FlyDave

Being that most of us have never landed an airplane gear up and, as such, don't know exactly what to expect, you should be completely focusing on getting the airplane on the ground in one piece, stopped and yourself and passengers safely out and away from the airplane. I can tell you that if I ever have to land gear up (gawd, I hope I never have to do that!!!!) I sure a hell won't be thinking about saving the engine.

Tim, Here's one from 2003 on AvWeb: http://www.avweb.com/news/maint/185049-1.html Dave

Lower power, higher TBO. But how are they claiming the same speed? Composites?

I think is was KSMooniac that said "holes aren't free" or something to that effect. I'll bet the weight savings of the carbon fuselage was offset by the added door.

It comes with a 2 year supply of Gatorade and you get to pick the color (ingress/egress determination).

Wow Tim - MOST important is you and your wife are OK. Excellent job of keeping your cool and getting back on the ground without any pilot/passenger injuries!! As Byron said, let the insurance company do what you hired and paid them for. You're probably in for a 3-5 month hiatus from flying but, just remember, things could have been worse if you didn't keep your cool.

Hey - I could fly 13 nm to Santa Rosa and we could meet half way I'll send you a PM with my contact info.

Some thoughts from a Bravo owner (that moved up from a J in December, 2013): Pro's: The long body of a Bravo adds a lot of baggage area. Combine that with the fold down rear seats and you probably have enough volume (not useful load) for 2 of Maruader's girls Long body is a bit more stable in turbulence I think the long body is easier to consistently produce better landings in Bravo's up until approximately 2000 models have room for 3 rows of instruments - you can fit a lot of instruments/avionics in that panel. Caveat is a shorter windshield. All Bravo's have built in o2 with 115 cubic foot bottles. 2 people can go from CA to NY and most of the way back on one fill at 18,000' Bravo is a production airplane - some people prefer that over a heavily STC'ed plane. I don't really care either way but it may make a difference at resale. Bravo's have a Lycoming engine (ok, flame suit on....) <<I think>> more Bravo's make it to TBO than Continental equipped planes. This may be due to the "wet head" design. DO NOT fly your bravo by the POH numbers or you will be replacing cylinders, exhaust and turbochargers on a very regular basis! Bravo's have 2 80-amp alternators and 2 batteries. The also have both a mechanical and backup electric vacuum pumps. A lot of redundancy is nice - especially if flying IFR You can put 106 gallon's of fuel in the Bravo, 100 of which is useable. It can have pretty long legs if you fly in an economy mode. My wife and I can depart with 106 gallons and pretty much all the baggage we want and still be with W&B limits. Note: if you fill extended fuel tanks in any Mooney model you will not get 2 medium sized people plus baggage in the plane and be within W&B limits. But also remember that the human bladder is much smaller than extended range tanks . My plane specific My engine is fairly easy to keep the temps under control My plane trues out at 210 KTAS @ FL210 on 18.5 GPH. This is excellent performance. I have a useful load of ~1015 lbs. Bravo Cons: Fuel burn: 16.5 - 18.5 GPH - better than a rocket, not as good as a 252 Engine replacement costs - YIKES Bravo: http://www.airpowerinc.com/productcart/pc/engines.asp?searchParm=tio540af1b&catID=33 Rocket: http://www.airpowerinc.com/productcart/pc/TCEngineDetail.asp?catID=69&prodID=25112 252: http://www.airpowerinc.com/productcart/pc/TCEngineDetail.asp?catID=69&prodID=24863 Bravo engine doesn't run LOP (except Awful_Charlie's plane) Bravo engine's typically don't run as smooth as the Continentals. I think the Bravo is an excellent plane and I am really glad I went with it. I don't have any time in either of the other models you listed so I really can't offer an opinion on them. Let me know if I can provide any additional information. Well, I guess that's all I have to say so best of luck! Dave

I have "the wind" tonight. Can I be of assistance?

George, Funny coincident that you posted this this morning. I was just reading through the thread on the LOA concerning DA/MDA and the one thought that I came away with was "yeah, we can cut ~ 35% of the FAA's budget". If they really have nothing better to do than assemble the resources including numerous groups of people and committees, studies, field work, etc. to come up with a directive (Is that what it is?) like that LOA BS then they are BEGGING for the US electorate to demand their ranks get sliced and diced. Dave

I'm going to bed.

Roger

I saw a Mooney tied down in front of the restaurant and I thought it was someone from Mooneyspace. Sure enough, it was Bonal. I tracked him down as he and his wife were walking back to the plane and introduced myself. It's always nice to meet a fellow MooneySpacer and put a face with a name! Here are a few pics from a local "boring holes in the sky" flight this afternoon. Bodega Bay, a nice green Northern California and weather over Napa. Did I mention that I Love to fly my Mooney

Clarence has probably stated the one thing that would get the attention of everyone involved - painters, A&P, helpers - Excellent idea Clarence!! When I was flying gliders we had to put the ships together every time we flew. We always did a Positive Control Check where one person was on the controls and another on the control surfaces. The person on the controls would say "left aileron up" and the person on the control surface would provide resistance. Then "left Aileron down", etc. We would do this on all control surfaces every time we put a plane together. It's a simple check that can provide a lifetime of flying.

It should be VFR on Saturday Bonal.

Since Mooney likes to be "the first" and "the fastest" in aviation, I'm thinking a small turbine powered Mooney, but that is pure speculation.

My split alternator switch broke (again) and I searched the internet for a replacement. I found a listing on Controller.com for a replacement and Chandler Aviation (MSC) had a listing. Turns out Mooney had stock and they drop shipped to me next day air. Price was something like $50 - WOW!!!! Check MSC's for replacement switches - Mooney may be stocking these now.

Seneca? That sounds like a soft drink, not an airplane

This is exactly what I did. No muss, no fuss. Jimmy Garrison is a straight forward guy and I LOVE my Bravo! Here is a link to my trade-in experience:

Yeah, and did you see that thing over his shoulders? I'll be daffed but I think it's a jacket .

For me, after good airspeed control and flying by the numbers, holding a steady pitch attitude in the flare ensures a good landing. In fact, if I may say so, since I learned this I'm impressed myself many times with my landings .

As Hank said, the sight picture is a little different from the mid body to the long body. When I transitioned from my J to the Bravo I had a bit of a time with additional weight and length on the nose. Also, the power off glide seems steeper in the Bravo and it will come down faster than the J. I'm not sure if this is the case in the Eagle/Ovation/Acclaim. But once you get used to it it's just like anything else you fly.

Huh?

A friend of mine is taking lessons at the flight school this plane is out of. In fact this is one of the planes he has been training in. He sent me this recording - start around 3m30s for the mayday then......he "has a low fuel indication": http://archive-server.liveatc.net/kvny/KVNY-App-Jan-12-2016-0030Z.mp3 Too bad it wasn't raining fuel

Karson, I didn't end up going. The weather was marginal with icing forecast on the last 100 miles of the flight from 11K' down to around 6k'. I think I probably would have made it in but getting out and home was a question. I didn't want to miss the get together the next day. Dave