Davidv

Ok, so this may be very obvious to some people already, but I've been thinking about the origination of Mooney's modern naming convention. Most companies put a lot of thought and strategy into developing naming conventions for their products. However, my hypothesis (again, correct me if this is already obvious or know to others), is that the late model names came from a convenient coincidence. When the TIO-540 AF1A became the TIO-540 AF1B, it went from the "alpha" to the "bravo" version of the engine which informally named the TLS as "Bravo" (a little easier than "Turbo Lycoming Sabre). When Mooney was developing the the next model and thinking of an appropriate name, I could see someone in marketing say "Well we already have the Bravo, why don't we call this one the Ovation?". Thereafter we saw the Encore, Allegro, Acclaim. If, for example, the engine was a TIO-540-AF1D and it become a TIO-540-AF1E, I'm pretty certain we wouldn't be flying around in Mooney Echos. Was a coincidental phonetic alphabet engine designation responsible for future Mooney names?

I’m not going to hate on any discounts, but I think the “customer loyalty” is pretty funny. “even though I was considering putting in a TSIO-550 in my bravo, I decided to stick with you guys and go with the 540”

The issue I had was that the software in my KLN-94 was a version that was slightly too old to allow for database updates through my PC. Honeywell took mercy on me and shipped a card free of charge.

Unfortunately not, and the replacement doesn't illuminate at night. The only benefit to the porsche replacement is that you don't have to do any panel work (that is, if your current clock is broken). If you don't mind cutting the panel you can of course source any other clock.

If you're referring to the little digital clock on the upper left part of the panel, yes I do have some experience. It was made by Mid-continent but the clock is no longer manufactured. However, it is the exact same clock as the porsche 944 digital clock which can be found on ebay. That's what I put in and it works fine. Let me know if you have any questions.

You must be my neighbor, and yes, the tropical inspired bathrooms right outside our hangars are a nice touch...

Stop depressing us members in South Florida...

I'm not an expert on the topic, but teardown does not equal overhaul. If the strike happened prior to the last overhaul I'd feel a lot more comfortable than just saying the engine was taken apart and inspected.

The only reason why I may want to go 900 is to keep the display on the left side of my panel without recutting a new panel right now. If it's going to replace all of my factory gauges I'd rather have it more directly in my view than having to glance over to the right too far. This is just my situation, and if I was designing a brand new panel, the 930 would probably be the way to go.

It would seem that in a worse case scenario you could just have a regular non-battery operated A5 flow meter that could be connected directly to your 02 port if the battery stopped operating. You'll use more 02 but at least it will be functioning.

That's a good point, it's probably something related to that, I'm doing some minor panel work in 2-3 weeks to fix an A/P issue so I'll check that as well.

Thanks, I was told by JPI and my avionics shop that the EDM-900 would be the primary engine gauge replacement? I believe the 930 just provides a larger screen?

Thanks Scott, I was actually all set to get them until a few friends (and the shop that I got a quote from) told me about the bad experiences. I think I just need to speak with a few other installers to see if they've had the same issues or have successfully installed them in a long body (I'm not sure how it would be different from other bodies, but maybe some particulars involving the larger tank). I have the Monroy 118 gallons and I realize that even with the CiES I'll only see fuel when it gets below 89 gallons which is perfectly fine by me.

Thanks! I was going to go with the CiES but some friends have said they had a lot of trouble getting them to work right in my model (and they would probably add about $3000 in parts and labor to the install since i need 4).

