Jeff_S

If you take it to a prop shop they can at least run the analysis and tell you if an imbalance in the prop is causing your vibration. The problem with a dynamic balance on the plane is that in most cases, the only way to correct it is to drill holes in the spinner bulkhead and apply a screw with some washers to get the right amount of weight in the right spot(s). People have been doing this for years and it's an accepted practice, but some (myself included) don't like the idea of altering an otherwise perfectly good airplane part. It really is up to you how comfortable you feel about it. Of course, if doing so is the only way to reduce vibration that may otherwise shorten the life of your engine mounts, avionics, etc., then perhaps the trade-off is worth it. But getting the analysis done will at least arm you with the info on what is possible.

I made it through half of the video, and while it was full of great footage of airplanes in flight, and quotes by well-known people, I really couldn't understand much of it. What is "performance based evaluation" for example? The video was a good marketing piece that said basically, we want to make it easier to bring innovation to the market. Great...all for it. But I didn't get a good sense of just HOW that's going to happen.

I tried the Mike Busch/John Deakins method when I first got my Ovation, and it does work, but it's way overkill for my engine. Here's what I do: Cold Starts pretty much by the book: 1) mixture/throttle full 2) low boost until it stabilizes, about 5-7 gal/hour 3) throttle back to idle, then two turns 4) start the engine. Usually starts within 2-3 seconds. If not, there's not enough fuel, so just let the pump go for another 5 seconds and start again Hot Starts are pretty easy: 1) mixture/throttle full 2) low boost for just a second or two 3) throttle to idle, then 2-3 turns 4) engage starter, if it doesn't fire right away, just give it the low boost another shot or two and it will kick right off. Good luck!

This one hardly needs editing, except for the part about landing in the water. I haven't seen any Mooney do that yet...more than once! Parrotheads rejoice... "Jamaica Mistaica" Some folks say that I've got the perfect life Three swell kids, lots of toys and a lovely wife I fly, I sail, I throw caution to the wind Drift like a stratus cloud above the Carribean But every now and then, the dragons come to call Just when you least expect it you'll be dogin' cannon balls I've seen too much not to stay in touch With a world full of love and luck I've got a big suspicion 'bout ammunition I never forget to duck Come back, come back, back to Jamaica Don't you know we made a big mistaica We'd be so sad if you told us goodbye And we promise not to shoot you out of the sky It was a beautiful day the kind you want to toast We were tree top flyin' movin' west along the coast Then we landed in the water, just about my favorite thrill When some asshole started firing as we taxied to Negril Just about to lose my temper as I endeavored to explain We had only come for chicken we were not a ganja plane Well you should have seen their faces when they finally realized We were not some coked up cowboys sporting guns and alibis (Chorus) They shot from the lighthouse They shot from the highway They shot from the top of the cliff They had all gone haywire We're catchin' fire and there wasn't even a spiff Well the word got out all over the island Friends, strangers, they were all apologizin' Some thought me crazy for being way too nice But it's just another shitty day in paradise (Chorus) Come back, come back, back to Jamaica Don't you know we made a big mistaica We'd be so sad if you told us goodbye And we promise not to shoot you Promise not to shoot you Promise not to shoot you out of the sky

I fly from Atlanta to KOJC (Johnson County Kansas) pretty often to visit family. That is one runway, almost due North/South. And yes, it can be pretty breezy at times. I set my personal best for a crosswind landing there last April, with winds 25G40 straight across the runway. Did have to go around once, but nailed it the second time. I was going to KCMC as my backup if needed. On the other hand, I've found that stiff crosswinds do miracles to scrub the air out from under the wing and minimize the float that you can get from a Mooney. But as with any landings, speed control is still critical.

I had graphic proof for how quickly things can deteriorate in the pattern just this week. It was a clear late winter day, which in Atlanta means there was some breeze coming down from the northwest. So coming back into PDK they were landing on the 3s, since it wasn't strong enough to warrant 34. But the winds were squirrely, and on short final I had a couple of gusts from a quartering tailwind and was getting bounced around pretty good. I was stabilized at 50' and landing speed of 75 knots when all of sudden the bottom just dropped out, stall warning horn starts blaring, curse words start flying out of my mouth. I managed to arrest the drop before impacting, and somehow made an actually nice little chirp-chirp landing, but way more adventurous than I like. In thinking about it later, I may have been better served to go around, but that has its own set of consequences once you are that committed to the landing. But the whole thing was over in literally a couple of seconds. It can happen fast.

Um, am I the only one wondering about the parachute? I can understand that if this was a stall/spin on approach, the chute wouldn't have enough time to deploy anyway, but it does beg the question of how valuable the chute is in preventing the most common types of airplane fatalities.

