cliffy

Regulations Everything installed in an airplane must be in working order for flight or MEL'd or placardd/removed. If its inop in Pt 91 ops (without an MEL for that slecific airplane) it has a specific means to make the unit inop and record the item in the maintenance log book. If it has an MEL then the MEL procedure has to be followed. Inop items just can't sit in the airplane without some kind of maintenance item recorded.

One- I've seen many "unairworthy" airplanes flying around in my 60 years in aviation Two- You are not looking at the parallel between the mentality of accepting INOP equipment and being totally proficient as a pilot in your airplane Its a attitude . An attitude of doing everything in your power to be competent and correct on every aspect of aviation. Generally if you participate in a discussion board like here you may be less likely to commit the errors mentioned but not always If you let the little things go by then the big ones bite you. Again its an attitude Here's another question to ask yourself-- "I fly a Mooney with one alternator and one battery and I fly IMC, when was the last time I had my battery checked for capacity"? OR do you ascribe to the thoughts of- "HEY look, I got 7 tears out on my battery before it wouldn't start my airplane. " If you had an alternator failure in IMC and you're down to battery only power how long will it last? Have you ever tried to get on the ground or into VFR conditions in say 15 minutes? You may only have 15 mins or less battery if its old. BTW it will still start your engine even if its low on capacity for emergency purposes. Again its an attitude

How many avail themselves of an MEL list? No argument if they do but the vast majority don't. Even an MEL has to have a drop dead date for re[air or removal. They don't just hang on an MEL forever.

Your BMW doesn't need the FAA approvals for manufacture or production OR have the liability incurred that an airplane unit does. You just can't take the "same" unit from a BMW shelf and put it on an airplane Likewise there are 10,000 BMWs per 1 Mooney to market to. Numbers in production do make a difference

When ever someone comes on this site and is new and looking for a Mooney we all seem to want them to find the "Holy Grail" We tell them to find a low time, good as new airplane. In reality a needle in a hay stack by the way many pilots treat their airplanes Yes spoiler alert! I'm going to make some comments not too well received by many. Let's look at how we operate our Mooneys. If you fly 75 hrs per year (or the airframe has 4,000 hrs since 1970) (and not many do) the airframe is actually being used less than 1% (0.008) of its time on the ramp. It has spent 99% of its time just sitting there rotting away. For those who tie down outside it spends realistically its entire life sitting out in the sun's heat in the summer and the snow rain and cold in the winter. How long would your NEW car last with that treatment? Would you even put your new car through that gauntlet? And here we have a half century old airplane under those conditions that we place our lives in its hands every time we take to the sky! YET- Many of us still cling to the CB Club and look for ways to get the quick and cheap annual, do minimal maintenance and have numerous items INOP in the airplane. What we have in many cases are in reality RUST BUCKETS that we go aloft in. And its us doing it to ourselves. Just walk around and look at your own airport. How many of you would go out to a 1970 Ford that has been sitting outside for 30 years and just jump in it and drive across the state let alone the country? Yet we do that all the time in airplanes that sit rotting away year after year. And many of us do nothing about it. What do you think it does to all the avionics in the panel? And yet many jump in and fly IFR with them. With no thought of testing or maintenance until something breaks in flight and then its likely to get deferred. Sure you say "we have annual inspections"! HA! How many times do we see airplanes that go 2 and 3 years between annuals? (with no flying) Here's a question I have asked a couple of times on here- HOW MANY INOPERATIVE ITEMS DO YOU HAVE ON YOUR AIRPLANE RIGHT NOW? If you can't say "NONE" then YOU are the problem. If you can't afford to fix what breaks on your airplane then you have more airplane than you can afford and YOU are the problem. Most accidents IMO are caused by incompetence or "too much airplane for the level of the pilot"(financial or skills). I've studied it for over 60 years. I've watched and read accident reports and most come out the same way. Too much airplane for the competency level of the pilot. When I see a plane come through the shop with differed maintenance I know the owner can't afford the plane he owns and his skill level for that airplane is probably lacking also. Look yourself in the mirror and ask if YOU are part of the problem! I've seen too many smoking holes and many are tired together with the same theme. If you can't afford to fix your airplane when it breaks then you can't afford the airplane. If you can't afford to fix your airplane when it breaks your own skill level is in question. One leads to the other. Too much airplane for the pilot to handle.

