Jeff_S

Tony, your link didn't work but I read the factual report online. Are you referring to the several prior incidents where the pilot reported poor climb performance? The report spent a lot of time discussing contamination in the fuel manifold but didn't say directly what that meant.

The 55x does the same thing with a G1000. When you go into approach mode you take it off of GPSS and I think the nav signals just aren't as precise.

Pretty consistent readings to what I was getting. That's cool.

There's no doubt the parachute can sell airplanes, I guess. And there are a few well-publicized examples of it saving some lives. But if you look a the Cirrus accident record starting from Jan 1 2015 to today, there are 11 fatal accidents with 19 lives lost. A quick scan through those shows that most of these are prime examples of poor maneuvering at low altitude with subsequent stall/spin entries, and no parachute is going to overcome that. I'm not quite with the rest of the crowd that says Mooney needs a parachute to be successful, or that the M20 is a goner. Bonanza's and TTXs are still being produced (albeit with bigger corporations behind them, admittedly). I assume that Mooney has run the analysis and knows how many airframes it needs to sell per year to have respectable profitability, and that it can move these in China as well as the U.S. I don't know what those numbers are, but for all the reasons we've always espoused, I think the M20 is still a viable product. Perhaps I have my head in the sand, but I remain hopeful...

I'd say that if you're only getting 22 gph near sea level in a WOT climb, you definitely need to increase your fuel flow. That would be one reason your CHTs are so high. It was a hot day for me, with temps well above ISA, but my #5 cylinder (always hottest, since I haven't done the pixie hole thing) still never topped 380°F. I would generally lean to about 1300 EGT every few thousand feet.

This was from last November. Accident report says he was having oil pressure issues.

Just another example of a Mooniac who loves his wife almost as much as he love his airpl.....uh, I mean, the other way around!

Hi George, Okay, summary version. Mooney has been claiming for several years that they have a plan in place to allow these non-WAAS G1000 birds to upgrade to WAAS in a more economical fashion. The first option they provided, which cost on the order of $60-80K, was to simply swap out all the STEC-parts and the older Garmin GDU with a new GDU and put in the Garmin GFC700 autopilot. Not too many people took them up on this offer. Later on they said they had a plan to bring WAAS capability to these planes and keep the STEC 55x autopilot, which as we all know supports WAAS approaches just fine in many other configurations (e.g. the GNS480/MX20 I had in my old J). That plan has stalled for two years or more now, and counting. Tom Bowen has gone on record stating publicly that he sees this as a safety issue and has "committed" to it in the past, but it keeps getting stuck behind all the new development. While we as owners respect that Mooney has to continue to grow and seek new sources of revenue, this particular project has many of us feeling stranded that we can't get full utility out of our planes in the modern age, especially as ILS approaches are being replaced by LPV approaches. Also, this hurts the resale value of our planes. It is true now that with the GTX34 we have a solution for ADS-B in/out, and that's a good thing. But it is also true that Mooney has stranded the G1000 owners with an older version of the Garmin software that doesn't even support some of the newer capabilities built into the G1000, such as outputting the engine monitor data (and many others features I'm sure). Independent exploration by some members here on Mooneyspace (David Kayden, among others) suggests that the software exists to support all these changes with minimal development time required, if any. But a test/certification program has to be put in place and managed by Mooney, since they own the TC and no one else can do anything legally. The net-net is that Mooney has been telling us for several years that they are working on this problem, and nothing happens. It always gets pushed off to the side. We're just looking for some concrete action that assures us the project will get going. While there has been some idle talk about possibly forming a class-action lawsuit to see if we can get things going, no one really wants to do this and as I noted above, we recognize Mooney has priorities. We just want one of those priorities to be us!

Le voilà!

Hey Anthony. I didn't notice any physical effects of the low blood-ox levels, but my pulse was definitely elevated into the 100s. But I was checking pretty regularly, every 5 minutes or so, so I never let it go too long. Also, as I got comfortable with the height I think my breathing became more deep and regular.