Dan, we will look forward to your PIREP to see how the GTX345 is working. As for me, this is actually getting pretty close to all I want. I wasn't likely to give up XM weather anyway, since I think it's better than ADS-B weather, but I would like TIS-B traffic which should have much better coverage than TIS-A. And while it would (will? hopefully?) be awesome to have LPV approaches, the fact is that I can probably live without the extra 150 feet of lower minimums based on how I fly. For me, the real value of WAAS has been to be ADS-B compliant, and to help the resale value of my airplane. The good news is that there do seem to be some realistic choices now coming to market.

Yes, I was in the camp to depart VFR and stay low, which is entirely legal. But you had better be sure your clouds will go away when you think they will. Otherwise, you could call in for a pop-up.

Well, if you want an Acclaim, I think your only option is G1000. If you buy an Ovation older than 2004 or so, then that will be non-G1000. I think only the absolute latest G1000 planes will be ADS-B equipped. Starting in about 2008 or so, they did have WAAS, but not ADS-B. So yes, there is still some uncertainty about how the older G1000 systems, either WAAS or non-WAAS, will ultimately get upgraded to full WAAS and ADS-B. And yes, it's true that we are relying on Mooney and Garmin to come up with the solutions and the pricing. However, the flip side of that coin is that if you are willing to live with some uncertainty, but put faith in the market forces and in Mooney and Garmin's statements that solutions will be forthcoming, then you can get a pretty good deal on a G1000 model and that uncertainty is reflected in the price. I can tell you that when I was looking around in 2014, I felt the market price of a non-WAAS Ovation 3 was well worth the uncertainty. Having Mooney on solid financial footing did help my decision, to be sure. And Garmin isn't going anywhere anytime soon, and there are enough these birds flying from Mooney, Beech, Diamond and Cessna that there is market force for a solution to be developed. It's three and a half years away, so something to consider, but no time for panic yet. And in the meantime, having flown with steam gauges first, then graduating to a plane with a nice GPS/MFD setup, and then to the G1000, I can tell you that the G1000 is absolutely superior to anything else out there for situational awareness, access to data during flight, etc. It is true that I don't have LPV approaches, and I guess if you plan on spending a lot of time flying hard core IFR and need that extra 150 feet of descent on a regular basis, then it is a consideration. On the other hand, with Synthetic Vision on that monstrous PFD screen, and a flight path marker pointing you to a runway that you can see and fly to like it's a CAVU day, I don't really miss LPV all that much. Hope that helps.

Here's an interesting question posed to me yesterday. I was telling my brother how the new Mooneys will have a door on each side, and being the ever-inquisitive attorney that he is, he said "why do the single door planes have the door on the right?" I seemed to recall from somewhere in the recesses of my brain that the Bonanza was the first one to popularize this, and Piper and Mooney (and others) just followed. It's easy to understand that a single door saves weight, but the question is why on the right instead of the left? If you think about it, the left would make more sense, allowing everyone else to get in before the pilot. So all you historians out there, do you know WHY the door has been on the right? Safety reason? Something else? Enquiring minds want to know...

I can vouch for the owner, a personal friend, and the plane which transported us on many a fun ride. And Chase Aviation helped me sell my J in 2014, so they are a fair and honest group to work with. This will be a nice new family member for some lucky buyer. And it will help Leigh pay off his boat! So he's getting rid of at least one of the three "F's" in his life. You know, "if it floats, flies or (expletive deleted), rent it!"

Rather than talk about specific apps, I think we can generalize to say that any of us who have made the switch to electronic charts would never look back. As far as the (potential) technical issues you cite, I have never once had my iPad crash while in flight. But if you are using ForeFlight, then you can have duplicate charts on your iPhone just in case your iPad fritzes out, so you've got a belt for your suspenders. No matter which app you use, I think you'll find the speed, ease of access and ease of updating the electronic charts will be quite superior to lugging around a bunch of paper. And add geolocation on the charts while you're in flight to the benefits list, which is something a paper chart will never do.

At the risk of not having much to add, I'll pile on anyway (slow day at the office). We get similar instructions like these at KPDK all the time. As has been noted, there's really no way to perfectly determine whether you're on a 3 mile base leg, 3 mile final (well, that's easier) or 3 mile hypotenuse. And I can't image they care that much. It seems to me it's really just a quasi-clearance, almost like an IFR reporting point, so they can keep track of people and know generally where to look. Because at least at my towered field, the radar isn't really what they go by at that point...they have binoculars and they are looking for you out the windows. I know this because we just had a controller-pilot seminar last week and this is what they told us. (Aside for anybody who's ever flown into PDK and heard the lilting, almost musical ATIS renditions of Phillip the controller...he's the best!) The other issue the OP mentioned was the dissatisfaction the controller expressed with his original reporting point. While it is true that local landmarks are often used (here it's the King and Queen building), if there a lot of students in the area they may not really know what that means. So in order to help them maintain situational awareness, it probably is a better idea to give a more thorough reporting point. After all, you're talking to the other pilots as much as the tower...or they should be listening, anway! It's no different than practicing approaches on a nice VMC day...none of those VFR pilots have any clue where AABEE or CHAMB are unless you give them some distances from the airport. (And yes, I realize you would never be on that approach without ATC clearance...it was just an example.)

