienced before. I was flying at 16,000, almost the entire time. I was flying LOP and all was well with one curious thing happening almost cyclically. My MP was 29”, fuel flow was relatively stable at 16.9-17.1 gph and the TIT was stable, but my cht’s would cycle from 212 knts to low 190,s, and the hot cylinder #5, would go from 355-375. Not rapidly, but continuously drifting back and forth between the two extremes. Has anyone ever experienced this, or have an explanation? I have never flown over this terrain before and we had headwinds from 20-50+ knots right on the nose. I know there were some thermals at times, and I would sometimes see 10deg pitch up attitude with no real change in altitude. it could just be inexperience on my part but was hoping for an explanation.

I would suggest you accumulate all the requirements to take the exam before you go to the course. this way you can focus on the things you need to know for the exam and the rest will be rote. most of the accelerated schools require this anyway. the checkride for ifr was much easier for me than the ppl because I had accumulated about 150 approaches and close to 100 hours with safety pilots and instructors. I personally wanted to be prepared to actually fly imc approaches and the unintended consequence was that the exam was much less stressful. I won’t say it was easy, I was just much more prepared.

That’s a winning suggestion. Will send logs. That will be the best couple hundred bucks I could ever spend.

Aside from the typical and obvious things in logs like damage history or lapsed annuals, are there any things unique to bravos that should be scrutinized?

If you know of one that is for sale for 100k I’d probably add it to the list. I haven’t seen one in that price range yet. i have several hundred hours in ovations as well, and agree, it’s an excellent platform, but they cost more than I plan to spend knowing what I’ll put into it after purchase.

I have about 600 hours in mooneys, the vast majority in g1000 ovations and acclaims, and the rest in a k. I have never flown, or even flown in a bravo. before I bought my first ovation I was bombarded by an inordinate amount of “hangar talk” from everyone I told my intentions to, about mooneys being dangerous, hard to fly, hard to land, slippery etc. I didn’t really know this was inaccurate, but knew I loved the way they looked, and wanted the speed for my mission. five years later I now know the “hangar talk’, was all from people who heard something from someone who knew someone, and not from anyone who had any real experience. I currently own a very late model acclaim and want to transition to a twin, but do not want to sell my new plane until I have located, and configured to my liking, a more modestly priced older model. I have narrowed this down to a J or a Bravo, and I’m leaning towards the Bravo, primarily because I fear I will be disappointed by the performance and handling of a 200hp engine when I am so accustomed to the big continentals. (Yes, I realize the radically different planes these two selections are) i will probably put a glass panel, and a modern autopilot, I just want to find good paint, good engine and good history, the rest I am willing to bring to my standard. i am also ok to a point, with having a little more in it than it’s worth, if it’s safe, and exactly what I want. i currently have my eye on a few that are late 80’s early 90’s, these selections are mostly because I can get them in a price range that allows me to upgrade without spending 300k. i watch the market and I see that bravos really seem to languish, and am really interested to know the real reason, not the anecdotal, “hangar talk” reasons. if there is anyone in south florida that has one, I’d be happy to trade a flight in my ultra for one in your bravo!

My ultra was painted at aerosmith in 2019. I would not return there.

In a long body ovation I found 15.5gph to be a flat rate fuel burn to plan with. climb more or less negated by descent. In the long body acclaim, I plan for 17.5 generally but at full gross I plan for 16.5. In my experience I have found that the TN mooney’s can be flown at numbers almost identical to the NA engines if desired. I’ve owned two ovations and two acclaims and I am not speaking anecdotally. I have also flown identical routes for years in both models and I am completely comfortable with my experience/assessment. lastly, from everything I have read about mooney’s it seems the limit on the UL is the gear, not the airframe/airfoil. I participated in a ferry flight of an O3 that was close to 600# Over gross and you could barely tell the difference in any phase of flight. Even take off roll was barely affected. let’s hope someone eventually figures out a fix for the gear for us!

