jlunseth

If you fish around on the www.seaerospace.com website, you might find recond. units available for that altimeter, but they would still be in the 6k range if I recall correctly. And that is the altimeter alone, without the install. I looked at the alt. pre-select at one time also, and came to the same conclusion you are coming to. If I wanted to put 15-20k into the plane, I could think of a number of other things that would come first.

To add the KAS297, don't you also have to add a different altimeter than stock, the KEA346? I looked at doing that for my 231 and the altimeter is quite expensive, I want to say around 10 or 11k. Maybe that is the hangup your shop is running in to.

Second the motion. The ability to couple the GPS to an AP is extremely helpful for single pilot operations, whether approach or enroute. Makes things much more seamless. You can literally take off and let the plane do the rest except for changing altitude and slowing down or speeding up. On days when the weather has the plane moving around quite a bit, the AP coupled to the GPS really smooths out the enroute flight. Same if AP is couple to a NAV radio and VOR, but the GPS lets you go direct quite a bit more.

I am not going to chime in on the airworthiness issue, but rather on the need for a working ammeter in a 231. The 231 has a mediocre alternator system design. It is a direct drive, and the gearing of the drive unit is such that no matter what size alternator you have, the charging system does not work very well at low engine speeds (such as at idle or during taxi). The stock alternator is a 70 amp, and there is or was an 80 amp kit available, but the A&P's that know Mooneys will tell you the alternator size is irrelevant to this issue. The stock strobes and landing lights have a big draw. So night pattern operations where the engine is operating at idle for extended periods and these lights are on can lead to a discharged battery. The annunciator panel will tell you that the battery is discharging, but I would want a working ammeter if I were you, and I would also want a voltmeter. There are aftermarket units that are switchable between amps and volts. Unless you have something installed above the strip of engine gauges, they are accessible with the glare shield off. Maybe not convenient, but there is nothing there blocking access. A good alternate is an engine analyzer that reads amps and/or volts. Must be STC'd to be primary though, to satisfy airworthiness concerns. For example, an EDM 700 is not STC'd as primary, the 711 is STC'd.

I got them from sellis, she is with the company, and they are on the site. I can send them in about an hour and save you the fishing around.

I have the Mooney Aircraft Co. 100 hour Inspection Guide (which is used for an annual), and also the annual section of the M20K service and maintenance manual. I received them from the company. They are in .pdf. You will have to send me your email in a pm, I did not find it in the member list.

I would check with Mooney to see if the plane has a maximum rated TT. Many GA planes do, and it is usually around 10,000. Like TBO, you can legally overfly it, but the resale value on the aircraft will be very poor. You could probably have the factory "remanufacture" the plane, but I shudder at the cost.

Well, what is "book?" If you have a 262 then you have a 231 with a 252 engine right? What do you have for a POH? My own 231 has the aftermarket intercooler and wastegate, and there really is no "book." There is the POH, and there are some adjustments to the MP that need to be made depending on the cooling rate of the intercooler, and their are lots of recommendations out there to fly this setup to 252 book numbers, but the 252 book numbers are too low in my experience. So I am guessing that you have a similar situation. No real "book" to fly to.

Double post.

Well, I wouldn't call mine a beautiful face, but I have in my past been a rally car driver in an MG that had an actual shoulder harness, and out here in the midwest we do a fair amount of four wheel driving during bird hunting season, and I feel naked without that shoulder harness, whether in a car, four wheel drive vehicle, or a plane, it just doesn't feel right. I have hit my head more than once in a four wheel drive, I don't do that anymore.

My comment was not a criticism, it was a, I hope, good natured shot at CFI's and their double I brothers. I know what they are up to, they want to make sure the student can manage the airplane regardless of the level of distraction. But man! Sometimes it is layered on thick. So a couple of weeks ago my CFII and I are shooting NDB approaches to two airports that are only two miles apart, we have my old CFI in the back seat observing, and in the middle of the first approach to a good sized downtown airport, trying to manage the approach with a stiff crosswind, he asks what I would do if the engine went out (we have not done that lesson yet, so I had to make something up). We finish that approach and then get vectored to the second one that is less than five minutes away. I guess I handled it. It was probably a good night. I am grateful for every heckling I have gotten during all the instruction. Not long after I got my PPL, I was able to successfully navigate a NORAD approach to a Class D on light gun signals during an airshow (with a squadron of Thunderbolts and assorted other aircraft on the ground watching my every move), an alternator out, and assorted other minor emergencies without a pause, well not enough of a pause that you would know. So I guess it all did some good. But it sure is more relaxing not to be peppered with questions and distractions every time there is a quiet moment in the aircraft, or a not so quiet moment, or an absolutely stupid crazy moment. I find myself cruising at 17,500 with the autopilot flying the plane, breathing 02 from a perfectly functioning system, watching the ground slide by underneath, wondering what all the fuss was about, its so easy.