I'm 6'3" and my wife is 5'8". I can tell you that with the adjustability of the seats, you can easily make an Ovation fit for just about any body type. I never bump shoulders with anybody, and I have plenty of head room. The back seats are spacious (for a Mooney) and as noted, they recline, so they can be pretty darn comfortable. It will be a bit more difficult to load up the people in the back, but if they are reasonably athletic it shouldn't matter. That last point is not a joke, unfortunately. Because of the way Mooney sits you down low to the floor, it does require a decent amount of agility and strength to be able to get in and out of the cabin. I have a good buddy with bad knees, and getting him to the co-pilot seat is pretty easy, but getting him out is a bit comical. The only other drawback you may have is useful load. Depending on what add-ons your plane has (e.g. A/C or ice protection or built-in O2) you may need to think about your load a bit.Mine has A/C, which chews into that by 60 lbs (might even be 80, can't remember). So that when I have myself at 180, my wife at (ha! I'm not an idiot so I won't tell you) and 70 gallons of gas, I only have 190 lbs left over for passengers and luggage. I think both the 182 and the 'Toga will let you haul way more stuff. On the other hand, on 70 gallons of gas going 175 KTAS on 13.5 GPH, I can go 700 NMs in four hours with legal reserves. Try that in a Piper or Cessna!

For a good time, for a good time call....

I had a similar experience doing some winter cruising this year, although not at temps as cold as the OP's. But I was seeing my #6 (also the coldest, for the same reasons) drop below 240° into the twenties. I remember from a Continental webinar I saw that there is such as thing as CHTs that are too cold, so I just richened it up a bit until I was more comfortable. It meant burning more gas with no meaningful speed increase, but I guess that's the price you pay. I have the oil cooler restrictor plate for the O, but in Atlanta it just doesn't make sense since the temps fluctuate so much and never really stay low that long. I'd be taking on/off the cowling all the time.

Nice to see how one AOA implementation can go. Is it just the way the camera was mounted, or were those approaches pretty darn shallow? Seemed like you were pretty low on final approach, shooting for a short-field landing or something. Could just be the POV of the camera though.

I'm glad to hear someone finally talk about the "time needed for air displacement" in the tanks. Because of an annoying wing-walk seep at more than 30 gallons, I seldom put more than 35 in the right side, but I'll often fill the left side to the top, and I always hear some gurgling sounds when I do this. I've taken to bumping the wing with my hip to get is sloshing around in there, and that helps me add more gas.

To Tony's point, the website doesn't work well in a phone/tablet environment, but it works fine on a browser, and I don't find it slow at all. And in defense of Mooney, I know all too well the challenge in getting a website that can satisfy all the requirements to be totally cross-platform and still provide the level of usability and information that people want. Mooney has gone to the new style of website design that is all the rage these days, using vertical scrolling as a key navigational element. When I was designing webpages, the old adage was that if you can't get it on one screen people will never see it. But with the rise of the smaller devices, scrolling has become "de rigeur" again. The more things change...

Dan, I think you're jumping the gun to schedule an install of the GTX 3x5 without knowing what Mooney's total solution will be. You have 3 and 1/2 years until the requirements actually kick in. Mooney is likely to come up with a total solution that addresses WAAS approaches as well as ADS-B, hopefully within the next 3-6 months. Then you will know what all your options are. Unless you are just dying to spend money to get ADS-B out right away, I think it makes sense to wait a bit longer. That's just my $.02.

Hi Trek. In the post above, David says that this won't work with the pre-2014 version of software which we have in our non-WAAS panels. Is that correct? If so, doesn't this then require a certification process by Mooney to get us to the latest version of software before we could install the unit? My suspicion is that Mooney and Garmin have been looking at this as part of the strategy to get us non-WAASers into the modern age, with a single program that combines all the necessary elements. While you may not be able to comment on that entirely, I'd appreciate your input on the software version question. Thanks!

Looks pretty cool. An update to the panel by adding the Cirrus-style FMS keys, although with my aging eyes, I'm coming to appreciate the FMS knobs more and more. The second door will attract new buyers who want a more car-like style of transport...and will support the fuel-tank repair specialists with another wing-walk fuel seep to repair! The composite shell may be an improvement, although it hasn't affected the rated speeds or weight. All in all, I think it shows a degree of forward thinking that can only help sell airplanes...after all, if you were going to sink $699,000 into an Acclaim, the extra $70K ain't gonna matter!

What I want to know is if this unit is available as an LRU for the G1000 system, or if it has to be mounted remotely in its panel-mount incarnation. In other words, can it be a slide-in replacement for the GTX33S that I have?

This I gotta' see.