I have a family of four, myself and three ladies, all around the 100# except me 170# with the dog and minimal bags I can still take on 55 gallons legally in an acclaim with AC, which is easily 2.5-3 hours with reserves. this is about the bathroom time limit for us anyway. room has never really been a problem for us in a long body.

Is there a difference in the door of a post K model or is it just those models that have an stc?

So, is it for sale?

the acclaim cannot fly the advertised speeds for any period of time. Climb is a little more than half of what a turboprop would do. It’s not practical for most, I admit that but for a commuter of 3-4 hours some over water, it is certainly not impractical. The acclaim reduces my mission by 30+ minutes on average. That’s worth 3gph more to me than an ovation. It would be worth another 5-8 to be another 30 min faster and behind a turbine instead of a piston. its noise, safety, speed, dependability, tbo, fuel availability etc. Sure, its more money but nothing in ga is rational or cheap. all that being said, it would take someone like Mike Patey to make this fantasy come to life.

Sure, for a million more. Btw, I have time in a TBM and a Meridian. The TBM, is an incredible machine and in a completely different class than the meridian. I would think that the problem with all the turboprop non pressurized conversions isn’t just the cost. Its the useful load and fuel capacity.

With the rolls Royce engine the bonanza uses, which is temperature limited, vs torque so the ceiling is about 23k, it would make an excellent candidate for a long body. With Monroy tanks, it would hold more fuel than the bonanza, and the weight savings of the turbine would cancel most of the add for fuel. if the bonanza can do 220, the Mooney should do 250. With 130 gallons at 22gph that’s four hours with reserves, about an hour longer than the bonanza. the market is small, but I Suspect more Mooney guys would be interested than bonanza guys. after all, they already decided to go slow once... I agree that pressurization would be a game changer, but most mooneys are flying in the FL already, and pressurizing an airframe is not an stc. It’s a whole new concept. But, adding 20-50 knots and the safety of a turbine would make the most sense for the continuity of mooneys mission. Go Fast! I would think to be viable it would have to be all in under 200k to even be marketable, and even then only on a long or mid body.

I can tell you from personal experience that any warranty on an airplane is grossly overrated. I would go as far to say it wouldn't be a factor for me in buying a plane again at all. if the FAA wasn’t such a messed up anachronism there may be a real wave of innovation. In my humble opinion, the reality is that aside from the ballistic parachute nothing made today outperforms the Mooney for speed and efficiency, or the bonanza for speed with payload. it’s easy to convince oneself that new is better, but after you fly for a while you realize that isn’t axiomatic in aviation. Cirrus’s accomplishment isn’t a better plane, it’s better marketing, and a financing machine that makes it easy to own. Innovation in aerodynamics doesn’t happen in leaps and bounds and thanks to the FAA, it pretty much barely happens at all in GA. Mooney has lost its shot to compete in the modern market of throwaway goods, and buying predicated on monthly payments. Good marketing and advertising works, no doubt about it, and selling the caps system as a panacea was effective. But any objective pilot can’t argue the pros of a mooney. That doesn’t mean it’s the best plane for everyone, but their attributes and capability is clearly established. I’ve got about 20 hours in an SR20 and SR22, and while I’m obviously biased, I was very underwhelmed. I didn’t really enjoy flying the cirrus, I think most of it was the side yoke, but it also just felt cheap if that is relatable.

Mine was a pretty reluctant flier in the beginning. made statements like “I won’t fly with you for two years”. i didn’t get upset or argue, I just flew and trained. then her dad got sick, and we were back and forth five six times a month on what would have been a 15 hour drive or a 4 hour flight. she bit her lip and “tolerated” until the plane went to service and she had to fly commercial... cant say she loves flying now, but she appreciates the freedom, convenience and expedience. It works. You find a middle. She doesn’t have to fly anywhere if she doesn’t want to, it’ll come.