Jeff_S

I can see how the RB Air Races would be pretty boring for people in the stands, unless they are just die-hard aviation freaks. How interesting can it be to watch planes perform the same routine over and over again, after all? The TV coverage is what made the show, with the "shadow" plane so you could see how they were doing head-to-head and the quick access to times. It's too bad they cancelled the series, but not surprising. They never had much of a physical audience at the US events, although it seemed to draw well overseas.

Boarding the Mooney can be a bit challenging, for sure. There has to be at least a modicum of arm and leg strength. It's easier to get them into the plane, where you can be there to stabilize them. Getting them out of the plane is more of a challenge, as it requires some strength to lift oneself out of the seat. If there is a line-person or some other helper present, that is best. However, I've also learned how to instruct passengers to just swing their legs out of the door and scoot along the front edge of the wing and just slide off there. It worked well for my 6'3" father when he could no longer get out of the seat, and it just worked last week for a burn patient who could not exert much strain on her legs or torso.

ForeFlight is a great app and still my favorite. However, their continued inclusion of new features in the Performance Plus category seems mostly about the needs of the commercial or corporate pilot. I may finally have reached a quasi-CB status in this regard...I just haven't seen a strong enough need for these features to upgrade past my Pro Plus plan. For those of us who fly the same plane pretty much all the time, we should be well-enough versed in the general performance capabilities of the plane that we don't need a crutch such as this one. I can see a commercial pilot or someone who has to fly and keep track of multiple aircraft finding this very useful.

This exact situation was just covered in an article in this month's IFR magazine. They went through the regs as noted above, and the summary was pretty much the same. IFR in Class G without a flight plan doesn't violate the regs per se, but it falls into the careless/reckless classification. They cited two pilot suspension cases that were adjudicated as such.

Yes, good point...once the OP gets into Class D. But he made the call outside Class D (I hope!) and therefore I wonder, again, whether or not the Class G regs would allow descent to 1000' AGL and be legal, i.e. 1 mile viz and clear of clouds. Once inside the Class D, then he is in controlled airspace, and would have the clearance to operate at 1000'. I admit it's a situation that seems to skate the thin edge of several regulations...interesting dilemma to contemplate.

Did anyone mention here that 1,000ft AGL is typically Class G and the instructions are simply 1 mile vis and clear of clouds? Seems like that's the operating principle on this original concept. As to SVFR, I also have used it to depart VFR when the airport was technically IFR but the patchy clouds clearly opened up in my direction of travel and the tower granted the request.

To the OP, I would say that there are still one or two things you could try to increase that. You could try leaning a smidge to get slightly more power at 1,000' MSL. Also, did you have your vents closed? That's a racing technique that helps reduce drag and may give you a knot or so. And are you sure your gear doors and flaps are rigged for maximum drag reduction? As to gaining altitude, Bryan's advice would work for a turbo but not for us NA guys. The performance charts clearly show that TAS will decrease even with full power as altitude increases. Byron's racing techniques included things (as I recall) that take you close to the edge of the certification envelope, like advancing the mag timing, etc. Probably not something you want to mess with unless you're really trying eke out those knots. But from what I recall of my J-model, the OP is doing pretty well compared to the absolute book values...which as we all know are just for marketing!

Just to update this thread, I spoke with the Genesys folks at SnF and asked about the status of the STC program for the 3100. Barry was around but not while I was there, so I spoke with Mike Demeter, Regional Sales Manager. Mike confirmed that the STC program is scheduled to start early in the 2nd half for Mooneys in general. He also acknowledged that they still aren't sure exactly how the solution will be supported by those of us with G1000 avionics. He notes that the preference is to access the G1000 through a digital interface since that is what the 3100 uses, but that a fallback could be to mimic the analog interface of the 55x. It depends on how much Garmin wants to play...and probably also on what Mooney is willing to do. So we shall see. Those of you with purchase orders on the books, there is at least lip service to progress.