Dan, when did you install the 345? How long did that take, and how much extra labor did the shop charge? Did you have to get a third GPS antenna? I'm considering doing this in October since my two-year check is due..

George, there is a thread with very recent entries on the topic of support for these non-WAAS planes. It will tell you all you need to know. It would sure be great to get someone from AOPA, and a fellow Mooney pilot to boot, to put some pressure on them. Let us know what they say!

Hi Dan. Sorry, my question was aimed at Christian!

Hey all, Had a perfect day on Saturday to finally do some high altitude testing, both for the plane and my new oxygen canister (SkyOx with cannula). I took off from PDK (1000' elevation, 25°C) and climbed straight up to 17,500 to test climb performance. I used cruise-climb settings, adjusting VS to maintain 120 KIAS, and leaned for power using EGT. Then did straight line cruises from 17.5 down to 12.5 to measure speed and fuel flow. Also, used my pulse oximeter to test blood-ox levels. Performance charts are attached for those who are interested. This was just one test, on a day that was significantly hotter than ISA, so it will all be relative. Also, I started with 60 gals of gas and just me and on board, so I was probably 3000 lbs or so. But generally speaking, performance seems consistent with book numbers. A few of my key takeaways from the event: 1) The view from that high altitude was neat, a little freakish at first as I could really tell the difference once I got into the teens. Started to look like an airliner view. I'd never been that high in a personal plane before, but it was great once I got over the initial anxiety. 2) My plane just seems to like cruising in the mid 170s. Up high, that was about all I could get. Stayed ROP at that altitude because it really didn't like LOP, and at that altitude it doesn't really matter anyway. Down lower, I was able to get back to LOP which improved overall efficiency. 3) My oxygen delivery worked fine...when I remembered to breathe! I was so caught up in the data collection (and at first, yes, a bit nervous) that a few times when I slipped on the oximeter it was showing blood sat in the 80s. But a few deep breaths and I was able to keep that in the 90s, so now I know how that works! Overall, it was a fun experience and gave me some confidence for how to fly higher when conditions warrant. I will look to a winter day this season to repeat the test at ISA or lower and see how that changes things. Cheers!

Yes, no one would claim that a nicely equipped long body (Bravo/Ovation/Acclaim) are going to be magnificent load haulers. That's not how they're designed. The trade-off is speed and efficiency. So you have to ask yourself what your primary flight profile goals are. But you already own a Mooney, so have your flight profiles changed?

I had similar pitch oscillation in my J. For me, it turned out to be old cracked static lines behind the panel that were leaking air. Once we got those replaced the problem went away.

As one of the affected owners, I have as much interest as anybody in getting a resolution to the full WAAS capability. I bought into my plane knowing and accepting the risk of this not happening. The market typically does provide answers when they're needed, and in this case Garmin came through in a big way with the GTX345 option. I don't relish the thought of cutting into the empennage to add another GPS antenna, but at least I know I can if I need to. And I'm starting to seriously consider doing this now, in advance of a full Mooney solution, to get the traffic benefit outside of TIS-A areas. As to having full WAAS capability on approach...yeah, that would be comfortable to have. But a very good friend, Delta pilot and fellow Mooney driver with a tricked-out 201 complete with G600 WAAS capability confided to me that as long as he's had that set-up, he's flown an actual WAAS approach all of one time (and he flies that thing across the country regularly). And I know from experience that with the SVT in the G1000 and that glorious Flight Path Marker (aka "meatball"), getting yourself onto glide path and holding it there in a standard LNAV approach is really easy...only difference being the autopilot won't capture it. It's a good thing the engine and wings don't know the difference between a WAAS or non-WAAS receiver...otherwise you'd think the plane would fall from the sky without it!