Thanks Lance. This is certainly an interesting question and let me preface it by saying that my fuel gauges intermittent. When I fill up they will show a larger quantity and then "dance" throughout the flight. Having said that, it's my understanding that CFR 23 used to say that your fuel gauges only need to be accurate when they read zero and there is zero fuel in the tank. This is the case for me as my gauges will never show fuel higher than what I believe is in the tank and certainly not when a tank is empty. However, CFR 23 was updated to say the following: §23.2430 Fuel systems. (a) Each fuel system must— (1) Be designed and arranged to provide independence between multiple fuel storage and supply systems so that failure of any one component in one system will not result in loss of fuel storage or supply of another system; (2) Be designed and arranged to prevent ignition of the fuel within the system by direct lightning strikes or swept lightning strokes to areas where such occurrences are highly probable, or by corona or streamering at fuel vent outlets; (3) Provide the fuel necessary to ensure each powerplant and auxiliary power unit functions properly in all likely operating conditions; (4) Provide the flightcrew with a means to determine the total useable fuel available and provide uninterrupted supply of that fuel when the system is correctly operated, accounting for likely fuel fluctuations; (5) Provide a means to safely remove or isolate the fuel stored in the system from the airplane; (6) Be designed to retain fuel under all likely operating conditions and minimize hazards to the occupants during any survivable emergency landing. For level 4 airplanes, failure due to overload of the landing system must be taken into account; and (7) Prevent hazardous contamination of the fuel supplied to each powerplant and auxiliary power unit. (b) Each fuel storage system must— (1) Withstand the loads under likely operating conditions without failure; (2) Be isolated from personnel compartments and protected from hazards due to unintended temperature influences; (3) Be designed to prevent significant loss of stored fuel from any vent system due to fuel transfer between fuel storage or supply systems, or under likely operating conditions; (4) Provide fuel for at least one-half hour of operation at maximum continuous power or thrust; and (5) Be capable of jettisoning fuel safely if required for landing. (c) Each fuel storage refilling or recharging system must be designed to— (1) Prevent improper refilling or recharging; (2) Prevent contamination of the fuel stored during likely operating conditions; and (3) Prevent the occurrence of any hazard to the airplane or to persons during refilling or recharging. Need assistance? To me, the term "means to determine" is a little less limiting than talking about a fuel gauge which could imply using the totalizer and wing gauges. Nevertheless, it's a grey area at best, the PHAK says something different, and I'm trying to get my EDM installed ASAP so I can get rid of this issue as well as a TIT gauge that seems to be having some issues (I currently have a JPM-700 so I can at least manage temps).

I've done a few 5.5 hr non-stops followed by 1-2 hr legs on O2 by myself and that's about my limit. I find that my energy level and alertness stays at a very high level until I get home when I'm completely wasted (I avoided using the verb "crash" here). I feel like the effects from the mental stress of constantly checking instruments, talking to ATC, and otherwise flying is latent for me, which can be dangerous.

Me neither, in fact, I've never pulled the cabin heat more than about a half inch open otherwise it gets too hot. I usually crack it, wait for it to heat up, then close it. I would take the advice of some of the others above since it seems you have some sort of leak.

I'm looking at changing out my original gauges for an EDM-900 and have a few quick questions for those who have done the same: 1. For those who have a late 80s/early 90s Bravo, were you able to get the EDM-900 to fit where the gauges are currently located next to the gear lever? I've seen a few pictures and it looks like maybe some minor panel modification but I'm hoping to do this without cutting a new panel or removing it to be cut for now. 2. I've heard some conflicting information on whether I could use my original analog fuel senders or I would have to buy new. One shop told me they could send out my senders (ha) for a relatively inexpensive overhaul and they should work fine. I know digital may be more accurate but at the moment my fuel gauges don't work at all (which I believe are my analog gauges and not senders for a few reasons) so I depend on my own fuel calculations, totalizer, and wing gauges to manage fuel. 3. Any good experience with shops in FL who have done the install? I've got one quote from a shop that I know is always high but it's tough to find others who I would trust with correctly attaching the sensors on the engine ect... Thanks for any help you can provide! David

Yes, I don’t think it would be ever something to rely on. I’m also referring to the speed switch that prevents retraction below a certain IAS. I can’t imagine the speed setting could be calibrated to adequately prevent all types of mistakes. For instance, put it too high and you risk people not being able to raise the gear on a go around if they got slow. Put it too low and it does nothing to prevent the person who thinks they are putting the flaps up when going 50 knots down the runway but actually touched the gear lever.

This is just heresay, but I recently met someone who owns a airline pilot staffing company and he said that Boeing is designing the 797 as single pilot with a second pilot on the ground in a drone like room helping to manage multiple flights. Who knows how many years away this is, but it’s another dismal reminder that aviation in general will change substantially over the next 50 years. Yes, I’m some ways for the better, but probably not for the people who don’t enjoy engaging the autopilot at 300 feet.

This reminds me that I really like where Mooney put the gear handle in our planes. I know one of the worries that some people have is that you’re going to inadvertently raise the gear. However, with the gear handle nearly at the glare shield I think the chances of this are very low. In the later model Mooney’s they put the gear handle at the bottom of the panel (which could be a little easier to mistake in a high stress situation). Out of curiosity, can anyone who has the gear handle at the bottom tell me what the minimum gear retraction speed is before the safety switch (if that’s what it’s called) prevents retraction?

I’ve flown here once and second that. Even though I never got to fly I nto the real Meigs field, it reminded me of that airport. Buildings directly to your left (you’re pretty much in downtown St. Petersburg), runway built out on water, and a nice little parking garage to clear on short final to 7. Great airport.

On the west coast I like the restaurant at Venice.

Not to restart the 02 discussion, but I’m the same way. Even when I’m at lower altitudes I’ll use it feel a lot better when I land. May be placebo but doesn’t matter to me...

Haha yes, that would be a lot of oil. I had meant 6-7 hrs per quart.