KSMooniac

I understand how you feel. I'm getting a GTX-330ES installed this week, and I called late yesterday to check. They said it was done except for the paperwork, and then he started telling me about the neat voice features of the -328. I said "you mean the -330?" and he went OOPS. I haven't heard anything today, so I suspect there is more than simply sliding the -330 in the new tray...I bet they have to change some of the wiring. I still hope they finish today so I can fly this weekend.

That sounds awful. Good luck with the resolution! I'm a happy EDM-700 user, although I didn't install mine. I'm tempted to upgrade to a -730 or -830, but more than likely will wait until a do a glass panel overhaul and go for a full replacement monitor/instrument package and delete my old engine gauges entirely.

I'm currently getting a 330ES installed after my original KT76 (not the A, even) threw craps a few weeks ago. I will have no money left for a G500! I'm also telling myself I'll be good and pay off the plane before throwing money into a G500 or Aspen...hopefully I'll listen to myself too. Like computers, there are cost advantages to waiting on stuff like this, so I'm content for now.

Docket, please post if/when you're headed to McKinney. That is my hometown, and I might be going back for a visit Friday evening or Saturday AM. It would be great to meet you and see your baby if the timing is good!

Another gorgeous Mooney!

I have no idea why you keep calling the 400/500 series VFR boxes...they make single-pilot IFR an absolute breeze for this IFR pilot. I learned on VOR/NDB and if I was lucky, a DME. I used a KNS-80 for a little bit too, and there cannot be any sane argument that the 400/500 series are more difficult than old-school! They are/were a wonderful advancement for GA flying, and I know a buddy in the USAF (B-1 pilot) that nearly cried when I showed him what my lowly Mooney can do. I predict King might finally get ready to deliver the KSN770 later this year, and they will be promptly trumped by Garmin with their next-gen navigators that will do more, at a lower price to boot. OSH will probably reveal this... Much like King finally released their PFD, at the same price as the G500 (PFD + MFD).

I'm afraid that might be the modern FAA...they're trying to avoid any liability I guess. Too bad there is no accountability with that bunch for not doing their job. If they don't do field approvals, then why are they even needed???

I'm an aircraft engineer and agree with José about this situation. The MIDO folks aren't the right ones in any case. If you would still like to consult with a DER, PM me and I'll see if my friend is interested.

Very, very nice Chris! That sure looks like a heckuva travelling plane, and I hope she serves y'all well!

Overhauling the cylinders on our IO-360 engines does make economic sense, but I would only consider it if I knew how many hours were on them. In my case, the first owner got a factory overhaul in 1991 with new cylinders, so I've got first-run jugs and thus would have no qualms about getting them overhauled at a good shop. I don't think I'd run them for more than two TBO runs, though. If you have unknown jugs and plan to keep the plane for a long time, then I would opt for new ones to re-baseline everything.

Tom, I'm strong believer in the Church of LOP as I think it is the cleanest, coolest, and most efficient way to run our engines. If I had a 231/262 or TN-201 (my dream) I would do everything I could to run it LOP. If you haven't already, try the GAMI Lean Test (http://www.gami.com/gamijectors/leantest.php) to see if *your* -LB will run LOP. If you have a fuel flow gauge, then you can simply set power by fuel flow once you get comfortable with LOP OPs. I think the multiplier for that engine is 13.7, so 75% power LOP would be 11.5 GPH at whatever MP and RPM you choose.

jlunseth, the leaning-in-the-climb technique is for normally-aspirated planes only! Since your turbo can maintain MP through the climb, there is no need to lean the mixture to compensate for less air...leave everything at your takeoff setting until leveling-off for cruise. Jim, I forgot to mention that you can descend from LOP cruise without changing the power setting....simply trim nose-down for descent and don't change anything until you really need to slow down for the approach/pattern, and then just pull back the throttle. You will stay safely LOP (and in fact go further LOP) in the descent. We have plenty of "headroom" in the green arc to nose over and descend at full-throttle/LOP settings without getting into the yellow, unless you do something like 1500-2000 FPM.

Dugosh in Kerrville would also be a good choice. If the Mooney is airworthy then Kerrville/SAT isn't too far away! Maxwell is great too, but on the other side of the great state of Texas.

I think the 696 is WAAS-enabled, otherwise the SafeTaxi wouldn't work too well. My 496 is WAAS.

Mitch, I'd further clarify your statement "It is a great get up and go fast Mooney for 2" to " It is a great get up and go fast Mooney for 2 for a very short distance." With such a dismal useful load, you won't be able to fly anywhere beyond a couple of hundred miles, max, with two people, much less bags. Assuming 550 lbs UL, 350 lbs of people leaves you 200 lbs left for fuel and bags. That is 33 gallons and no bags...on a plane that will burn 28 GPH on takeoff and 14-17 at cruise. That just doesn't work for anything beyond local flying, which is not what a Mooney is made for. Any trip out of the area would be faster in any regular Mooney, even an M20A, that doesn't have to stop for fuel every 60-90 minutes. This kind of thing would get an "F" in an undergraduate aircraft design class, I'm afraid. It is nearly useless without a gross weight increase.

I bet the Garmin replacement to the 400/500-series boxes will be out before King ever gets the 770 done.

