Jeff_S

I would suspect that any hard landing that was sufficient to tear of the wheel could stress the seams of the fuel tank. They're all pretty tightly integrated in that area, but without knowing exactly where your leak is it's difficult for us to diagnose. Black particulate matter sure sounds like it could be old tank sealant that's coming loose, but it could be other things as well. Was the tank drained and totally dry during the repair (I would guess so)? Some say that keeping that sealant moist is critical to keeping it intact, so even if the original event didn't cause the leak, the required repair processes MAY have induced the leak, which would all tie back to the original covered event as well. Insurance is a tricky beast so you really need to get an expert's opinion on that. If you're in the AOPA Legal Plan you can talk to an attorney. Good luck. And BTW, it goes without saying that if you were the lucky individual who put the plane down in that oil streaked condition, good on ya' mate! Well done.

Well, the old cost was about $70K from what I've been told, which was because it was a total system swap out. They actually just replaced the GPS units, both MFD and PFD, and the autopilot servos for the GFC700 units. You were essentially getting a new G1000 unit which matched the "then" current production systems. If they follow through on what they've said they would do, the plan is to upgrade the GPS and software to WAAS so it integrates with the existing S-TEC 55X autopilot. The STEC is perfectly WAAS compatible because I had one in my J with the 480 and it worked great. So doing all that should come in substantially less expensive than before, but I agree it would be good if Mooney would at least give us a ballpark. I've got my eye on the $30K mark to get WAAS and full ADS-B capability. That would be reasonable I believe.

Ah, those significant milestones in the life of a pilot. Soloing. First Cross Country. First airplane. Hitting 500 hours in the logbook. Hitting 1000 hours. Acquiring the "corrective lenses required" designation after your medical exam!

Well, not to refute Jolie's expertise and the general sentiment of the crowd, but I do want to say that this sort of thing can be highly individual. My father passed away earlier this year, and while I was of course saddened by the affair, I actually found solace and peace in taking to the air to get away from it all. He and I used to go flying a lot in his last few years, so I found it a good way to remember and honor him. And when I'm in the air, there's no time for the other distractions, and the need to concentrate on flying is quite liberating. But as I say, each person is unique so you have to judge for yourself where you fall in the big P of the PAVE analysis. And to Jolie's point, if you are wondering about it, then best to take the cautious approach.

Everyone's route is different and no one way is right for all. Just to give you my experience, my first plane was a Piper Warrior II, which was a fine aircraft for tooling around, making even some long cross countries (from Atlanta to Denver, OSH, Connecticut and all points between) with reasonable speed and efficiency. It's also what I used to get my IFR rating. For me, I wanted a plane that was simpler to operate so I could get more comfortable flying in the system and learning the Big Picture of private aviation. But after three years I then wanted a better traveling machine, and Mooney was always my top choice there because of the speed/efficiency/styling combination (as the new marketing says, Choose Any Three!). As has been noted, you can learn to fly any plane as long as you put the patience and practice into it and have good instruction. I will say, though, that Mooneys do require more diligence and expertise, especially in the landing phase, then most other airplanes; but once you get the hang of that, they are a joy to fly. Good luck with your decision. You're at one of the most fun stages, where you can experiment and strategize and think about what you want. Test flying a lot of planes will be a blast, and give you the info you need to make a decision.

Yeah, I agree with Cruiser. I was overthinking hot starts when I first got my Ovation, but now it's very simple. Mixture rich, throttle full, low boost for one or two seconds, then pull throttle to idle and give it two turns, fire away. Be ready with a jolt of low boost if needed if it starts to falter. Only one time did I use the full "clearing" procedure as described above, which does work, but I would only use now as a last resort.

6 quarts seems to be my happy place as well.

So what this really does is send a shot across the bow of Appareo and the Stratus, seems to me. As I read it, the Stratus would be superfluous since the ADS-B info can now come from the Garmin equipment. The ability to transfer flight plans is coming up, which I guess could be interesting if you're really trying to keep the exact flight plan synch between your panel and your iPad. For me, though, I've always felt that the advantage of the Stratus/ForeFlight connection was precisely because it WASN'T part of the panel, and it's a backup source of data to correlate or use in an emergency situation. It's all a moot point, though, since those of us slumming along with a G1000 can't yet benefit from any of these new Garmin features. That's something I am really going to start hounding Mooney on at this year's Summit. They have GOT to start showing all the G1000 users what the path is to ADS-B compliance.

So I've registered to attend, but there's nothing there about lodging, etc. Are we on our own for that or is there a block of rooms being held somewhere?

Seth, make me an offer! I'll send you a PM.

It's amazing how your test is tracking your unit averages! But seriously, any one sample isn't going to tell you much, which is why you should get it tested with every oil change. Blackstone also does a real good job telling you what they've found and pointing out anything that merits further attention or investigation. I remember back when I had my Cherokee, I went almost 50 hours between changes because I was tooling around out West and then up to Osh, and I decided just to "fly the crap" out of it before I did a change. That particular sample showed a spike in iron, but because I told them about my "fly the crap out of it" strategy they suggested this was probably just some older corrosion that was finally getting knocked off and nothing to worry about. Sure enough, the next sample the iron content had dropped below the prior baseline.

I mentioned above the website FighterSweep as a place to go if you want a balanced opinion of the F35. Here is another entry from today that I would encourage everyone to read, no matter what your personal opinion. (Don't be mislead by the title in the URL.) http://fightersweep.com/2698/f-35-worst-fighter-ever/

Aviation Consumer did a write-up back in 2012 and endorsed both CorrosionX and ACF-50 as effective for combatting corrosion. They didn't do any independent lab tests like they've done for CamGuard, but they provided testimonials from well-respected organization and shops about how it stops corrosion from occurring.

