skydvrboy

I don't know about others, but my wife actually finds comfort in the low wing. She says it feels like there is actually something holding you up, rather than a high wing where you are just hanging there with nothing between you and the ground. YMMV. As for your mission, either an F or a J with a decent useful load would likely work best. Even a C or E would work, but the comfort for that 4th person may be ideal. Just depends how often they are going. Or you could just tell them to suck it up, if they want more comfort, they can buy you a bigger plane!

I was just playing around with power settings last week to see what kind of mpg I could get. My first leg (48 minutes) was at 2100 rpm, 16" mp, LOP, during which I burned right at 3 gallons including takeoff (105 mph). I didn't really like running it there because there seemed to be more vibration than at higher RPM settings. Also, the RPM was VERY sensitive to control inputs and a quarter turn on the prop knob would send RPM's much lower. During my second leg (1.8 hrs), I ran 2400 rpm, 14" mp, LOP, during which I burned 7 gallons (105 mph). Fuel measurements were by my self calibrated stick, so give or take a half gallon. Still, I was impressed. Given my 64 gallon tanks, that is a LOT of range and a VERY long time aloft!

I struggled on my first medical to pass the vision test. It was a new AME and she made me test near and distant in each eye and then again in both eyes, so a total of six different eye tests with the machine. I passed all of them except the left eye near test. She then told me to go to the nearest drug store and buy a pair of reading glasses and come back so we could finish the medical. I passed with the reading glasses. Now my AME who has been doing them for a long time, just has me read the chart at the end of the hall and then the small print chart up close, so only two tests. MUCH easier to pass!

I just ran across this news article with a video clip of his historic flight. Amazing! Anyone know if he or his son are on MooneySpace? If so... Congrats Captain Moyer! https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article246840002.html

Fascinating! Those numbers are (within rounding error) exactly the same as my F (and the J) when you look at max gross or X number of lbs below gross. I wonder if that holds true for other models like @Hank's M20C?

Yes! His was the thread that got me interested in doing this. I ran across it the other day when I was searching for glide info. In fact, in that thread, @Immelmanhad a great spreadsheet that made me realize all I had to do was determine how long it took to descend 500' in each configuration. I posted his results below. I didn't feel the need to do it at idle and I wasn't quite brave enough to stop the prop. http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MTC2dOXsq7c/U4izgCOGnWI/AAAAAAAAASU/DWrLuAPKzXM/s1600/m20e_glide_test.jpg Now that I look through that thread again, a bit further down I find the glide slope chart from the J, which shows best glide speed of 105 mph at 2740 lbs (same as my F) as well as 98 mph at 2300 lbs. I guess I could have used that to extrapolate my best glide speed for my weight today should have been 94.4 mph, though I'm not sure I could have held my airspeed to the nearest 1/10 mph.

Yes. First pulled throttle to idle, then cut the mix. When you go to restore power, you want to make sure the throttle is retarded (either from pulling the mix or running a tank dry). If you don't, it roars back to life and can over speed your prop. That's basically the same graph I have. No info for less than gross weight.

So I went out flying tonight with the sole purpose of determining the actual glide slope for my particular plane. Experiment Parameters: 105 mph indicated airspeed per POH, 500' to stabilize descent rate, time the descent for 500' vertical. First test 2500 RPM (cruise), throttle idle, mix cutoff, then "feather" prop, 500' to stabilize, 500' timed. Airplane conditions: '67 M20F, 655 lbs under gross, most 201 mods added, needs washed and waxed. Results: 2500 RPM = 33.0 seconds = glide ratio 10.2; "Feathered" = 41.1 seconds = glide ratio 12.7 POH Data: Prop windmilling 105 mph glide ratio 10.2; Prop stopped 100 mph glide ratio 12.7 So was this just dumb luck? I think the best glide speed changes with weight, so my true best glide speed should have been lower than 105 (though I don't know exactly how much or how to calculate). I also assume the 201 mods would reduce my drag from the factory airplane. So is this just an example of multiple errors compounding to cancel one another out or is the best glide ratio a relatively fixed number at a given airspeed?

I think we have someone around here who flies an Ovation and did so regularly with some kids a while back. Anthony,@carusoam, you want to take a stab at this one?

I had one of those black hole incidents right after getting my license with my whole family onboard. I took off at night with a high cloud layer from a rural western Kansas airport that I was fairly familiar with having been there a few times during the day. Everything seemed perfectly normal until I left the runway lights behind and then... WHOA!!! Not even a single farmhouse light in sight with the small town directly behind me. I immediately went head down and kept telling myself, just keep the wings level and keep climbing, there's nothing out there. I didn't look up from my gauges until I reached 1000'. By then I could see some nearby towns and started my turn for home. One of the scariest flying moments I've had.

