cliffy

+1 with Ward It won't pass an annual without the required placards. If an IA signs it off that way he'll be seeing the Feds if they see it.

Looks like a nice airplane For a better answer with help, what is your flying background and experience? Speed control on landings seems to be the bigger issue in a lot of cases. Mooneys are not difficult, just slick, and need good speed control. 10 kts extra in the flare uses 1,000 more feet. Big deal is bounce or galloping on landing. On the third bounce you'll more than likely get the prop. Don't be afraid to push the knobs forward and go around after a bounce. They usually happen more often if you are fast on landing. It's really a good idea to get Mooney specific training with someone who knows how to do it. Welcome

Anyone have an update?

PM sent to you.

Looks good I saved a picture of it.

Haven't used one but might. Looks like they have a PMA approval and CofC with each light. It will need a Field Approval by your local FSDO to install. They do supply a couple of Field Approvals for reference for your A&P. Not a direct swap without the field approval. Can not be considered a "standard part" for this LED light as there is no "standard part" LED in existence. Here's a;ink to one of the Field Approvals http://www.aeroleds.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/piper-field-approval-2.pdf

I've had 3 RDs (rapid decompressions) in my career. 2 at altitude and one on climb out at 24000. None could be controlled by alternate or manual means so down we went. After each one as soon as we leveled out I made an announcement to the PAX as to what happened and what we were going to do, hoping to ease there concerns. In older planes (727) A/P off and push over, on newer (A320) the A/P does it. Once the masks go on for the pilots, the real emergency is over, now get down for the PAX. After you get down now you need a plan because if you are far from home you need an alternate because of gas limits down low. THAT is not an "emergency landing" by any measure, as it is usually reported. I've actually flown twice from LAS to SFO and back, non-pressurized in a 757, that had both A/C packs inop (legal MEL) No emergency landing there. No different from getting down with packs or pressurization dead and then landing unpressurized. Though it may be unnerving to PAX it is really a non-event.

The transition from steam gauges in a 727 to an "Aspen" like display in the 757 was very difficult for many old timers. Notably the FMC was a bigger issue than the glass but the glass had its issues with many also. Took some time to transition to being comfortable. All in all I preferred it to the Airbus 320 display. If I could I'd go Aspen.

i can tell you that after 30 mins at 12000' 0 degrees F and IMC the windshield ices up completely INSIDE the cabin on my C. Couldn't go lower due to MEA out here in the west. Cold as a well diggers *&^% for the wife.

Used to send new flight attendants to the rear lav with an air sick bag to get an air sample for maintenance before we landed.

Had a friend hit a deer at Grand Canyon Apt in Merlin. Bent the prop and engine mount. Didn't do the deer any good either.

Sabermech- now that I am retired and fly for fun I'm with you and I have been doing this for 54 years. I can remember flying over LAX in my C140 when there was no Class B, hell there wan't even a TCA. Just look at he TAC chart for LAX now! It's a zoo.

Just a note on the anonymous feature of ADS-B It is written into the regs that you can set up ADS-B for anonymous use but it has to be done on the initial install set up. It can't be changed afterwards in flight. If used, one can not receive ANY ATC services in that mode. Can't go Class B or C or A if you need ATC. No flight following, no pop-up IFR approaches, nothing that ATC has to respond to. Might as well not even have it. There will be NO anonymous flights anymore for corporate/executive aircraft period. THAT is BIG security issue for many companies. Think about oil companies or financial companies that fly all over the world that now have removed any identification from their airplanes (plain white paint jobs) and now block their N number from ATC. It's all about to stop for them. Full public disclosure is the official FAA mantra. Secondly, if anyone thinks that ADS-B will not be proposed for user fees in the future you'd better think twice. Absolute perfect records of airspace use is waaay too easy for some to gloom onto for money. As was said, precise identification (by N number)is not needed for ATC TIS services. Random codes would be just as useful for traffic depiction for all VFR traffic. IFR you have RADAR and you can be tracked that way for user fees if they ever want. A system proposed here a few posts back that just relays the satellite signals back to the ground for position processing would also work and be totally anonymous in nature. Can anyone say that this is not the start of user fees without Congressional action? Pay to play for everyone as the FAA dumps their upgrading costs onto the GA market. Again JMO

drapo- thanks for the correction to NavCanada Yes better service for Oceanic travelers hence only in the Hudson Bay area.

I once broke out at 200 feet on a rainy night and just as I was flaring the runway seemed to "lift up". Seems hundreds of seagulls has used the runway for a roost. The airport manager went out and picked up 22 of them. They were bouncing off the windshield like baseballs. I ducked below the panel as I was rolling out.

That doesn't mean I don't like YOUR system!

YOUR system would work IF the system worked that way but it doesn't. YOUR WAAS GPS takes the signal from many satellites compares the angles received from the base time mark and the variable time hack from each satellite (each satellite position is a known quantity) to compute a position in space of where the receiver is. That position is then displayed on your panel. A basic geometry problem to solve. All the angles when compared to the known position of the satellites converge on your airplane and from that your position is computed by your GPS receiver. Now with ADS-B they want us to re transmit that position to them for their ATC separation responsibility. They even have issues with has fast the re transmit function can happen. They have "latency" requirements for the signal to go from the WAAS motor to and through the transmitter and out the antenna. This is why ALL ADS-B equipment has to be certified with specific WAAS receivers, UATS or ES transponders as a complete system. We can't just take any WAAS motor and couple it to any UAT or ES xponder and hook it up. The timing of the signal through the entire system has to be certified to be within TSO limits.

