Hank

I still have the original gears, and it's 52 turns. My first-ever time, during transition, was done in the air. Had the pleasure of one non-practice event in the air, too. DO NOT practice in the pattern--go somewhere empty, like the practice area, and do it a couple of mistakes high. Be sure to disengage and fold the crank handle before pushing the breaker back in. Not thinking about that because the whole complex thing was so new, I learned [unforgettably] the hard way. My leg was sore but not bruised, and the headset was only yanked partially off of my head. But I'm always conscious of this now!

Quote: N601RX So how many people have the new Ipad on order? I held out on buying the 2 for the last 3 months until the new one came out.

Quote: Mooneyjet For those of you who fly non-turbo, my plane been a "c" model; any significant performance if you climb above 10" thousand on cross country trips, any advantage with fuel burns, as well what do you guys plan for fuel burns on the "c" model.do you ever lean back when climbing, thanks

Not if she had sat for a week or two, topped off after flying. There's a little variability in the gap I leave [1/2-3/4"] for expansion, too. Now, however, I know there's not a gallon per tank variation! Fly, top off, park for a day, or two-three weeks in winter. Fly, top off, determine gph [high due to leaks]. Now my gph is down significantly! :-) If only $ per gallon would also go back down . . .

Quote: flyboy0681 I haven't had any spacial disorientation issues at all, especially after recent unusual attitude drills, but I know it can come at anytime, anywhere and for any reason. Try to get at least one. The way I described did it for me, in actual, by myself. The first time I simply rolled into a procedure turn without slowing down first, early in my training. Fell right out the bottom of the clouds in the turn, recovered, climbed back up and slowed down. You don't want your first-ever episode to be alone. If nothing else, try the classic dropped pen move with your instructor. Regarding your "use" of your heading bug, I find it difficult to put anything past most instructors. Yep. Also found out that the heading bug banks much higher than standard rate if you are making a significant turn [note to self: remember this when flying in actual]. Now I hand-fly all of my practice approaches, and decide based on conditions for the few I've made in actual. If it's just penetrating a layer, I don't sweat it; prolonged flight, sure, that's what AP's and heading bugs are for, especially if it's not smooth.

All you can do for "instructoritis" is put post-its in for all planned airports, including alternates. Mine made me hand-fly everything. I made the mistake of asking if I could use the heading bug, and she was fine with that until she realized that moving the bug also moved the nose of the airplane . . . then no more! The biggest problem I have now is programming clearances and deviations on the fly. The 430 does NOT have user-friendly interface, but it was apparently designed before the ramped-up interest in Human-Machine Interface design. [OK, maybe it caused the interest.] Switchology is an arcane science, and I always seem to need the part I am least proficient with, and then there are those durn south Florida Victor airways that ATC likes so much--good luck with those. I just follow along until the next VOR, cause they never seem to be perfectly straight, like V3 from Melbourne to Ormond Beach. The moral of the story is practice hard and get proficient at managing everything, flying correctly, switchology and interacting with ATC, and then the checkride will seem easy. It will also beat the procedures into your brain, so that later when you haven't done something in a while, you won't be learning it completely from scratch but dredging it out of your memory. Something to practice with your II/safety pilot--fly along on an initial clearance situation [cleared to 3000, expect higher in ten minutes], powered back and leaned, then get cleared to 8000 and push everything in. The sensation when in IMC is quite surprising when it hits you for the first time, like it did me between FXE and Palm Beach in the clouds with light rain. That was my second spatial disorientation, 1½ years after my checkride [the first was with my CFII]. That's why so much flight time is required, the dependence and trust in your instruments has to override your physical sensations; that overwhelming feeling that you are turning hard left is really hard to ignore, but the DG isn't moving and the AI & TC both show no bank and no turn rate, so don't do anything.

