dkkim73

Somewhere a product manager is smiling at you and pretending he's listening to you, but going to do the same thing anyway.

Love it! I think we might be making some assumptions. You (or your wife) probably don't want to just build time flying in circles as slowly as possible. A Mooney will be a pretty efficient way to fly and have some adventures. Agree you can go slower or faster as the need dictates in most models. Even the TN. But a nice 4 cyl will give you lots of options on the frugal end. D

Is that a NH guard plane? That would make sense. Guessing that's one of the 767 based tankers.

Has anyone managed that? The plane is certified with the G1000 but I suppose that doesn't mean you couldn't customize the panel and slide things around. One thing that might work without too much change is to replace the AI with a GI-275 and put a tiny 2nd AI over all the way on the left. Both pilots would have a backup and you keep the mechanical baro gauges. Here's a wacky question: if you had an EIA. GI-275, could it talk to the GEA1 and display info if the main displays went bad?

Very sobering. That is sad, such a young family. Probably new to and excited about aviation. RIP Those are pretty low speeds. I wonder if there was an issue with partial power that lulled the pilot into continuing the takeoff. I agree with @Schllc, those speeds in the final 3rd of the runway get your attention.

Interested in this. I think you have a lot of leeway. I do like the redundancy of the altimeter and airspeed, non-electric. Replacing the electric AI with a GI 275 adds complexity, but both are electric, so... It's been hinted that the GI 275 could interface with the G1000 for extra functionality, but not clear what's "approved" by Garmin.

You're just saying that because of the jaw dislocating and hitting the floor, and the multiple heart attacks. Not to mention the puzzled look from the wife. Ha. I resemble that remark. That's definitely been my experience. I remember hanging it on the prop to climb to 10k in the hot summer in a rental plane with passengers in the 2000's. Carefully planning low routes. Now I blow through 10K early in the climb and mostly worry about crossing weather systems. Then again, amazing what the Mooney airframe can do in many forms. Lots of happy J owners taking amazing trips. I passed 200 hrs in the plane in a bit under 1.5 yrs, but that's with a commute... I hope I can keep up the regularity, it really helps.

I haven't flown a lot recently in areas with lower MEAs. Out in the west, the turbo means good climb rates all the way up, and easy compliance with MEAs and strategic dodging of icing layers. My plane does not have cooling issues where I've flown it so far (up to FL210), usually but not exclusively LOP. But I hear some variation in experience based on the engine, cooling baffle design, and ROP vs. LOP operations. In my mind, the turbos make it easier to manage power, at least with a good design and automatic wastegate. And, practically, you get full power (or whatever you select) higher up as opposed to letting ambient pressure set power for you. Aside: Your comment about fancy panel vs. TKS, I would also choose TKS. I love the fancy panel (G1000) but you can get a lot of the same SA with thoughtful selection of other avionics and a good tablet GPS (Garmin etc) or iPad.

That's pretty cool. Do you know if the TKS installations in those planes are generally FIKI or inadvertant only? If FIKI that would be a pretty nice solution, though NA. Ovations with TKS might be another option, though above that budget I think.

You will find a great plane, love that plane, log many hours, get good return on money, and then in about 8 yrs you will be back here as your family grows asking what to do and being told to buy a Saratoga. But seriously, the Mooney is a *great* choice for an adventuresome couple. Especially in your case where she will be a flyer, too. Definitely think on the turbo question. For me, it became a no-brainer due to terrain and wx where I fly. Do you have a fairly good idea what tours you will do, or could you end up anywhere? Welcome aboard. I think there are two other AH 64 guys here, and someone who by their name might have flown the Cobra.

Do you recall how long ago or what title? That's a good series.

Well-done. Love the cloud cap, too!

I wonder if anyone has any good reliability and time-in-service numbers on engines rebuilt by "higher-end" shops like Victor, Gann, etc. I've heard anecdotal positive reports even about small rebuilders. So also about machining valve guides to reduce wear etc.

It's interesting in the first graph the drop after 2000 hrs. I wonder if there is a a subgroup that, since it does things on condition and goes beyond TBO (often 2000 hrs) might *also* be taking better care of their engines? This data would necessarily reflect a few different cohorts from "wait til it breaks, overhaul when told" to "borescope and do compressions every 35 hrs". An aside, I had my plane in the shop last week: - Alternator and coupling inspected last week (about 850hrs since replaced with new, SB says inspect every 500 hrs). Brushes were pretty worn (predictable) but the coupling also failed the torque check. I decided to do this after listening to a recent Finer Points podcast with Jeff Simon, bringing up discussion of occasionally catastrophic failure modes in this part. Example of periodic inspection and expected wear. - Borescoped while they had the plane down for oil change and plugs out. Valves look good except for some deposits on the oldest cylinder. Lapped. Example of surveillance for known failure modes. The rotocoil replacements prophylactically likely helped. Aside from oil analysis, I'm not looking "deeper" in the engine. I can definitely see the argument of the "horse you know" being more reliable.

True. OTOH it might help as an implicit subsidy. Cover costs and enable kind of like "individual pricing" in an economics sense. They tool up to sell UAV engines to various "states", and can sell at a mid-price to the certificated market, maybe even at a lower price to the experimental scene.

