• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


donkaye last won the day on December 1 2018

donkaye had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,608 Excellent


About donkaye

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Santa Clara, California
  • Interests
    Flying, Flight Instruction, Running, Clarinet
  • Reg #
  • Model

Recent Profile Visitors

4,330 profile views
  1. I find that I am basically comfortable with 4 sources of electronic charts (no paper necessary) with 3 different power sources: G500TXi and GTN 750 (Power source 1), Aera 796 (Power source 2), iPad (Power source 3)
  2. There are so many combinations of subscriptions. While I love Jeppesen, their charts aren't necessary on the G600 and GTN 750. The Garmin Flightcharts do just fine for that purpose. I could be wrong, but at present I don't think Jeppesen is compatible with database concierge for the FS 510. Now THAT IS useful for uploading databases to the 750/650 and G600. With Garmin's OnePac subscription you get updates to all their databases, database concierge capability, all databases for one handheld GPS, and additionally get the IFR upgrade to Garmin Pilot. I then buy a Jeppesen subscription to the iPad which also comes with all Charts free for one handheld, in my case the Aera 796. My primary is the Aera 796 with Chartview (and Flightcharts) with the iPad as backup. The Flightcharts work well for additional non north up geo-referenced plan view on the 750 and G500/G600. I secured the Chartview card for the 750, but haven't used it yet, because yet another large price Jeppesen subscription would be necessary, and I just don't see the benefit in doing that.
  3. When I had an issue with one of the first GFC 500 installs on my M model, Garmin went out of their way to assist me in solving the problem, including allowing me to visit them on the way to Oshkosh last year. They found the problem in less than 5 minutes after opening up the avionics bay in the back of the plane. While almost everyone on their team had left for Oshkosh, an approval letter was generated for a required change to the installation that allowed the airplane to be returned to service. I was on pins and needles for most of a day, but the letter was received by the shop at 4:30 in the afternoon of the last day we were to remain in Olathe. Also, after a year and a half, the display on the TXi decided to go bonkers. I had a replacement in 2 days. So I have found Garmin service to be impeccable. Your situation is rather unique. Who ever heard of a tail from a different model Mooney being used as a replacement for the original? After talking with the flight test pilot who helped certify my model Mooney, I found that the testing for approval of an autopilot for a specific model aircraft is significant: weight variations from light to gross, CG variations from forward to rearward, altitude variations from low to max altitude, speed variations from slow to fast, etc. The expectation that Garmin would risk approval on a "one off" in the situation of a different tail assembly, I think is unrealistic. The problem lies with shop that had the temerity of replacing one model's tail with another model's tail. And why didn't the prebuy find that issue? This whole situation I find incredible.
  4. It might be compared to the difference between driving a VW bug and driving a Lincoln Continental. The C grosses out at 2575 while the Bravo grosses out at 3368; a nearly 800 pound difference. The C is light on the controls and can be landed short like a Cessna 150. The Bravo is a lot heavier on the controls, and with experience can be landed short, but not as short as the C. For longer trips over various terrain the Bravo brings more capability and options. Much more can be said, but this is a good start. The above statements come from having done trainings with students in both airplanes and having owned a Bravo for the past 27 years.
  5. While I agree there is probably no market for the totally upgraded older Bravo with a new zero time engine for someone who hasn't owned an airplane before, for someone like me who's been through the downtime, knows the performance of the Bravo, and is willing to sacrifice 25 knots to save more than half the price of a new airplane, it would be a bargain. For those that want new and price is no issue, of course, the new Acclaim Ultra can't be beat.
  6. I've been associated with Mooneys for a few years, like 27 years of ownership of my Bravo with another 2 years before that of decision making. I'm on my 3rd engine right now. I've been through a complete panel upgrade, starting in 2013 and adding new things up to the present. When it comes to engines, the price increases about 5% each year. Count on it. If you have time to spare in your life, cash in your pocket to spend, and want your dream airplane, then buy a Bravo with both a run out engine and original avionics. You might be able to find one for $95,000. A new reman installed, as mentioned above is close to $85,000. Your dream all Garmin panel with G500 TXi including EIS, GTS 800, GTX 345, GDL 69A, GMA 35c, G5, GTN 750, GTN 650, FS 510, and GFC 500 costs about $130,000 installed. So you would have 95,000 + 85,000 + 130,000 = $310,000 in the plane. Add $12,000 for tank reseal, $15,000 for exterior paint and 15,000 for new interior and you end up with $337,000 for an almost new airplane. This is less than half of the cost of a new Acclaim for a plane that is only about 25 knots slower. The downside is that the new engine will take over 2 months to make and other 1 month to R&R. And unless you have the Avionics shop on the same field as the MSC, add at least another 4 months for the avionics upgrade and another 2 for the tank reseal and paint and interior. That's 2 + 1 + 4 +2 = 9 months. Then add another 3 for delays. So the plane will be down for a year. The upside is that you will have an almost new airplane for less than half the cost of a new one. Then, of course, you could decide to buy a Bravo with a run out engine and a somewhat upgraded panel. The upgraded panel would probably consist of at least an Aspen, GTN 750, KX155, and GTX 345. The plane could probably be purchased for $135,000. Add the new engine for $85,000 and you are in it for $220,000, you're down for 3 months, you hope the tanks don't leak, and can live with the old paint and interior. You don't have the dream airplane, but you've bought the avionics at a discount, you don't have as long downtime, and you still have the speed of the Bravo. Also, remember airplanes are not inexpensive to own, so expect it to cost at least $30,000 per year to own for about 100 hours of flying per year. It's expensive, but at least not the annual cost of maintenance on a small turbine prop plane or small jet, and you're not that much slower.
  7. No, labor to R&R is additional. I figure that the total cost to change engines with a reman would be about $81,000. This includes overhauling both alternators and prop governor (2,000), replacing all hoses (2,000), inspecting the engine mount frame (500), New engine mount kit (1,200) and labor to remove and reinstall the engine (10,000).
  8. As of September 2018 the Reman cost $65,647 less $1,700 Customer loyalty discount plus $,1,248 Shipping. That assumes you get the Core credit of $29,500 after you return the core. The cost probably increased somewhat after the 1st of the year.
  9. Due to P factor I do adjust the rudder trim to minimize constant rudder pressure in climbs and descents. It doesn't have to be done constantly, since you are climbing and descending at a constant rate. When climbing at or below Vy some right rudder will still need to be held, as rudder trim doesn't fully cover the P factor at those speeds.
  10. Slipping any Mooney for the purpose of losing altitude is just poor form and uncomfortable for passengers. Of course it is necessary for crosswind landings, but even then, I would practice enough that you are comfortable with the crab and transition to wing low method of landing, as the work load is significantly reduced all the way to the corrections necessary in the flare. All proficient Mooney pilots should be capable of recognizing the sight picture for a stabilized approach and not be high. Having said that the long body Mooneys (M20M, M20R, M20S, M20TN) can be slipped even with full flaps. There is no prohibition in the POHs from doing them. (In the K model there is) If doing so, make sure it is done above the 85 knots Bob Krommer stated. To demonstrate this, when a student is high on downwind, I'll have them full slip around the turn to base and final. The wing is NOT loaded, the speed is greater than 85 knots (usually 90 knots), and the nose is down for the descending slipping turn. The ball in the turn coordinator or PFD is facing the inside of the turn. Do NOT skid around a turn as this can lead to an unrecoverable stall/spin. I would recommend doing this first with a Mooney Specific Instructor familiar with your airplane model. Remember, this is for demonstration purposes only and should not be the norm for flying a pattern, as I said above, the proficient pilot knows the slope at which to make all turns in the pattern.
  11. The clock is a bit of a PIA. The clock works great if the bulb isn't burnt out. If you can't read it, the bulb it probably burnt out. Before we learned how to change the bulb simply, we had to take the whole glare shield out and that took a couple of hours. On the second time, we found that you could just unscrew the ASI, push it down, and reach in and change the bulb. It took about 15 minutes. This assumes you have the legacy six pack instruments.The bulb can be replaced with an Audi #431-919-040 that can be purchased at your friendly Audi Dealer. I do have a complete clock that came out of my plane when I did my upgrade, but the easiest thing is just go to the Audi Dealer and get a new bulb.
  12. The answer, "For the most part". I'd really like to fly another M20M that has added the GFC 500. Only two things could be better. In turns where the bank angle goes to 30° (the maximum allowed on the GFC 500) there is some damped oscillation that diminishes after a couple of oscillations. It's acceptable. Also, on approach, there is some oscillation on the glide path that is also acceptable. I did fly Adam Fineberg's (201Mooniac) J model that exhibited none of these issues. It was perfect. So, from my perspective, the J is perfect, the M almost.