Nah! I think he just made somebody's day! From what I've read, Seth, you're on the right path. I can't give you any assistance, since my carb doesn't do LOP very well. But at 9-10K, peak seems to work well for me, too. But now that I've resealed my tanks, overall fuel consumption seems to be down, so I get to refigure everything. My favorite feed run went from 8 gals to only 6 gals, so I'm a happy camper and don't mind re-learning my fuel use. Darn, honey, we have to go fly more, and visit family again, to see how much fuel it REALLY takes to get there!

Before I take off, I put post-its in the book for the destination(s). If I think I know which approach I will use, I'll attach the sticky to the facing page, making it open to the right one. I keep binder clips in two sizes [med & large] on the old microphone clip on the window post to hold the durn book open. They are especially handy when the approach I need is on the skinny part and the book wants to open to the fat part. Just in case, I have a couple of extras in my flight bag. They're cheap. For practice, I sometimes remember to download the approach plates and print them two per page, fold it between them and put it on my kneeboard. Then it's just a matter of setting the power where I want, and configuring the radios to match the plate. Don't forget to identify! And watch the altimeter. I find the timer in my G327 transponder convenient to time approaches, more so than watching the second hand go around and trying to remember the minute/second that I started inbound. Inbound at 5:20 [rounded to the nearest 5 seconds], and 3:20 becomes 8:40--I'd rather watch the digital timer count up to 3:20, especially when I'm also trying to remember the min altitude and initial missed instructions. Isn't the aging process wonderful? At least I learned in my late 40's, so the adjustments aren't too harsh, I used most of them while earning the rating in the first place. Now, I just have to remember what they are, and to use them. If you get behind, the plane flies very well at 90 knots [approach flaps, gear up, ~18"/2300 works for me], she's a little squirrel-ly [no offense, Squirrel!] clean at 16"/2300 for my taste.

Sorry to hear that, ELT. My glareshield is made from covered in shinyl vinyl, in two pieces. One fills in the extra gap where the bottom of the windshield moved forward, then there is the original-looking one. Both are covered similarly. I don't recall what it's made of, but it is somewhat flimsy, and the vinyl edges are not adhered to the back very well, requiring some tape to hold it together. Oh, the things we find when we dig into our planes! But it IS functional, and when assembled it looks pretty good.

Yes, getting the rating IS work! But having it, and using it, is much, much less. Staying current requires time and effort, but nothing like learning it in the first place. Keep on keeping on, it is so worth it once you are finished.

Welcome, Brian! There's lots of talk about Mooneys being 'tight' for two reasons: 1) The seat is close to the floorpan, so you sit in sportscar mode with your feet out in front of you. Cessna and Beech pilots sit more upright with their feet flat on the floor. 2) Early Mooneys like mine, the short-body, have virtually no back seat legroom. Some people will sit on one rear seat with their feet in the opposite footwell for comfort. 3) Oh, yeah, the panel is closer than in many other planes. But I can reach every button, knob and switch [except breakers on the right side] without having to lean forward. That's beneficial when the going gets rough. I've had my plane for almost five years now, and love it! Get a turbo model if you live in or visit the intermountain west regularly, or fly far enough to be above 15-16K often. I typically cruise back-and-forth to Charlotte Exec, Fayetteville or the Atlanta area at 8-10K, sometimes a little higher around Asheville if the wind is strong to clear the bumps. A J-model would run ~20 knots faster for an extra 2½-3 gph. but I'm a Cheap B@stard so that's fine by me. P.S.--there are three kinds of people in the world: those who can count, and those who can't.