These discussions have always intrigued me here on MS In reality what we have here is trying to resurrect a legacy aircraft line What we have are hard limitations to same We also have a diminishing fleet of Mooneys due to losing several each week to sliding on its belly or smoking holes Think about this for a minute- we have an airframe design that is basically 60 YEARS old! Who of us is still driving a 1964 Chevy or even a 1980 Chevy? Who is asking Chevy to resurrect those "airframes" The design is also frozen by the TC In order to change the TC it takes A LOT OF MONEY! Just look at what the process was for just adding a door! I was there in Fredricksburg when they debuted the door and in talking to them they said it was way more work than they estimated And that was just for a door! And that was the factory doing it! We all love our esoteric world of Mooneys BUT the market just isn't there The costs involved bring most of the "mods" into plastic airplane range and like it or not they have a parachute. THAT item DOES sell airplanes. What we are is a niche group of airplane owners trying to hang onto an antique airplane line as long as possible before we are dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century in what we like for air transportation and we have to give up on the Model T we love. I have some other Mooney thoughts which I will start a new thread on.

I just sent an email the Stephen Hayden the BK rep for the west USA asking direct questions about the Aerocruz A/P My "sent" file says it went out now I'll wait to see if he responds I'm not holding my breath

Question- Is Duncan getting any shipments of any TT/BK autopilots for any airframes or experimentals? Are there even any experimental systems available anywhere? Seems they have all dropped off the earth

Aerocruz And not a word out of BK No communications is the real quandary- WHY? Honeywell still has to send the money to BK Just because you are part of a larger organization doesn't mean you will get funded. If you read their "Vision" statement (BK) they are transitioning to a "connected- wifi- subscription service" model for the future. You'll pay a monthly fee for everything. Discreet components (autopilots etc) don't look to be in the offing going forward.

My opinion now? It'll never happen

I paid up front a month ago when I was told they were ready and 3 days later got the email that the order had been cancelled by BK/TT as to no availability. now or in the future. I called Spruce and they said they never charged my CC BUT it appeared on my statement for the next billing cycle. I called AcS again and they said they didn't show any charge to my card. I called the card company and they showed the charge so I am now in a "Disputed Charge" venue with them. It looks like I'll be OK but? On another front. I have my Dynon HDX installed and working fine but for the autopilot I was talking with a Boeing guy the other day and he related that he too has an HDX and was working in SEA with the FAA and got to talking about the Dynon approval that is going through the SEA office. He was informed that the FAA has until the end of the year to either approve or cancel the rating system on the (IIRC) 737 similar type rating (no separate rating required ) and at that time they will have more personnel to work on the Dynon approvals.