Jim, I keep the throttle full-forward until setting up for an approach. I'll run RPM ~2550 or even 2600. (My tach isn't very accurate) I too typically cruise 7-9000' unless winds (or ice) dictate otherwise. As Ken mentioned, at our typical cruise altitudes you're really not going to produce enough power to hurt anything with the red knob of death, so go ahead and keep wading into the LOP pool! On your next XC trip, keep everything forward from takeoff to level-off, except lean in the climb to maintain a target EGT on a cylinder of your choosing. (likely in the 1250-1300 dF range) As you climb, every 500' or 1000' lean a little to bring the EGT back up to what you saw on takeoff, full-rich. Once you get to cruise altitude, level-off and wait for the airspeed to build up, then set the prop to whatever you wish and then lean looking at the cylinder of your choosing. *IF* you can lean to 50 dF LOP (or more) *AND* your engine stays smooth, then as I mentioned above you'll know all of your cylinders are safely LOP. Now, 50 dF LOP is more LOP (less power) than you need to be to stay out of the red box, but if you can get there smoothly, you kow all the jugs are pretty close together...so go ahead an enrichen a bit and aim for 20-30 LOP if you're at 8000+ altitude. Once you feel this out, you'll be much more comfortable and then you can do some timed cruise runs on one tank only to establish your fuel burn at that particular power setting like Ken knows for his F. That is pretty much my procedure, except I have a FF display that I use to cross-check my leaning, especially if I'm at low altitude. I still cruise WOT even down low, but lean more to stay out of the red box if at 3,000 or 4,000. In the summer I typically have to lean a bit further to keep the CHT's below 380 too. The benefits are tremendous as we've enumerated many times...the only knock is a slightly slower cruise speed for our NA birds, but the efficiency gains more than make up for it IMO. I'm still lusting after a TN kit for my bird so I can cruise at 85% power LOP continuously, especially in the teens, and really boogie! 185 KTAS on 11.5 GPH at 17,000 ft is where I want to be....someday!

Actually, there is an option on the 340 that I found after 2 years that allows you to enable "karoake mode" which keeps the music going when talking on the intercom. Radio transmission still soft-mutes the music, though, as it does with the PS product I believe. Default on the 340 is for the music to mute everytime someone talks on the intercom, which is not optimal IMO.

Thanks for the PIREP! That is on my radar too, and I would appreciate some careful TAS runs when you get the chance. My '77 has the original square-tipped McCauley which is not as good as the later models IMO, so I could perhaps get even more improvement with the MT.

It sounds like you might be experiencing the "bootstrapping" problem that is common for the TSIO-360. Ken might be able to shed some light on the issue. I've not flown a 231 so I don't have any relevant experience with it. From what I've been able to surmise from reading the various forums, the TSIO-360 is quite finicky, and some can get them to run great LOP and others can't. This comes from Turbo Arrow and Seneca drivers as well as 231/252 folks. The APS guys confirm it as well.

Oops, I typo'd in my first response...in my plane currently there was NOT enough room to put the 430 under the 530. I hope to rectify that if/when I do a full panel overhaul down the road.

The 430 isn't hard to read, but my typical setup is Nav 1 page on both units, which is the arc/map view on the 530 and the 6 numerical fields on the 430. On my 530, I have fuel flow and Track Angle Error displayed, and I find myself wanting to reference some of the other fields that are showing on the 430 while on an approach. So, while it isn't hard to read, it is a long way to look "over there" while trying to scan my 6-pack plus the CDI. Getting a PFD would likely allow me to keep my eyes straight ahead, but who knows. It would be cleaner, certainly, to put everything in the center and then I could put my 496 in a dock on the right panel and get it off my RAM mount on the glareshield. I also want to add a primary engine instrument/monitor and ditch all of the old gauges too.... One day when I trip over a stack of $100 bills on my way to work I'll go ahead and schedule all this work.

Jim, regarding Ken's ability to know all of his cylinders are safely LOP from his single EGT instrument...that is one of the gems from the class that you'll learn why running an engine LOP w/o a monitor is actually wiser than running one ROP w/o a monitor! As mentioned above, when LOP power is directly related to fuel flow. Moving the mixture either direction changes the power output. Think of our IO-360's as four separate engines running in formation...if they each make the same amount of power, then it will be smooth and relatively balanced. If one (or more) is making more or less power than the others, then there will be an imbalance and you'll feel it. Causes for the imbalance could be a weak plug, clogged injector, induction leak, etc. and you'll feel immediately that something is amiss. Running ROP, the opposite is true. You can move across the mixture range quite a bit and not appreciably change the power output. So, you could be flying along at 100 or 150 ROP and get some debris into one injector and effectively lean that one cylinder to 20 or 40 ROP and you won't feel a thing. However, that is the worst mixture setting to be at, and you'll be really abusing that one cylinder with higher heat and pressures. Without a monitor, you'd never know it was happening, either. If flying LOP, you'd notice it immediately. Since Ken only has a single EGT, he knows when he is LOP in that one cylinder. By leaning to 30+ LOP *and* having a smooth running engine, he knows the other 3 jugs are very close to the one with the EGT reading.

I believe APS still offers the online version of the course, but IMO if there is any possible way to attend the live seminar, it is *very* well worth the effort. I'm an engineer and probably could have learned quite a bit from the online self-study, but there is tremendous value in the live course, especially seeing the engine test stand in operation and watching the concepts demonstrated in real-time. There are significant question-answer sessions that are tremendously beneficial too. I learned more in 2.5 days there than in many engineering courses. Beautiful Ada is, well, small-town OK. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I stayed in a nice new Holiday Inn Express. Food is catered to the class, and there are two dinners out in town. No rental car is needed, as they help with the transportation, too. Typically they'll have a class in the May or June time frame, and another in the fall sometime.

Bryan, I'm not sure there is an STC to put that engine on a C model yet. Beyond the paperwork issue, you would need a new cowl as well, which is not a trivial exercise either.