The open cockpit is hard to find in a multi these days, and despite the landings no gear up! Go for it.

Went through the same thing earlier this year. The revelation is how much less there is to do in the cockpit, and how much easier it is to fly the plane, with no CFI on board. Something wrong with that.

I would definitely vote for Willmar to do your pre-buy. You want a shop that knows Mooneys, and knows your particular model.

It sounds like you had the autopilot ALT hold on. Was that the case?

We don't know how long the runway is. 5 knots is a big deal on a short runway.

Yes the temp gauge is in C not F. The rough rule of thumb adjustment is 1" per 10 degrees C, but the tables they provide are more precise and I believe the adjustment per the tables is less - 1% of MP per 5.5 degrees C differential. The bottom line on the intercooler from my limited experience is that it helps the engine run cooler at higher altitudes, and allows a little better climb rate to that altitude. It is going to increase your critical altitude a little bit. From memory, the critical altitude per the POH is either 14 or 14,500, and I generally find I can climb right up to 17,500 without having to firewall the throttle to maintain 36-37" max MP (that being the adjusted max MP after subtracting from 40" based on the temp. differential). I have the LB, Merlyn, and Turboplus.

We had terrible heat problems with my 231 when I first picked it up and flew it back to Minnesota. It turned out to be a combination of things, all very bad maintenance by the owner and/or bad work by maintenance shops. The fuel system was I think the biggest problem, it was not putting out the 22-24.5 GPH needed to keep the engine cool in climb. The baffles and baffle sealing was all bad also. With everything fixed it has run like a charm, in fact the engine is the best part of the whole plane. I do have the Intercooler, the temp gauge may not be working right (we are replacing it), but it generally only shows about 40 degrees of cooling from the Intercooler. That is not nothing, but it is also not the kind of temps the Intercooler people adverstise (70-100 degrees). We are replacing the temp gauge so the new one may show a better differential. I do not have a problem with overheating anymore since the repairs were done. Mine is the LB. The CHT's are a little warmer when in the teens, than when lower down, that is all. The engine is getting close to 800 SFRM. I guess I will know more in about 500 hours, but it does not seem to be showing any signs of premature wear, excess oil use, or running on borrowed time. It was the GB that had the reputation for burning out fast, and the major problem with the GB was said to be the fixed wastegate, the Merlyn really saves wear on the engine I think. What you will read about the GB is that pilot engine management was a real issue, and I think that is the key to the GB or the LB, good throttle management and good engine maintenance. The trick with the LB, Merlyn, and intercooler is to advance the throttle to a point where you will get about 30" MP at the start of takeoff and let the turbo kick in and catch up. Then slowly advance to 36-37". You will have plenty of power. You don't want to firewall the throttle, and if you have the intercooler you don't want to run the MP up to the 40" marked on the factory gauge. If you do either you will be overboosting the engine. With the Intercooler the effective MP will be over 40" because the air coming out of the Intercooler is denser than what the gauge is set up for. I think the Intercooler has one main effect, and that is to allow the engine to run a little cooler at higher altitudes. There is no lack of cooling lower down, but up higher the air is thinner and a poorer heat conductor, so having help from the Intercooler makes a difference. The LB is a very fuel efficient engine and likes to fly up high. There is not speed advantage over the J at lower altitudes, you will typically see 140+ kts., it is up high in the teens where it really shines, and speeds are generally 170+. It feels like a heavier airplane than the J, and is somewhat easier to land because of that, for me anyway. The J likes to float more. The K will float also, but when you pull the power out it wants to sink faster than the J.

