donkaye

I've flown a number of K's with the pneumatic speed brakes. What a PIA! They were slow, sometimes didn't retract fully when cold or extend fully. Electric speed brakes are a breath of fresh air. Speedbrakes are more than the sum of their parts. When used properly they bring added depth to your airplane. I can't imagine keeping a vacuum system with the weight that that entails for the purpose of speed brake usage only. With what you're spending to upgrade your airplane, a new set of electric speed brakes will make you smile every time you use them in the same way as using the new avionics.

As Ken has asked, How much Mooney time? In my opinion, "some Mooney time" just doesn't cut it. You want transition training from a Mooney Specific Instructor. In fact in transitioning to ANY airplane you want a person who knows and has many thousands of hours in your type of airplane. Those people are out there and you will get a lot more out of the training. You can go back to your favorite instructor later.

That looks right to me. The first 3 items are required for the G3X. The other items are required for the GFC 500 installation. I don't have the G3X, but I do have the GFC 500 and it required all the named parts, however, those could have been detailed even more than indicated. I've attached the interface of the GFC 500 and G500 TXi. Replace the TXI interface with the G3X and you have your setup.

Did my first solo on October 31, 1967. Applied for and received the Master Pilot Award last year. The FAA makes quite a production of that, including giving you a "Blue Ribbon Package" that includes everything the FAA has received on you. They are usually a couple of inches thick.

Yes, My GAD 29B was installed next to the circuit breaker panel on my M20M. I thought I had a better picture, but can't find it right now. But you get the picture.

You apparently didn't get the full meaning of my last posting. If the solution was going to be "Cancel IFR" why get into it with the Controller. I wasn't sure if I was missing something, or the Controller was in error. I figured I would spend some time on the ground sorting it out, if it was my error. If it was his error (it was) why embarrass him? As I mentioned, if it was IMC that would have been an entirely different story. I'm not intimidated by any Controller (not should anyone) and certainly would have gotten clarification in that situation.

I finally have time to get back to this posting. Flew KRAP to KOGD today. Home tomorrow. There is no doubt the Controller failed to give a proper holding clearance and I volunteered to hold on the inbound radial to the VOR I was on, which he said was unsatisfactory. When he said "Hold as Published" I quickly pulled up the enroute chart on Jepp FD and found no holds on any airway. I did find holds on some approach charts, but didn't query the Controller, since no approach was given or stated to expect in the ASOS. However, there was a good reason for the lack of query. I didn't want to embarrass either the Controller or myself. I took the prudent way out for the weather this day and said, "Since there are no holds on any of the airways, I cancel IFR". He didn't comment on that "subtle" remark. Had it been IMC, he and I would have gone around, and I would have pinned him down to what he specifically wanted. That would have been the prudent (actually the only) thing to do in IMC conditions. Certainly I took the "easy" way out. It didn't really address the issue for the future, but it was the best decision given the circumstance, in my opinion.

Was arriving at KRAP a few days ago on a direct flight from Sioux Falls to Rapid City. Radar was out. Another aircraft was on an instrument approach. I was told to hold as published Southeast of the Rapid City VOR. Looked at the Charts and there were no holds on any airways. What would you have done? Remember I was going Direct and was not on any airway.

1. Support has been excellent for all products including replacing some early on (GDL 88 and GMA 35) when I had some issues with them. 2. Others have commented that it is. 3. I think it helped, but since mine was the first installation after the test aircraft, they were particularly interested in making sure it wasn't their problem.

The rudder trim is independent of the GFC 500 installation. Mine works perfectly with the GFC 500.

I've waited until I had put some time on the GFC 500 after my problem was analyzed and corrected before I posted. I now have 6 hours with it and am able to confirm that my pitch oscillation problem is apparently and thankfully resolved. I can't say enough about the fabulous support given this issue by Garmin and their support team. While there were many people involved whose names I don't know, two that were absolutely integral to defining and implementing the solution were Trek Lawler and Aaron Newman. From the beginning Trek said from his experience this type of problem was usually an installation issue. He was right once again. For whatever reason, the pitch trim servo was not properly braced per the STC, and three setting were not correct. Once these items were corrected, I have an autopilot that both meets and exceeds my expectations. In the last six hours there has been no oscillations, and the flights have been mixed with smooth and bumpy air. Shirley really notices the difference, especially in turbulence. In the past with the KFC 150 it has been necessary to turn off the autopilot in rough air. Not so so far with the GFC 500. Where the KFC 150 would overshoot the level off after altitude capture, the GFC 500 smoothly captures right on the altitude preselected. It's like I'm flying a different airplane. Many threads have been talking about many different new autopilots from different manufactures. Some have been approved, and some are awaiting approval. I read many of the reports and am not impressed. Notwithstanding the GFC 700, the GFC 500 is now the best autopilot I have flown. The only item I wish Garmin had included was CWS, but its lack of implementation has not be a hardship. Yes, I went all in for nearly every Garmin Aviation product on the market. This autopilot on my airplane confirms that decision.

Thank you, Greg, I'll let you all know the results after my 8 hour flight back to the Bay Area over the next few days. The problem may be resolved. The next 8 hours will tell.

A few of my thoughts from my experience; Take the test and pass it first. The weekend courses are fine, but what goes in fast goes out faster. I've found the Gleim Course to be good because it gives you the reason for the wrong answers as well as the right one. It does just prepare you for the test, not the practical reality of actual instrument flying. The big Jeppesen book is like a reference manual, but provides really good information. If you have a glass panel, the instrument rating is almost too easy; Holding patterns, glideslopes for flying approaches makes life easy. Of course you should get some "dive and drive" experience, but with the modern GPSs step down situational awareness is easy. Even flying VOR approaches is easy with a WAAS GPS since you can now fly the whole approach with GPS and just monitor the VOR during the final approach segment. Gone are the days of ADF approaches that were more difficult and very inaccurate. From my experience, younger is better for doing accelerated courses. I had one student do the whole rating (not including the knowledge test) in 8 days. We flew 2-3 sessions of 2.5 hours/session each day. He passed with flying colors. He was technically oriented as a software engineer and 26 years old. In California in the summer you get the marine layer many days. In the winter you many times get the fog layer in the Valley. I like a student to have at least 4 hours of actual IMC before taking the practical test.

While I don't have any KXanythings, but you need the GAD 43E to interface such navigation equipment.