donkaye, MCFI

I'm also posting the reference email I had with the FAA 11 years ago regarding an airplane having dual ADS-B Out capability. It states that their system has been "adapted" to handle an aircraft with both ADS-B signals, if properly configured.

I corrected my above statement to state that correlation of Active traffic from the GTS 800 and ADS-B traffic from the GDL 88 occurs within the GDL88.

The ADS-B system was updated over 5 years ago to accommodate ADS-B Out on both channels simultaneously.

Marc, I can't speak to the possible issues with the GTX 330EX, but I can say what I did with my GTX 330ES. I didn't like the green color of the display, so I sold the unit and bought the GTX 335 with the bright white display and a few other niceties, which, of course, I never use. The GTS 800 interfaces to my GDL 88 where correlation with ADS-B traffic data takes place. In addition to saving a bunch of money, I liked the idea of having both 1090 and 978 ADS-B Out, so I kept the GDL 88. As a result the replacement didn't take much time at all. The labor was $1,500, but also included the wiring to upgrade the GMA 35 to the GMA 35C.

My Annual is next month. I'll let you know at that time, but my avionics tech thought it would be about $400.

I was going to send my yokes out this year and have them leather wrapped, and then I talked with a friend who said, "Why not just have them powder coated?" I like the feel of the yokes the way they are now. I've flown with planes that have the leather and they are fine, but I thought I'd give the powder coating a try. I can always go back and have the leather done if I don't like the results.

Very disappointing. When N355RZ was new in late November 1997, I ferried it down and back to San Antonio for Ron Gilbert to have the TKS installed at Mooney. I flew with him on a number of training flights and have over 43 hours in the plane. The flight to San Antonio was memorable. After stopping for "cold" fuel in Twin Falls, Idaho, at 23,000 feet at night on the way to what was supposed to be an overnight in Albuquerque, the engine started sputtering, I think I declared an emergency and descended down to 18,000 feet where the engine started performing normally. I remember the woman Controller was very helpful. I diverted to Farmington, landed safely, and stayed the night. That night I got on the phone with someone at Mooney and we came to the conclusion that it was ice in the fuel. The temperature at altitude was -23°C. The next morning I circled the airport for 15 minutes to get comfortable with the plane before heading uneventfully on to San Antonio. Currently, I have 6,959 entries in 12 logbooks. Some flights, no matter how long ago they occurred, remain unforgettable.

If this helps one person, it will be worth having posted it. At some point during a transition training, after landings are becoming consistently satisfactory, I do something that about 90% of students fail to catch. During takeoff and in the crosswind turn, as the students reaches for the gear handle and puts it down, I will start talking while at the same time pulling the gear actuator circuit breaker and stall and gear warning cbs. I casually cover them with my hand. Then wait an see what happens. Even though Pitch+Power+Configuration=Performance, this goes unnoticed. I've had people check the gear handle on base and final. On final I'll wait and finally ask if anything is wrong. They'll sometimes check the gear handle is down, and then say no. At that point I'll have to point at the gear down light not being on and reengage the cbs. Most are grateful for the exercise.

From my experience the standard pattern procedure can be taught in a couple of hours. Where the hangup usually appears with a good number of transitioning pilots is the last 5 seconds. Too many people incorrectly think and act as though the transition from approach to flare can be done rote. It cannot. So I spend a lot of time going around the pattern waiting for the last 5 seconds. It is simple for me to see when they "get it". Too often this takes many more hours than I think it should. After the "get it" and signoff, with a little more solo time a person may modify their "approach" to landings. I don't usually fly a pattern like I teach it. I teach for simplicity. Get the rote first, combine that with understanding, go for application, then correlation after signoff. Doing it this way, adapting to the variations of things that can happen on a cross country are much more manageable.