If the satellites transmitted position to the airplane and the airplane re transmitted that signal to ground- Why not just have the satellite transmit the aircraft position to the ATC? Because it don't work that way

The GPS satellites transmit a signal with timing the receiver decodes the signal from numerous satellites to give a position in space, it doesn't just re transmit a position signal,

The video shows the tree he hit with the wing next to it. He hit it about 8 feet from the ground. The Fire Dept is washing down the gas spill off the tree in the video. Wing looks to be right next to tree. Energy was dissipated slowly by having various parts leave the airplane over an extended time period, relatively speaking, thus keeping G loads to a survivable level. Kind of like an F! race car, controlled demolition in a crash.

The TSO for ADS-B is long and tedious, I've actually read it all the way through. The FAA is tasked with traffic separation. Has to be absolute, no issues, no failures, period. (I'm not trying to defend them, only make a statement.) Right now THEY are responsible for the accuracy of THEIR RADAR systems to accomplish this task (even as limiting as it is in this modern world). They have decades of experience with it. Now they want to move to another platform as far as the PRIMARY data collection on aircraft location goes. From their own"in house" system (RADAR) to a system that they have no direct control over as far as accuracy goes in a failure state. They're wanting to go from a few hundred systems they control (Ground Based RADAR) to a couple hundred thousand airborne systems that they don't own (ADS-B transmitters), They don't give a hoot about the IN side of the equation, it's only fluff to make the mandate more palatable to us, the ones paying for it.) Now with them not having DIRECT control over the primary position data that they have to gather, they want/need it to be a closely "controlled" and accurate as they can so as to assure them that the position YOU transmit is accurate. Hence the WAAS mandate. More on this in a second. One item I have not read about yet, and the big hole in the system (and I could have missed it), is the issue of performance checks for the OUT data on a regular basis. For those going the ES transponder route "I presume" that the bi-annual xponder check will verify the ADS-B transmission accuracy. Again, I'm presuming this with no actual reference data that I have read. On the UAT side, I have seen nothing on an ongoing quality control program for each UAT installation. With the UAT being the PRIMARY device to show the location of the airplane, how long will it be before we have mandated UAT checks just like xponders now? Another expense. If the argument will be that they will compare RADAR target info to UAT received data for accuracy of target, which will they believe? If they fall back to RADAR, what have we gained with ADS-B? i feel (and it's only my opinion right now) that the only reason we have to have WAAS quality EPEs is for their need to locate GROUND TRAFFIC on major airports with pin point accuracy. ALL baggage tugs, fuelers, any and all wheeled traffic on major airports will be required to have ADS-B transmitters (think UATs) so they can be seen on ground RADAR on foggy days. Do they really need under 100 ft EPEs for airborne traffic? I doubt it. But they do feel they need it for ground based traffic. To cover their butt for accuracy on every use of ADS-B they went to a "one size covers all" system with WAAS AND a TSO for everything. It protects them legally and us retrospectively. Their responsibility for traffic separation and us "owning" their primary target position system (ADS-B transmitters) is why they will be very reluctant to make any changes to the program as mandated. Do you really think that all those ground based systems will cost a minimum of $5,000 or $6,000 ? Many of you are young enough to not remember when they went from the very old RADAR systems (WWII types) to the current (I believe it's call ARTS3) that they use now. The costs were staggering but they had to pay for it as traffic separation was their responsibility. They just shifted the cost of their responsibility to us, to the tune of over $2 BILLION dollars, that's all. If they want the system for their use, they should be paying for it! Sorry this is so long Rant over for right now. JMO

What condition are the elevators? any damage at all? I have a 64 D/C and I'm interested Let me check the part number tonight.

Lets see- How old are your landing gear rubber biscuits? If they are old they get hard and they don't dampen the rougher surface of a dirt strip as good and then you get more leaks in the tanks. Obviously you know how to add power slowly as you accelerate for T/O to avoid rocks in the prop but your Mooney prop is closer to the ground (9" or there abouts) so be extra careful. Keeping your nose in the air as much as possible when on the ground pays dividends to your prop also. As a new Mooney owner are you aware of the "third bounce and you buy a prop" issue? On landing if you porpoise and continue to the third touch down you will most likely hit the prop. Don't porpoise a landing. Also AANMO, speed control on approach and landing is critical. Keep your speed down. 10 kts extra uses 1,000 more feet of runway. On a rough surface it's critical to make sure your landing gear over center links are adjusted properly. Did your A&Pat the last annual check them with the correct tool and torque wrench to verify or did he just run the gear up and down to see if it worked? Most improved dirt strips should be OK with proper technique and care. Unimproved dirt is another story in a Mooney.Taxi very slowly as any holes or bumps are magnified by our gear and the prop comes close to the ground. What model Mooney do you Have? I'm in a 64 D/C an I'm in Page AZ,

Lood- give us some pictures!

He is an excellent rifle marksman! Very cool guy to talk with.