The Mooney pilot sounded Canadian to me, but it's tough to say for sure. Also, are we 100% positive that the comment came from the Mooney pilot? I listened to it three times and I couldn't tell for sure. Finally, who hasn't had the unfortunate slip up and said something over the open mic that was really supposed to stay in the cockpit? I think before we condemn someone in this obviously trying circumstance, perhaps a bit of benefit of the doubt is called for. I've been cussed out over the phone many times, and it's never just because the other person was a total jerk. There's always something going on that precipitates the reaction. The ATC response was exactly what was called for...nothing. Let the guy blow off some steam, realize he may be dealing with other shit in the cockpit (maybe a wife or kid who really has to go to the bathroom) and call it a day.

I have often asked myself the same question as the OP. The answer I've come up with is that I think we are addressing our own fears. Sure, say all you want about learning from the event so you might avoid it yourself. But let's be honest...the causes of GA accidents are really not that many, and they are well documented in NTSB reports. I think we speculate about recent accidents as a defense mechanism to bolster our own confidence when we fly. We tell ourselves that we would react differently and that these unfortunate things would not happen to us, and that's the swig of whiskey we need from time to time to help us deal with the risk. I'm not being critical of anyone when I say this...I think it is basic human nature and something that has allowed us to evolve and continue to push the boundaries of experience. We allow ourselves to be critical of "the other guy" because it helps us maintain the courage to keep on keeping on. Just my thoughts.

80 lbs for the A/C system in an Ovation. I don't see any way you could put this into a J, since it relies on driving the A/C compressor with a belt off the engine, and to my knowledge the Lycoming doesn't have that second belt drive. I could be wrong, but it seems you really need the power of the IO-550 to operate that thing.

They call the 70's the golden age of general aviation. I grew up in Wichita, "Air Capitol of the World," drove past the Beech and Cessna plants nearly every day and saw plenty of B-52s and F-4s flying out of McConnell AFB. But I just had a shocking revelation about just how dangerous those times were. I watched "We Are Marshall" this evening, and decided to check out the NTSB report for the crash that claimed 75 members of that football team in November 1970. Pilot flew into the ground on final approach, indeterminate cause, unsure whether there was instrumentation error, altimeter error, or just plain pilot error. Another military charter in Alaska killed 45 in similar circumstances. But then I started scrolling through the entire list of accidents from that month. 384 of them! Compare that to any given month in this century and it's probably three times as much. Granted, three times as many people flying, but the accident record is grizzly. I counted 4 mid-air collisions (that's 8 planes) including one with a Mooney. Lots of "VFR into IMC" type incidents, fuel starvation, the usual suspects. The causes of fatalities hasn't really changed in the last 40 years, but the frequency sure has. While there's no doubt the sheer population and number of flights impacted this number, I think it's equally clear that the technological safety advances we've made in GA have made have helped make us all safer. But if you're ever in need of a sanity check about the things to watch out for, I would encourage you to go back to any month during that time period and just scroll through the NTSB reports. Then go fly...but keep the fuel in the tank and the greasy side down!

In the G1000 it's actually coming from the baro-altitude system. I love you Med again in my G1000 manual and there is no config setting for this that I could find. It just does what it does.

I don't think it is editable, at least I can't find anything in my manual. But you will have a later rev of the software so that may be there for you.

I find it incredibly entertaining that we all zoomed in on the anal check up. I was going to say something funny but y'all beat me to the punch. One thing I noted, though, is the act only gives the FAA 180 days to get the process defined. I thought the FAQs said they had a full year. Did I read that wrong?

Oh, here's another idea nobody has mentioned yet...get your glider (sorry, sailplane) license. That will really teach you about energy management and, like a tailwheel, will also hone your rudder skills. And it will help you keep from freaking out entirely in the unlikely event that your Mooney ever becomes one. Admittedly the profiles will be very different, and the sight pictures, but at least you will have some experience with a whole lot of quiet in front of you. I did some glider training, just for the experience, and it was quite enjoyable. Never took it all the way to a certificate but definitely helped me understand more aspects of flight.