If you haven't done a Mooney prebuy before I'll attach something I wrote here a long time ago. It should get you on your way Check that all the model numbers and serial numbers match on everything with the log book, engine, prop, airframe, I do radios also. Actually read the data plates and compare to the logs. Check that the parts actually installed match what is contained in the TCDS and/or the logs show an STC change for the big stuff and changes for radios and electronics. Anything added like engine monitors, fuel flow gauges, etc should show an STC listing in the log books. Pull the rear seat bottom and open up the inspection holes to check for corrosion on the spar caps. Look at the spars real well in the main wheel wells for same. As noted fill up fuel tanks the night before and look for leaks the next day. If you can jack the airplane do a gear over center torque check. Make sure the A&P has the correct tools to do it. While on jacks, move the main gears in and out toward the wing tips for excessive movement. Lift the main wheels to check for play in the donuts. The donuts should expand enough after 5 mins unloaded to not have much movement. Check the mouse boots for condition in the main wheel wells. While down by the main gear look at the spar bottom between the fuselage and wheel wells. Look for smoking rivets there. The rivets that hold the spar sandwich together. That can be a big $$$$$$. I found one in AU with almost every rivet loose on the bottom of the spar. It was grounded by the owner when Kerrville said it had to be repaired. Nose gear area - if on jacks this is easy- twist the nose wheel left and right to check for excessive play in the steering linkage. More than about 10-15 degrees either side of center before tightening up on the linkage is too much. You will see the slop way at the top of the nose gear on the rod end linkage up there. Most important on the nose gear! Look and feel for dents where the steering system touches on the tubing for dents where it touches. Turn the wheel by hand and you will see where it touches and stops. MAKE SURE THERE ARE NO DENTS THERE! The limit is 1/32" depression. Any dents and the nose gear comes out for repair $$$$ On the tail surfaces grab the tip of the stabilizer and try to move it up and down and fore and aft. If it moves or clicks you might have work to do. Limits are about 1/10th of an inch either way. Usually fixed by changing out the "close tolerance bolts' in the hinge. As noted lift up on the rudder to check for play in the jackscrew. Same limit about 1/10 of an inch. Lots of times it is wear on the 2 bolt hinge bracket at the aft end of the jackscrew and not the jackscrew it self. I found one stabilizer that moved 1/2 inch either side of center! Look over the outside surface of the entire airplane for dents, filliform corrosion, hangar rash (the elevator tips seem to be especially susceptible to this damage and NO repairs are allowed to control surfaces (no patches, partial skin replacement, etc). The FAA in one case here on MS made a big thing out of this stuff on a routine ramp check on one of our posters. Basically they said it didn't come that way from the factory so fix it. I check all the exterior control surface rod ends to see if they are loose enough to move or if dry and frozen. If dry and frozen I start looking at the logs real close to see if the lube and gear swing AD had been being done. One item missed almost always due to the effort but it can cause big headaches, is pulling the sidewalls inside and actually looking at the steel tubing frame for rust. If the windows are not sealed well, water gets in there and runs down inside on the tubes and rusts them. The insulation SB aside. There is actually a SB describing how to check for leaks by pulling the sidewalls and directing a water hose at the windows looking for leaks. Make sure everything, and I mean every switch, knob and button works as designed! Put power to it and try all radios in all modes, all lights, all warnings (landing gear warning horn, stall warning horn, etc), all exterior lights, everything that can be turned on or off or moved in and out. There was one write up on here a while back where someone bought a Mooney and the stall warning didn't work nor did the gear warning (IIRC). That makes the airplane unairworthy. If on jacks (and it should be) do a gear swing and make sure the gear works properly. I've seen them signed off 3 months ago and they hang 3" from the wells when sucked up. If its electric gear do a manual drop also to make sure it works. Had a couple on this board recently that went in for annual and the manual gear drop didn't work. So check it out. Look to see if the gear actuator has ever been removed, cleaned, checked for proper gear lash and relubed. If it hasn't you may be doing that on the next annual yourself It's that important. Disregard if its a manual gear. It goes without saying that a full log book check is required for all applicable ADs and required inspections even though the annual has just been done. The logs tell a story and knowing how to read them is a skill. Make sure you know what to look for or have someone that does. The engine stuff is the normal stuff. Compression check, oil filter inspection, looking for leaks, cracks, anything not normal. Pull the plugs and read them, they too have a story to tell. My caution to any whom I help buy an airplane? Trust no one selling an airplane period. Take nothing for granted. Don't trust anything even though it just had an annual. If you do, it will bite you in the arse. Check and verify everything before money changes hands. Once you pay for it , its yours! Good luck and show us pictures even of the prebuy! :-) :-)

Any time you "adjust" the tension on any gear leg (not check but adjust the rods) you have to check all the others Move one and they are all affected by the design of the system. The hardest is to get even tension on both of the rods for the nose gear on manual gear Mooneys.

A few degrees is normal tolerance a lot of degrees is too much wear. I've seen a lot of wear iMooneys. Go to the SB and drop a plumb line down from the nose gear truss as it shows to do and really see if you have the correct caster. Until you do that you are just guessing.

With only 4 tenths in a Mooney and out of a Falcon you are just over controlling the rudder pedals I was 5 years on a Boeing before my Mooney and I overcontrolled like crazy the first few landings, Keep your heels on the floor and not raised on the pedals as you do in big iron Also have your nose wheel raised off the ground (NOT by laying on the tail!) and see how much free play you have L and R at the nose tire If its more than a few degrees either side get the steering linkage in the nose well repaired or replaced

Folks ! By far more importance than the collar is how sloppy or lose the articulating steering pieces are up in the nose well. "8 SECOND RIDE" again!! If those parts are worn you'll dart all over the runway Lift the nose wheel off the ground and see how loose it is in turning (at the nose wheel), If it goes more than a few degrees L or R repair the top linkage.