Just curious, why would anyone need to know how much unusable fuel is left in the plane? After all, you can't use it, so it doesn't do you any good. If you are doing some sort of unusable fuel calculation to mark your fuel stick, that's most likely not the best method. Much more accurate to just stick your tank before you fuel up and make a mark on it where the fuel level shows. Then fill up and subtract that from the total for that tank and label the line you just made. If you label those marks to the nearest 1/10th of gallon, you will soon have a fuel stick that is easily accurate to within a half gallon.

So, if I understand this correctly, I can take an old pilot up who hasn't flown in years, turn the controls over to him, and he can log that portion of the flight. The only catch is then I can't log that portion of the flight since I am only acting as PIC and not actually manipulating the controls. Please let me know if this is incorrect.

Well that makes everything clear as mud! Actually, I think I get it now.

Related question on this topic. Two fully rated, capable, current pilots decide to go for a flight. What, if anything, prevents one from saying I’ll act as PIC, you operate the controls, then we can both log the time?

I know others may gasp at this solution, but I had the same problem and it’s fixed now. I went to Walmart and found the thickest, squishiest, foam weatherstripping they had. Ironically, this was also the cheapest they had, less than $5. I replaced my door seal with that and it seals up perfectly. Much better than the factory seal I had before. Someone said that’s great, but how long will it last? It’s been in about a year with no signs of wear, so for $5, I’m happy!

"Is this a doable flight in a M20F?" Yes, the 960 nm flight is doable with the 64 gallon tanks of the M20F and you would still have legal reserves. For bladder comfort, you may want to make a stop somewhere along the way though! You've got to love the range of the Mooney. Seriously though, as other's have already said the weather will be your biggest obstacle. Be wary of winds aloft, they can make flight in the mountains extremely uncomfortable. Also, if you get a chance, some mountain flying training would be helpful. Not everything is intuitive in the mountains.

@Oldguy's method works well too, but you have to be patient to let the fuel flow through all the little holes and equalize before you mark your stick. I did it that way first and wasn't patient enough which caused me to have more fuel than the stick would show.

Aside from installing CiES fuel senders and connecting it to new fuel gauges, I think the best solution is to make your own fuel sticks. The process is very simple and yields accurate results to within a gallon. Step 1: Fly one tank empty. Step 2: Fill tank and record how many gallons go in. Step 3: Repeat steps one and two for the other side. Now you know your exact fuel capacity for each tank. (if they are different mark one side of your fuel stick for each tank) Step 4: Go fly and before refueling make a mark on your fuel stick of how much fuel is in each tank. Step 5: Fill each tank up and note how many gallons it took. Now subtract that number from the total for that tank. Record on your stick how many gallons you had in the tank at that mark (to the nearest 1/10th of a gallon). Step 6: Repeat steps 4 & 5 on every flight until you have lots of marks on your fuel stick. You will have VERY accurate fuel sticks that are customized for your specific tank/bladder combination.

If the leather wraps don't make sense financially, bicycle grip tape makes an amazingly comfortable wrap for $15. I wouldn't paint or powder coat them simply due to the high thermal mass. As mentioned earlier, they will burn your hands in the summer and freeze them in the winter. The bike grip tape is comfortable year round. As for cleaning, I used black, haven't cleaned them in over a year , and they still look brand new.

At least it was a C-17. Anytime the military is in the neighborhood, we have these tiny little F-16's zipping around. Given their size and speed, it's a bit harder to spot them and keep track of where they are!

This is a lot like asking how fast you should drive down the highway. There are some limits, but as long as you're within those, do whatever you want. Are some speeds more efficient than others? Yep. Are some speeds faster than others? Yep. Does it make you wrong if you don't drive the fastest or most efficient speed? Nope. That said, unless you have high CHT's, full throttle and max RPM gives you the most power and will get you to your cruise altitude the fastest. Some say that is also the most efficient since you can reduce power for cruise sooner. I believe the current school of thought is that there is no benefit to reducing RPM during climb, but also no harm.

I’m going to contradict the other advice you have been given. There just isn’t enough difference between the C, E, or F model to worry about for your mission. In fact, the only time I would worry about which model is if you are going to regularly fly with 3 or 4 seats filled. Then you’d need the F (or the G). I think you will be much better off focusing on how well the plane was maintained, how often it was (is) flown, and how it is equipped. For solo flight or with a single passenger, there just isn’t much difference between the three. However, there are huge differences between the maintenance, recent hours flown, and installed equipment within each model!

Must be regional. Here in small town middle America, most planes live in unlocked hangars with the keys hanging on one of the instrument knobs, and unrestricted access onto the airports. I'm a little more cautious than that, but depending on my perception of the risk, I've left the keys in the plane, unlocked, on the ramp for short periods of time.

Thanks for the heads up Ned. I'll check this out and add the second nut at my next annual.

I am/was already considering the G5 before the AV-30 became available. Based on reading other's experiences, I've always thought Garmin didn't play well with others. Is that not the case for the G5. Could it, for instance, integrate with the TruTrack should it ever be certified? I definitely want to give myself the most integration options down the road for both an autopilot and a navigational GPS.