I flew down for the day on Thursday, specifically because I knew that Friday was going to be wet and I didn't want to taxi and park on wet grass. I've been out in the "East 40" where they used to put the "GAP" (General Aircraft Parking) planes, and the ground there is loose sandy soil so even on a dry day the Ovation required a ton of throttle to get moving. My point is, with this in mind, while I agree that the PIC has the ultimate responsibility for the safety of the airplane, I also think that some advance thinking and preparation could have spared everyone all the angst. Specifically at SnF, you can call the FBO and get slot, or as others have said, park at one of the outlying airports. I wasn't aware of the "heavy" option but I do see how your typical volunteer lineman would look at a Mooney asking for "heavy" and scratch his head. That said, the *new* GAP parking is so superior as to be unbelievable! It is right next to show center, which requires a bit of a taxi on landing but then means you are just steps away from the exhibits, and the departure (which is almost ALWAYS on the 9's) was very quick. And I found the turf there to be quite compact and the grass well mowed, so the throttle responsiveness was much better for getting going. There was one slight hump we had to negotiate to transition from the grass to the taxiway, but I just took it slowly and there was never any risk of prop strike. The only downside is that once the airshow starts, you can't get out to your plane since it's in the protected area, so if you have purchased any bulky items you have to figure out where to put them until you can leave.

No one else seems to have said anything about this, but those AeroPoint products look like the JPI 900 and JPI 960 products rebranded. I know that rebranding was the theme of this whole thread, but nobody picked up on the JPI angle. I haven't seen any other news about JPI being acquired. I wouldn't expect to see news about them licensing their products for OEM white-labeling...that's the point of white-labeling after all. But did anyone else catch this?

I've got a Sidewinder as well and I like it, so that's +23 or something like that. But to the other Sidewinder users I have a question. Any tricks on keeping the expansion mechanism that goes into the nose gear from getting stuck? I almost freaked out the first time I used it, because I had tightened the mechanism and then I couldn't get the thing out. Finally with some careful pushing and prodding it came out, but since then I just don't use the expander. Also, how do you keep the friction mechanism from abrading off the nose wheel rubber?

Thanks Mike. I always appreciate and respect your opinion...I guess it's a good thing you didn't notice that I didn't use rudder trim when you did my FR a few years ago! My concern is more about forgetting that I've applied rudder trim once I'm in cruise climb or cruise. While not a dangerous condition I suppose, it's just one less thing I have to remember. It's very obvious during takeoff that rudder trim is required, so I couldn't possibly forget to use it then. Regarding the SB I mentioned, it was actually an SIM that came out last year relating to rudder-trim slippage in the Ovation and Acclaim. Here's the reference to that: SIM20-124 2018 April 11 Prevent Inadvertent Rudder Trim Slipping During Extreme Deflections

I'll be the contrarian here re: the use of rudder trim on takeoff. I don't use it. I feel like it's my responsibility to keep the nose pointed down the runway and that's what rudders are for, especially in a takeoff situation where the trim is only used for such a short time. I figure that's one less thing to forget about once I am established in a cruise climb. I guess I picked this up during my tailwheel training, when I almost did let a SuperD scoot off the left edge of the runway before the instructor got it back. That's yet another reason that I call my Ovation 3 a "Mooney Tail Dragger"! But I have never once felt that my leg strength wasn't sufficient to the task. Perhaps as I get older... There is also the issue of the SB that was put out by Mooney, citing the potential for rudder-trim to get stuck when in a full position...or something like that. I can't remember the details, since I don't use rudder trim and I'm not under warranty I decided to forego that expense.