Look at Lightspeed website comments, it sounds like a non-standard connector. At least not a USB standard USB. Suggestions: 1. post a photo of the port here in case someone recognizes an industry-generic plug (still don't know the exact wiring though) 2. contact Lightspeed, and/or Sporty's if you bought it there HTH

I wonder the same. I was puzzled by Don's experience. I almost didn't get the O2D2, but am happy I did. Interestingly, I believe I have the same (or similar) altitude-compensating regulator (IIUC) in the factory system in the Acclaim. Mountain High's guy (Eric, I think, whoever is the main person who helps you select a product) said the system will actually provide too *high* a pressure and, to get it to work correctly, I needed to inline a regulator upstream: https://www.mhoxygen.com/product-category/regulators/regulators-reducing-ilr/ So, I suppose the system might not work correctly if the pressure is too high. Though I think in a previous post Don detailed that he worked with the company on this and so presumably this has been tried. It seems plausible that the depth of inhalation could cause this issue, since the puff comes early on. Whereas a continuous flow will give you close to the same mix, except maybe when using a mask. Anyhow, I find my own results vary a lot with breathing technique, either free-flow or O2D2. I get a lot of variability with the cannula, similar to what someone described above, sometimes fine on D5, occasionally needing to switch up to F2. Might be physiologic state that day, who knows. I would have the same problem I think using a cannula with any system. With a mask, it consistently works flawlessly regardless of attention and effort. The real game-changer with the pulse-delivery systems is that it makes fills so infrequent that: 1. you just use oxygen whenever it makes any sense at all (I usually just go D5 on any XC, and always at night) 2. you don't have to plan ahead on fills, which I had to do using the factory system at continuous flow I imagine the concentrator gives a person a similar sense of freedom. An aside: a person above mentioned how hard it is to hold your breath long enough to drop your SaO2 at sea level. That's because your primary respiratory drive (if healthy) is from too much CO2. Less CO2 at altitude makes it easier to not breath enough. Also, fun fact, this is why it's dangerous to hyperventilate prior to a long underwater swim, you can fight your air hunger long enough to pass out from lack of O2. I think we, collectively, may have found a replacement for the "lean of peak" discussion topic

The thought that crosses my mind is: Has quality improved, declined, or stayed the same at the relevant factory? So many pressures, changes in upstream supply, market, etc, it's not clear that something built 20 yrs ago might not have been made better. But then again some parts may simply fatigue regardless. And in some areas process capabilities have probably improved, the question is, does that flow through to the specific manufacturer? (Ie it can be done better, but does it make business sense). I'm hopefully a ways away from this decision, knock on my wooden head, but will be asking the same question regarding Continental.

This is another area where IFR melts away the problems. Sounds like poor culture and practice on ATC's part, though.

The Cessna Mixmaster holds an odd fascination for me. It actually looks like a pretty usable airplane, great vis, and at least some I've seen aren't that pricey.

No, you're not wrong. The argument is that if you get runaway trim, or the trim state is very different than you think, it will fight you when the AP clicks itself off (or you click it off). IIUC from Junkman's description above, the PFD/AP display will tell you to trim with a little arrow. In effect, you become the pitch trim axis servo in that design. IIUC The argument is that that makes you more aware.

I had a 2006 Subaru STi as a daily driver. "It's a 4-door, it's practical..." uh, yeah. Actually it was. Amazing car. My dad had an old (60s? 70s?) Citroën SM he worked on and loved. We took a ski vacation as a family of 4 with baggage and skis in it. If the clowns can do it, so can we. But seriously, if you can make the W&B work it's an adventure (early on at least). I don't think it obviates the issue about more hauling capacity. Since you @Zippy_Bird are open to the idea of novel/dual solutions, consider if you can't find a good rental/club plane, you could try a partnership with the one that is a better fit (more common mission, more predictable scheduling, better shared cost, etc). And yes, definitely, do some fun/intro flights. Make it light, easy and a treat. Go when it's calm, etc. You probably already know some of this. And, minor correction, not to be pedantic. Technically, it doesn't turn money into noise, it turns fuel into fun, with the waste energy dissipated as the sound of freedom

Agree, esp. for 6-pack flying. And man, the 430W's still pack a lot of value...

I've thought that from time to time. Here's the other end of the spectrum from the MPPP in early June:

Your post is pretty thought-provoking for me. I don't think I agree about it (PTRM) being bad to include in an autopilot, on balance. I can see the other side of it. E.g. You point out it is has a few potentially sinister failure modes. OTOH so does flying a coupled approach without an autothrottle. I suppose I'm generally pretty aware of the trim state, and sometimes use the AP to trim for me. E.g. doing engine runs (working out power settings) or slow flight... I hit ALT or adjust power and I am aware it's trimming for me. But sometimes it can do things you aren't specifically thinking of that moment, like on a level-off. That would still happen with only an elevator (PTCH) axis. And if you get way behind it takes longer to undo. Intersting thread. It actually had never occurred to me that a GFC500 or GFC700 would be installed without a trim servo.