Well, Wikipedia may be right, although I couldn't find anything in either the POH or the Type Certificate that specified what type of flaps they are. I guess I didn't think there was enough of a gap to call them true slotted flaps but perhaps there is.

Plain. While there is a slight gap between the wing and the flap, they just go down on a simple hinge and I don't believe they would qualify as slotted.

Okay, so I realize spelling can be optional for some folks, and the OP's original message reads like a cross between Kerouac and Joyce. But still, while I'm quite sure he meant to say "nubile" in his description of the young jumpers, I just had to see if "nubial" was actually a word. Well, it is, sort of, if you believe Urban Dictionary: Nubial: A part of someone's body that you love to pinch "Nubial is part of someone's body you like to pinch such as Kneecap, elbow, cheeks, behind" So either the OP is actually brilliant, or he lucked into something there. Either way, Bravo!

If you want a more balanced opinion read the entries at http://www.fightersweep.com. There is an entry there that describes in more detail what that test flight was all about and that you can't read much into it.

The course was determined to be 109nm, based on the defined Turn waypoints and assuming 180 KTAS. They do factor in some amount of distance for the turns. If you look at the defined (first graphic) course compared to my actual flight path (second graphic), you see an obvious bobble I made on Turn 1 where I turned too far. Most of the turns were actually pretty tight, except the first one which was less than 90 degrees and I just got carried away. Quickly learned to dial in the heading bug for the new heading prior to the turn to smooth the rollouts. Also, the time started at the departure end of the runway in Greenwood, so you're not up to full speed or altitude when the clock starts. All those contribute to the slower average total speed. I know at most times on the straightaways I was getting 185-190 KTAS. I started with about 35 gallons as I recall...pretty conservative on that front as well, since I didn't know where I'd end up on the GPH.

Hey all, The official results from the Palmetto 100 Air Race went up this week on the Sport Air Racing League site (http://sportairrace.org/sarl/node/2204). The original Saturday date was rained out so we ran on Sunday, which caused a few of the original racers to miss the event. But Sunday was bright and clear and the race went off without a hitch. I'd boast that I won my overall category (production aircraft) and my racing class (>280HP, normally aspirated, retractable gear, or FAC1RG) but I was the only in my class, and the only other production plane was a Grumman Cheetah/Tiger (not sure which) so my "high horse" is deservedly low. But I had a great time and enjoyed the group...I know Byron and Becca have been quite active with them in Texas. I sure want to get a few more races in to improve my technique. Since it was my first race I didn't want to push things too hard. I stayed at about 2200' MSL (1200' AGL) for most of the race, using slight descents in the turns to help accelerate. I also left the RPM at 2550 and the MP around 26" so I have room to go quite a bit up from there. Fuel flow was about 21GPH to keep the max CHT at 370. I can tell right away from analyzing my track on CloudAhoy that I can cut my time measurably just by better turning. The designated race course was factored in at 109nm, and I flew 114nm which added almost two minutes to my total time. The winner flies a souped up RV-6 that he has tuned for racing. He mentioned all the things he's done to that engine and I can't remember most, except he said he put in high compression (10:1) cylinders. It was pretty comical how at every turn point, he would announce his turn and he gained two miles per me on every corner. Anyway, it was fun, so if you've got a hankering to see what your bird will do you should join the fun! Cheers, Jeff

I wondered what the green text was for, especially that bright lime green that I couldn't even read on my screen. I had to drag and select the text so it would show in a white-on-blue background.

I read that article and looked up the Brodie Landing System as well. Excellent example of necessity being the mother of invention.

It's neat how the lines all converge on their flight paths into and out of the airports. It shows that traffic patterns are really well defined roads in the sky.

Agreed...seems like the upgrade from 2 to 2S is not really worthwhile. Although, a couple of weeks ago I had left the 2 on the glare shield in full sun while I went for lunch at an airport. I'd never had problems with overheating before, but it reached its limit I guess because it kept shutting off until I got it out of the sun for a few minutes, then I just left it on the pax seat for the rest of the short flight and it actually worked fine, good coverage, etc.

I've only had my Ovation for about a year, so my experience is more limited but I have 4 years of J to compare it to. Any retractable is going to add some to your maintenance costs compared to a fixed gear. It will add a few hundred to the cost of the annual, just because they have to spend more time checking gear rigging, etc. If you need to do maintenance on it, realize that changing gear shock discs is $106 PER DISC plus probably 2 hours per side (4 hours altogether for the mains, plus 3 hours for the nose gear). Realize that with the heavier long-bodies, you'll have to change the discs more often. Moving to the engine, that's two more cylinders to inspect, two more chances for exhaust stacks to go bad, etc. Of course that won't hit you every year, but when it finally does it will add several hundred to the overall costs. (I just found a cracked muffler while doing an oil change last week, and for safety sake we pulled the whole exhaust and sent it out for inspection since it was seven years old. That will probably set me back $2K or so...but I err on the side of safety, so that's just me.) You'll have speed brakes which work wonders, but when they need maintenance they need to be pulled and sent to PreciseFlight in Oregon. That's $800, at least it was in April of this year! So there are definitely higher expenses, any of which can get you at any point but probably won't all hit you at the same time. The good news is that all this is worth it, because the smile you'll have on your face when you're cruising along at 170 knots listening to that Continental purr is priceless.

Ah, no, I was trying to modify my existing profile. I'll try creating a new profile to see if that works. Makes sense.