As another tech industry veteran, I will add my congratulations to the ForeFlight crew for getting the buyout they wanted. And I think Boeing was a pretty good choice. For those wondering why on earth Boeing would want ForeFlight, think about all the applications for extending ForeFlight capability even into the big-iron world, not to mention the military. I see big opportunities there. And I also grudgingly agree that the latest ForeFlight innovations are targeted more toward commercial users...and have come with the commensurate price increases. But let's face it: as basic GA pilots tooling around in our Mooneys, we don't really need ALL those new gewgaws that ForeFlight has introduced, so I'm happy keeping my current subscription and its feature set. We GA pilots were NEVER a target market that was going to take FF to the next level, so they've behaved like rational business folks looking to increase their return on investment. What's not to understand about that?! Finally, someone asked a question about Apple haters. There was a time when the Apple closed ecosystem was sneered at by the nerds who wanted to build their own machines and add components willy-nilly for maximum geek-out. Those days are long gone, but for some the "us vs. them" mentality still holds true. But we all have our biases...I won't go near a Brussels sprout no matter how hungry I am. I can't explain that any more than I can explain why someone now would hold such enmity against Apple. The French have a saying: A chacun ses goûts!

I grew up in Wichita, the self-proclaimed Air Capital of the World. That was back when Beech and Cessna were kicking out planes by the thousands, Boeing was building B-52s, and F4s and B1s were flying out of McConnell and buzzing the whole neighborhood. It was awesome. I went to that museum when I was back in town a few years ago and I remember seeing that Mite. I didn't remember that the area around it looked so "under construction" but that may be just the way the photo above was taken. Of course I knew nothing of Mooney growing up, but the museum shows where Al's shop was southeast of town. As I recall it was on about Pawnee and 127th Street or thereabouts, only a couple of miles from our farm. In my youth there was nothing resembling any kind of airstrip in that area, but it was still very rural. Now my old high school (Wichita Southeast...go Buffs!) fills a quarter section in that same neighborhood. Go progress.

Thanks Scott. That blog I think explains it, as well as confirms some suspicions I've had for awhile about mysterious lack of returns. The weather forecast for the whole day was for negligible precipitation and no convective activity, so it seems reasonable that the human-element may have set this filter and then not turned it off when showers started to develop.

Hello all. I'm aiming this mostly at Florida folks, but any others in the Southeast may have had a similar experience. While flying from Amelia Island down to Ft. Pierce for the Florida Mooney monthly lunch (great fun, by the way...good to see all my Mooney compadres) we had some slight bit of weather around the central coast area. We were in an out of clouds, but the XM NEXRAD on my panel wasn't painting any precipitation so I wasn't paying much attention. Then all of a sudden we flew into some actual showers, hard enough that I thought they should have showed up on NEXRAD. Sure enough, when I pulled up the ADS-B NEXRAD on my iPad there was a small band of showers that we just flew through. On the way back north, that same line had progressed a bit farther south and ATC actually called them out: "light to moderate precipitation on your line of flight, 5 miles wide, deviations left or right approved as needed." And yet, still nothing on the XM NEXRAD but that band of showers showed up on ADS-B. We zoomed the NEXRAD range all the way out to 1000 miles, and it did show some shower activity up in the Northeast but nothing at all in the Southeast. And the legend was showing NEXRAD as being updated on its regular schedule. So, did anybody else notice any "coverage holes" in NEXRAD in the Florida area (or anywhere else) on Saturday? Just curious... Jeff

So I read the article, and agree that it didn’t have any of the more obvious technical errors that many journalists make. But I believe the authors still took an angle of attacking (sorry, couldn’t resist!) the company and the FAA for what they considered to be shortcuts or decisions to make cheaper certification possible. It seems to me that if there is an established procedure for handling stabilizer trim emergencies, and that procedure works just as well for the new design, then it shouldn’t require retraining pilots. Based on this article, what I see as more at fault is the prior pilots’ lax attitude about squawking known deficiencies in this particular aircraft, and the company’s lax approach to addressing those squawks. If those prior pilots had written up their experience and forced the maintenance crew to take it seriously, the plane would likely have been grounded. It would be good to get a US pilot’s opinion on that. But even with that, if the accident pilots had followed the established emergency procedure, the article indicates the accident could have been avoided. So again, blame the pilots, or blame the “money grubbing” (my words) corporation...that also has strong insurance? The latter approach is what sells newspapers!