I agree. I avoided this sort of thing on my overhaul by hiring the guy in my mirror every morning, :-) I'm lucky as I can legally do the overhaul in my garage (which I did). After 9 years and 900+ hrs I still have not seen any metal in my oil filters at any oil change. Engine runs great!

Some of us shed them proactively (as in IMC flying, night SE over mountains) and others wait a bit too long. I won't list my creds here but just to say I've got 60 years into this flying game from big iron on down. 55 years as a licensed wrench bender on airplanes. Still active in both arenas I have stayed with my M20D FOR 25 YEARS NOW and have no intention of changing airplanes at this stage in my flying "career" . I know it well. No sense in trying to learn something new for a 10% speed increase when now every day is Saturday!!! I can agree with Parker vis a v older pilots to a degree. Annual flight review (or more) at less than 50 hrs/yr should be done after 75 yrs old at least -maybe 70. I've got no problem with that. But it should include "train to proficiency" or fail. It should have teeth in it. Maybe the call to "not able" has to be done. I've interviewed several Instructors who have complained about BiAs with pilots less than competent knowing full well that they will drop below competency in the next 3 to 6 months. I've done hundreds 'of 121 Check Rides as a Check Airman and it didn't happen very often (Thank God) but I've had to fail a few and they went out to pasture in years gone bye. But low flight time affects many way younger than 80. Ask any shop how many airplanes they annual with less than 50 hrs since the last annual. Recency of experience to is the biggest factor in safety in flying for any age group. After that comes more airplane than you can safely handle with your experience level. 25 hrs instruction time in a new hot rod just doesn't cut it in many cases. I could go on but I won't. Suffice to say I've seen many useless smoking holes in 60 years

Double check the torque on each sump to case bolt. Sometimes they loosen up. My top crankcase bolts did just that. A recheck on torque and the seep went away, Do not overtighten them just to try and get the seep stopped. Lots of case seeping in years past was done by cleaning with lacquer thinner (todays equivalent is brake clean in an aerosol can) and smearing on PRC just like the tank sealer. Its not in the book but just sayin' it was done back when. If its a bolt hole leaking then one would have to cover the entire bolt head and nut You could clean it well with brake cleaner and spray the edges of the sump with foot powder - run the engine for a short while and find exactly where it is leaking.

Here's a question- Is the TT/BK A/P available right now for any experimental airplane or are they also back ordered? Have there been any TT autopilots produced in the last 6 months for any application?

Don - No arguments inferred and just a difference of opinions contained therein- you make some good points for the higher end of small GA aviation If we are limiting to Mooneys then your comments are right on for J models on up. No disagreement there. Just did a quick search on the GFC500 installation and I can't find anywhere that shows an installation in the area of 12K, when all the required extras are included Here's just the first one I cam across https://avionics-laf.com/products/garmin-gfc500-autopilot-installed $15,500 NOT including the G5 nor a GPS AND they are full until Sept 2023!!! it comes out closer to $22,000 or $26,000 with GPS CAN YOU FIND ME ANYONE WHO HAS PUT IN A GFC500 FOR NEAR 12k STARTING FROM SCRATCH? (Sorry hit the caps key) I can't find anyone We may be coming from different spectrums also. I'm also looking at the bottom end of the GA market place as an area to really impact vFR into IFR accidents. The bottom end where older airplanes are owned by those (lets be honest here) barely able to afford an airplane in the first place. IF we could use the "cheap" A/Ps that experimentals use that alone would be a huge improvement in safety for that segment of aviation. Again an IMPROVEMENT in safety not a degradation of safety. They are safe they can be over powered by hand input, they have failsafe disconnects, they have clutch drives for disconnect all very safe and currently in use by experimentals. For thousands of hours! One button push for level! What a safety feature for the average VFR pilot And they don't need to be approach capable ! They could even be limited to 1,000 AGL There is no reasonable argument that they couldn't be used for NON precision IFR flight either just like many older Brittian A/Ps were certified to. Many Brittians were not certified for approaches but in recent times the only thing being certified by the FAA must have full approach capability. Truly insane thinking. There is no reason why this couldn't be accomplished for + or- $2500 plus installation. Thereby making it a available to the vast majority of the lower GA market place and be just as safe as anything installed in experimental aviation. No one has even looked at doing it NORSEE Why not? The FAA can spout all they want about supporting safety but in the end they are letting people die because they have their head in the sand.