Jim/Dan/Dave, et. al.-- The Mooney is an incredible airplane, very capable, dependable and versatile. I flew back-and-forth over the Appalachians many times VFR, and even went west to Yellowstone and back without an Instrument rating. Yes, we sat down early one time each way, but stopping short of Springfield, IL by hitting Lincoln instead didn't cost much time or distance, and we discovered it's a pretty neat little town with a museum at the airport. Yes, I canceled a few VFR flights for weather. Yes, I still cancel a few IFR flights for weather, most recently last week. Clear and a million here; 1500-3000 scattered-to-broken there; moderate turbulence along the entire 2-hour route; convective sigmet covering all of the destination state [RDU is pretty much in the middle of NC]. Didn't like the briefing that morning, so we didn't fly. It is very possible to have lots of fun and go lots of neat places, even in these wonderful Mooneys, as a VFR pilot. Been there, done that, had a blast! I flew 275 VFR hours in almost three years, from receiving the Complex Endorsment at 78.7 hours to the IA checkride. Went lots of places, only missed a few flights. Since I fly for fun and not for work, I avoid "hard IFR" when possible, but when you are traveling, weather happens. [Go around? Land and wait it out? or Press on?] The rating gives me security on two fronts: 1) I have the ability to find the airport even if I can't see it; 2) I trust the instruments, and can interpret them in the face of conflicting kinesthic input. Need to mess up your head a little? Fly along in the clouds [or under the hood] at low power [such as an initial clearance to 3000', expect higher in 10 minutes], then go briskly into a full-power climb. I learned not to do this by doing it once; now I push things forward in the clouds somewhat slower. Getting the PPL and learning the Mooney made me a competent pilot. This was reinforced, and I was made a more accurate pilot, by the additional experiences of IFR training. Maybe because my CFII was a former regional airline pilot, flying into such fun locations as Johnstown, PA; maybe it was just the airline training and procedures; whatever, I now hold heading and altitude much closer, even VFR, and my wife complains much less about landing away from the centerline. But you can still be an accurate VFR pilot, you just have to make yourself work at it, or pay a II to sit beside you and make you work! Is the IA useful? No doubt. Is more training a good thing to get? Certainly! Do I get to fly more often? Not especially, local fun flights and meals out just aren't fun in the clouds, and the food quality doesn't justify the risk. Did the Instrument training improve my flying? You bet! Do I feel better about long XC trips? Mostly, but it's still a judgement call with the briefing and forecast. THAT is the place where pilots seem to have been falling down for the last hundred years. And judgement is so darn hard to teach, much less test for! Keep flying VFR if that's what you want. It has worked for thousands of pilots for tens of decades, and will continue to do so. It all comes down to your judgement--should I fly today? Land short or press on? will there be a hole in the undercast developing below me or not? should I really take off in the fog just because it's legal, when I can't land again IFR or VFR in case of problems? Are those clouds ahead thicker on the other side of the mountains?

There ya go--now 6 out of 7. I started on mine two years after buying the Mooney, then between electrical gremlins and winter weather, took most of a year to finish up.

Quote: 1964-M20E If I’m not mistaken the factory tachometer is mechanically driven and there is some error when you view an analog gauge form an angle. High accuracy analog gauges have a mirror on the face of the dial behind the needle so you can ensure your are correctly lined up to the face of the gauge. Most likely the digital readout is more accurate than the mechanical gauge.

Quote: skyking what the hell happened there? 4 reposts!

Here are a few more details: http://www2.starexponent.com/news/2012/mar/04/nh-woman-critically-injured-rappahannock-plane-cra-ar-1739770/ Engine trouble?

Whenever I see anything funny, I hit 'Refresh' and often it will clear up.

Quote: orangemtl Aspen seems to have done a good job, overall. I'd love one, but my money is committed elsewhere [paying for the plane, fuel, training, etc. right now]. Without the 'lousy' Mooney gear, and 'outdated' steam gauges, and 'thirsty', 'outdated' piston engines, and 'temperamental' electrical systems, we'd all be on the ground. Thanks to all of those dumb, incompetent, outdated, sloppy engineers with their unreliable suppliers, I can fly through the air. If it's stupid but it works, it isn't stupid. Same goes for lousy, outdated, tempermental, etc. Even our 'flimsy' gear with such an 'awful' ride seem to have fewer parts, fewer problems and lower costs than other 'preferred' gear systems. Not so stupid after all, is it?

Lots more glass panel vs. steam discussion here: http://forums.aopa.org/showthread.php?p=1499650#post1499650

Quote: Hank The difference is smallest among the low-power models, and the reason for it remains unclear. One possibility is that analog gauges can be more easily interpreted during rapid changes in airspeed and altitude.