If you're talking about flying your Eagle up in the high teens, I would go portable. That's the decision I made with my Ovation. I like to get up into the mid-teens when conditions permit, or if necessary to get over some weather, but my trip profile doesn't factor in climbing that high too often. Of course, if you want to take long legs up high then it may be more convenient to get a built-in system. Also, do you need to put people in the back? If so, that speaks to the built-in. So it's really going to depend on what your mission is. Generally speaking, while the NA IO-550 does relatively well in the mid-teens, that's not where you get the best performance. For that reason, my feeling was that having the extra full-time weight of the built-in was not worth it. (Not to mention, I already have built-in A/C so I didn't want to further reduce my useful load.) I keep the bottle in the back seat for longer trips so I can use it if conditions warrant, but otherwise I leave it in the hangar.

Hi Dave. I’m full time at Amelia now so I want to start coming to the lunches. I see in this thread that the next one is scheduled for 2/9 at Ft. Pierce. Is that still the plan?

Hello everyone, My latest article has been published on Air Facts Journal. It's about my Sport Air Race League event from last year. Here's the link: https://airfactsjournal.com/2019/01/going-mach-0-3-with-your-hair-on-fire/ I only wish there were more events in the Southeast that I could participate in. Last season was hampered by poor weather luck, and I think racer participation was down. So if you have any interest, I would encourage you to check out the races for the upcoming season and dive in. They are really fun. The main league website is http://www.sportairrace.org. Cheers!

Hello all. I had a short flight to knock some rust off my brain today (boy did I need it...but that's too embarrassing to talk about right now) and pick up cheap fuel. On the return leg (back in the groove) I was cruising along at sightseeing altitude over the coast in my normal LOP configuration. After the flight I was studying my readouts on Savvy Analysis and noticed that at one point, when I had dialed back MAP from 24" to 20" (since I wasn't in a hurry) there was a corresponding rise in EGT. I'm sure this is a normal reaction, but I've been thinking it through in my brain and it hasn't clicked "why" just yet. At LOP, reducing MAP means less air getting to the cylinder which would make the mixture richer...so that makes sense. But the FF declines as well, so there's less fuel getting into the cylinders. But perhaps the new fuel/air ratio still left the mixture richer than before...so maybe I've answered my question but I know we have some better chemical engineers on this forum than me, so I'd be happy to get a more thorough explanation. Here's a graph of the section in question: And while I'm on the topic of things I know work but have never quite understood how, what is the mechanical link between FF and MAP? When you increase or decrease throttle (FF) how does that automatically change the MAP? Yeah, perhaps a very basic and dumb question that I should remember from PPL training, but I believe there's some hole in my knowledge of how an engine operates that needs to be filled. I appreciate all kind and compassionate responses!

Based on today's winds, using a route that keeps you over land and inside the ADIZ, I showed 995nm and a total trip time of about 6:15, which included an average 10knot headwind. Fuel burn was between 85 and 89 gallons, so not realistically a non-stopper in an Ovation (in my opinion) due to fuel reserves (and size of my bladder!). But for planning purposes, I fly an O3-310hp bird and expect to get 175 KTAS at LOP settings. In cruise altitudes from 8500-12,000 this generally works out to 13.5gph in the lower range, and about 12.5gph in the upper range. A lot depends on actual conditions, of course, but those are about where I come in.

Just checking to see if anybody has an update on this, since we're now into the first quarter of 2019. @Barry LeBlanc, has the company started the STC process for Mooneys? And is there any news on how well integrated they will be with the legacy G1000 aircraft like mine?

Marauder will never stop finding pictures of beautiful women in bikinis and posting them. I don't know where he gets his source. Oh, yeah...Google!