Jerry 5TJ

Never. Once I took off with only the side latch on the door engaged, but not the top one. Even then the door didn’t pop open because the side latch held.

There’s still room at the Lakeland PPP this month. It starts Friday 27 January 2023 The link to the Mooney Safety Foundation site is https://www.mooneysafety.com

If I fly as an instructor with a pilot who demonstrates a lack of skill combined with a lack of ability to improve (for any one of many possible reasons) then I don’t fly with him again. I do not have any way to stop him flying, tho, and I doubt many would want a CFI to have that authority.

Geez, 28 pages of this stuff? I’m glad I switched to JetA a decade ago.

The doubler covers or replaced the in-wing radome for a Weather Scout radar.

Keep looking and be ready to act — One of my former students has just sold his primo 1979 M20J. It was heavily upgraded with a new engine and custom paint and beautiful Interior and all new Garmin glass panel including GFC500. It sold in days for about $200K to a local buyer via word of mouth.

My opinion: Get a solid state replacement for the KI256 as your autopilot’s AI reference.

Compared to my experience in three Mooney airplanes, the average MooneySpace airplane flies considerably faster and costs much less.

From the CFI’s seat I often feel classic partial panel instrument training isn’t worth the learner’s time. When their plane’s upgraded panel has 3 or sometimes 4 AI, with several independent power sources, it makes more sense to train for more likely problems than partial panel. I have flown many hours in IMC with one mechanical attitude gyro powered by one vacuum pump, but I don’t plan to do so ever again.

Wow, your new avionics are going to fast forward you 50 years and into the 21st century!

It might be a good time to pull out the batteries, charge them to full, then run a battery capacity test. (Test is run at a constant current equal to the amp-hour rating). All you ever wanted to know about capacity testing your Concord aircraft batteries: https://batterymanagement.concordebattery.com/BatteryDocs/5-0171.pdf

Another plug for using the 172 for IFR training is you can do 20 hours of the 40 hours of instrument time in an AATD, per 61.65. Many flight schools have an AATD and it will emulate the 172 well. The slower, simpler 172 airplane and especially the simulator offer a better training environment than a Mooney. I find that my 172 IFR students on average progress more rapidly to the practical test than my Mooney learners working on their IFR rating. The AATD is a big part of that difference And yes, of course you can learn in your Mooney. It will probably take a bit longer. In the end you’ll know your airplane and avionics better.

If you lose control of your PA46 in IMC it will sometimes shed the wings, usually after the horizontal stabilizer fails. If you lose control of your Mooney in IMC, the wing will probably be intact at impact.

Ed, Given your location and missions most folks agree that you should look for TKS and a turbocharged plane. A 252, Rocket, or Bravo fit in your budget. At this point all the planes you are looking at are decades old. Any planes you would consider buying have been modified, most extensively. They are each unique by now. Rather than debate the minutiae of model, GPH or LOP, I’d suggest you find the best plane you can and buy it. Good hunting!

Just bought a PJ2+ for backup. Few fancy features, an easy-to-read display, standard jacks for your headset. With an external antenna it works about as well as the panel mounted com radios.

The door on my C popped at takeoff once. I’d let my passenger close the door, my mistake. I didn’t even try to close it in flight, just flew a normal pattern, landed, and closed the door properly. A bit noisy but no problem with controlling the plane, none at all.

We get "Thank God, we thought you would never cancel". We call Jersey Love. Yep. Decades ago in my M20E flying IFR into Linden NJ on the (then) VOR approach in thick summer haze I couldn’t spot the field as an increasingly irate NY Approach controller counted down the distance, finally ending with “Linden is 1 mile 12 o’clock and we’re holding all the departures at Newark for you!!!” I spotted the field and landed, to the clear relief of ATC. Later I realized that the MAP would have taken me directly to Newark airport.

When the pitch servo in my KFC225 system failed and commanded full nose down trim, the system did calmly annunciate “trim in motion.” But I’d already noticed the significant pitch down, that’s for darn sure.

Likely issue is that the company will name a liability figure that is unobtainable for a piston single.

The accident pilot certainly had plenty of hints collectively suggesting that it wasn’t a good plan to go to GAI just then. While he was still dangling from the transmission lines the front passed and the weather cleared up significantly.

The MAPASF PPP material suggests specific power settings, aircraft configuration and airspeed for approaches. Those are good guidelines.

The Piper P46T does about 23:1 glide up high and 15:1 near sea level, but only with the prop feathered. With the prop flat it will glide about like a Robinson.

Yeah, that’s one idea, but it leaves you looking up at the brick.

Nice that the proposed fix is a software upgrade.

Looks as if the trend of your curve is still decreasing at 130 knots, suggesting you can slow more and further improve your mileage. Try the power setting from the C model’s POH that’s around 1900 RPM and 18” and I think you will get about 100 KTAS at <5 GPH. That’s around 0.05 on your scale. At that power setting you are still faster than a Cessna 150. Which isn’t saying much.