Here's a revealing quote from the AOPA study: “We consistently see more accidents during takeoffs, landings, and go-arounds in glass panel airplanes,” Kenny said. The difference is smallest among the low-power models, and the reason for it remains unclear. One possibility is that analog gauges can be more easily interpreted during rapid changes in airspeed and altitude. Pilots with glass panels may also be “spending more time staring at the displays instead of looking outside,” Kenny said. If glass panels had airspeed and altitude readouts that are not moving tapes composed of little numbers that must be concentrated on to tell the value, but were instead readable at a glance, then this increased accident rate may actually improve. Interestingly enough, though, there was virtually no difference in the overall accident rate except in these operations where glass-panel aircraft had more accidents. This is a clear opportunity for the glass panel manufacturer to make something useful for GA pilots. Airspeed tapes may make good sense in an F-18 where speed may range from 140-1800 knots, but my interest is primarily in the 50-90 knot range for the flight phases shown above, and my Vne is a whopping 174 knots, not a huge range from stall.

Quote: aviatoreb What is the SA (standard acronym) for that?

Sure, fast changes will be obvious. But if I'm bouncing along in the clouds with up & down drafts, rolling across the mountains of southern WV, I want to know what my altitude is right now. If the big hand is pointing up IFR or down VFR, chances are I haven't moved 1000' without noticing; if it's not up/down, I need to correct it. With a tape, I have to look at the number long enough to recognize it, then decide if it's right or wrong, and if it's wrong, am I high or low, THEN make a correction. IFR steam gage, right of vertical I correct down; left of vertical, I correct up. Opposite corrections apply for VFR, though, since the needle should point down. And coming in on an approach, when looking for a step down or minimum altitude, it's nice to not have to think about what the actual number is, just is it still larger than my target? 1400' is the big four down on the right, the needle is moving through 7, so I still need to go down some more. Harder to do with a tape, I have to read 17, and somewhere between 20 and 30. It's just not on my comfortable list. Some systems I would have to read 1, and somewhere between 720 and 740, still not comfortable. Hold the pointer still and move the numbers will never be as quick to read as hold the numbers still and move the pointer. Dealing with complex airspace is a whole 'nother matter, and I think this is an advantage that Aspen has. There's no need to put airspeed, altitude, OAT, Groundspeed and Horizon overlaid on top of a moving map with weather. Separation can be a good thing--put the information on one screen, the map with airspace issues on a separate screen. Then I can alternate between the two, and keep the airplane in good control while [hopefully] not blowing airspace. But I know which of the two is the more important one! After all, nobody sends airspace bust notifications to smoking holes.

I just don't like "tapes" for altitude and airspeed. The pointer is always in the same place, regardless of value, and I have to look longer to read the number. Like with clocks--I can glance at an analog clock and know the time without reading numbers; with a digital, I have to look longer and read the digits. sometimes after glancing at the clock, while the time has sunk in [ten minutes til the meeting], I can't tell someone the actual time without stopping to think. Having to 'pause for thought' after each glance is not something I want to do while bouncing through the clouds. I would, however, like an Aspen PFD one day, keeping the AI and Alt round dials.

Quote: jetdriven Descending from 12,000 feet and remaining in the yellow arc of the tachometer for 15 minutes or more might be considered continuous operation. It is not a prohibition, it says to "avoid continuous operation". Earlier Mooneys had a redline on the tachometer between ~2200-2500 RPM. They transition through that as well. OMG! Surely you aren't advocating reduced-power descents??? To come down from cruise to pattern, I just push forward to my chosen descent rate [typically 500 fpm], trim out the forces, and every now and again nudge the throttle and mixture to maintain cruise MP/EGT. Level off at or near pattern altitude depending on terrain, reduce throttle a little and work the trim to slow down. Thus I'm out of any restriced operating bands right up until midfield downwind, and from there around to the numbers is not "continuous operation" nor is it a significant % power. My Performance Tables don't go below about 60% [~20"/2300], but if level and clean that is well above 90 knots, and I like 90 mph for downwind.