I have looked into the FIKI issue for the 231, and from what I can tell the problem is an inability to add a second alternator to the 231. FIKI certification appears to require redundant alternators so if one goes out, the deicing pump will continue to run on the second alternator. The 231 has a direct drive alternator (rather than a belt drive) and there is apparently no practical way to add a second.

We had this discussion on the MAPAlist. Here are my thoughts. The FAA wants us all trained to land somewhere other than a road. The reasons are: (1) that there are cars on the road and they don't expect to see an airplane there, (2) roads have powerlines on both sides most of the time, so how are you going to get down to the road safely. They apparently have not flown out in the midwest much. Here we have gravel roads every mile and they are very lightly traveled. Moreoever, you can see any car on the road from the air (if there is a car, there is going to be only one). In addition, every "bare field" - which is what they train you to land on - has powerlines. Very often the field creates enough backscatter that it is not possible to see that there are power lines blocking your chosen field until you are committed. Last but not least, anyone who thinks of a farm field as smooth and easy to land on has not ever been on one. Except when there are crops, they are plowed, and plowed fields are the worst landing surface short you can chose. If I am ever in this situation, and unless there is clearly a hayfield around and not a crop field, I am going for the nearest road, powerlines or no. As for gas tanks rupturing, that is why we are trained to open and block open the exit door before going in - so we can get out as fast as possible. Gas tanks can rupture in a gear up because of a rock or other ground obstruction but the gear in the wheel wells is at least some protection for the tanks, they can rupture in a gear down off-field from having the landing gear punched up through the tanks. Whether they will rupture or not is a matter of chance either way. I think you pick gear up or gear down based on the field surface and nothing else. If it is rough, gear up.

Well if you want to fly decently fast and decently high at a decent cost, you are probably looking in the right place.

The trip out to SD was one of those days where there was no way around the winds. Down low the winds were much slower, but they were directly from the west. Up at 17,500 the winds were really strong, but were more northerly. So the headwind component was the same in the entire column and it was smoother further up, so further up we went. Had some rookie passengers on board and did not want to rough them up. Coming back was sure a "breeze" though. Buster1 when can we all come fly with you?

On a flight from South Dakota to Minnesota this week, we managed to convert my 231 to a 252 courtesy of some ferocious winds aloft. Flying at 17,500 we saw 219 kts on the DME for quite awhile, which of course works out to the famous 252. Actually, we saw about ten knots more than that for a brief period before starting our descent. With a TAS of between 170 and 175, that works out to a tailwind component of better than 50 kts. Actual winds aloft forecast were low 60's to mid-70's but not right on our tail. The 419 nm from KRAP to KFCM was under two hours flight time. Don't ask how long the morning flight out there took.

There actually is a service that competes with Jeppesen on the older databases, and that is GarminAT. My Apollo GX 60 is now gone, but when I had it it was both cheaper and better to get a datacard subscription from GarminAT. Every month they would send a new card, two actually, one for the GX60 and one for my Apollo MX20. The new card had the new data, and you were required to mail the expired cards back. Worked fine until about a month ago when the GX60 died. I am putting in a new 430W to replace it, so I will probably be stuck with the Jeppesen system, which to me is the epitome of zero cost-high pricing. You buy the hardware to do your own data upgrade. You access their website, download the data, and put it on your card. They get $900 plus per year for letting you access their computer.

I have the 200, not the 225, but I think they work pretty much the same except yours probably has altitude preselect. I am not following part of your post, or maybe there is some difference between the systems that I am not aware of. You talk about needing to turn the "navigation bug" to cause the course of the plane to change while you are in Nav mode. Are you talking about turning the heading bug or the course needle? In my aircraft (with the KFC 200), I can either choose "HDG" mode or "NAV" mode. In HDG mode, the plane responds to the heading bug. In NAV mode, the heading bug is used to the heading to intercept the course set with the course needle. The system then ARMs and flies that heading until the selected course is intercepted, at which point it shows CPLD, and from then flies the course selected by the course needle, ignoring the heading bug. So do you mean you are using the heading bug to change course while in NAV mode, or the course needle. If you are using the heading bug, that would mean that the AP is not coupling to the selected course. Either you are not letting it get there, or there is a flaw that does not allow it to couple. I do believe, though, that once coupled, if you want the course to change you must move the course needle manually.