At this point you might be correct!

What can I say? Hope springs eternal? Don , I can agree on most every point you made. Even back in 1974 or 5 I needed a new transponder for a Navajo I was flying (while out on a trip across the country) and put in a Gold Crown one over night at "King Radio" in Kansas. It worked flawlessly Put in a complete Gold Crown package later on. It worked flawlessly. There is always a "cost - benefit" ratio to consider There is also a "cost-airframe value" ratio to consider As I've postulated before many Mooney owners (and other airframes also) are not interested in or need a full on everything included "CAT III" autopilot. Most are VFR only pilots looking for a good straight and level A/P for cruising from place to place. If I was (or they) doing LOTS of IFR flying down to mins then a Big G A/P makes sense. In most cases the cost for the VFR benefit doesn't make sense to most. The airframe value also factors in. Unless we are talking a J model and above that ratio is upside down . On the "lower" value airframes affordability for the owner is probably the biggest factor. $7500 vs $18,000 - 25,000 THE BIGGEST FACTOR (which I have postulated on several times) IS THE SAFETY FACTOR OF ONE BUTTON PUSH FOR LEVEL! This is the biggest safety factor any of us in GA could ever have and I fault the FAA on this one. An "AFFORDABLE" TO MOST, autopilot with this feature would have saved many lives even during this 4+ year TT/BK fiasco. There is absolutely no safety reason why an A/P like this could not be EASILY certified for VFR and maybe Non-precision IFR through NORSEE IF THE FAAA WOULD MOVE INTO THE REAL WORLD.. Its been proven safe over many years in experimental airplanes for what I propose. Let's add another vector into tis discussion- Safety on legacy airframes. We are not building CAR3 or Pt 23 airframes any more in numbers to speak of. We are always "preserving" what we have at least up to destroying what dwindling supply there is out there. Among that dwindling supply what is the biggest factor to safety and efficiency in ALL those airframes? THE ELECTRONIC AND INSTRUMENT PACKAGE! The basic mechanical airframe of each one of them is a well proven item when maintained to proper standards. That's not hard to do. But now look at the panel and what do we see? 30-40 many times 50 year old equipment patched together (or inop) with limited ways to keep the junk repaired just due to age.. I've also brought this up many times right here on MS- The FAA is derelict in not allowing PROVEN (and approved) avionics (those used in sport aviation or even experimental aviation) to be used in light GA aircraft. We have decades of use of this kind of equipment to speak to the safety of its use. Even if the restrictions were to come to just the lower class airframes like we limit Basic Med to just think what it would mean for the continued GA base going forward. We could have well proven glass panels that don't fail (safety!) for a relatively cheap entry price. Easy to install getting rid of the half century mechanical garbage and prolonging the airframe life of our diminishing GA fleet. Allowing the use of these A/Ps (through simple certification) would save lives ! Now the certification is so onerous and the market so small in comparison that no one wants to invest that amount of money for the feasible profit margin. My proposal has always been to allow Pt23 or CAR3 airplanes to be maintained AIRFRAME wise to the current standards but allow a placard (just like we do in Experimental) denoting that this airplane utilizes non-certified avionics and instruments. If we can allow experimental airframes to use these instrument packages safely even in IFR conditions we can do the same with lower end certified airframes with much greater safety that we have now using half century old mechanical systems. It is lunacy to keep your head buried in the sand (FAA) and not see the safety benefits of this approach to the aging GA fleet.

Anyone know what market share or $ volume BK does in their other GA lines? Who uses their screens and systems?

The part that is hard to swallow is the lack of any reasonable communications to the customers on what is happening. Truthfulness goes a long way in our world. Silence breeds discontent and anger