Questions to ask yourself: 1. What control is primary in any phase of flight? 2. Can I maintain airspeed within 1 or 2 knots in all phases of flight; level, climb, descent using the answer to question 1? 3. Am I as attentive to slope management as I am to airspeed during landings? 3. Do I understand mixture control management during all phases of flight including on the ground? 4. Do I understand the most effective use of the speed brakes? 5. Can I smoothly execute a go-around from a bounced landing or understand the energy management of the M20M to know when I can land after a bounce? 6. Can I easily handle crosswinds of 20-25 knots and the methods used to be able to safely land in crosswinds in excess of those? 7. Can I efficiently slow the plane down from 160 knots to 75 knots over a 5 mile distance on an instrument approach without harming the engine? 8. Do I understand my avionics and autopilot so well that it never surprises me? These are just a few questions off the top of my head that, if answered in the affirmative, make the proficient Bravo pilot. This is not experience gained over a couple of hours of transition training.

My friend at 160 hours TT and 40 hours in type, you don't know what you don't know. A couple of hours of transition training is insufficient no matter what you think. I say that having been a Mooney Specific Instructor for 31 years with over 7,100 hours of instruction given.

It does.

Bottom line, it was certified with the G1000Nxi and that's all that counts. Mooney did that when they were viable. They are not now, so no upgrades to legacy G1000s.

It's not the same fuselage. It was certified with 2 doors and the G1000Nxi.

You can get a Mooney with the G1000Nxi. You just have to buy the Acclaim M20V. I've flown and taught in all models of Acclaims, and while they are fast and fun to fly, upgrading your M20M with all the avionics you ever dreamed of having is the way to go in my opinion. You could put your dream avionics in and still be all in for half the cost of an Acclaim. The only reason you would buy a regular Acclaim would be for the extra speed, and for most trips the time saved isn't that much. Or am I missing something?

A quick Google Search came up with this:

Pre Surefly, I had had hot start problems that couldn't be resolved after a mag overhaul. After Surefly, cold starts start like a turbine engine and hot starts are absolutely no issue. Price of theSurefly was slightly less than a regular mag. There was an extra cost to run the wire from the battery in the rear of the plane to the Surefly. All the other benefits that Marc referenced.

There must have been some other reason because the G5 has all the software for the GFC 500. With an ADC the G5 displays DA automatically when on the ground and there is a data block for TAS. I have flown full approaches in VFR conditions with the G500TXi turned off and all works as well as with it on. Mine is hooked up as shown below except I have it connected to the GTN 750Xi instead of the GTN 650Xi. I had the opportunity to fly with the GI275 with Syn Vision at the PPP a couple of weeks ago. It is worth the $500 unlock cost, but I was not satisfied with the operation of the flight path marker as compared with it on the G500 TXi. Whereas I can fly a perfect level 45° banked 360° with the TXi, the GI275 fpm was way too sensitive to do the same.

In nearly 33 years of ownership I never had an issue with getting any amount of heat I wanted. The heating mechanism needs to be checked in your plane.

1800wxbrief.com > Wx Charts > Lifted / K index

Interesting question. Many years ago we were coming back from a flyin in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. Bases were reported to be 11,000 with tops at 15,000. Clouds seemed benign stratus. I decided that it would be a simple matter to just climb the 4,000 feet through them. After all, I have a turbocharged airplane. I entered the clouds at 11,000 and began the climb. 12,000, 13000, 14,000, 15,000, 16,000, 17,000. Light rime had begun to form. I thought about going back down, but knew more ice would continue to form. 18,000, 19,000. Looking up, the view was beginning to get lighter. I broke out at 20,000 feet. After accelerating, I tried to move the rudder with the trim switch, but it wouldn't move. It broke loose about an hour later with a bang. Sublimation of the ¼" of ice accumulation in the bright sunlight? Not a bit. So much for the idea of sublimation. The ice didn't come off until the descent over Redding. Lesson learned.

For me I'll fly through stratus clouds if the temperature is above freezing and the lifted index is positive with low K Factors. For the most part I'm not interested in flying through cumulous clouds and will ask for deviations. I've never been denied. If I were denied, I'd ask ATC if they would rather I declare an emergency and ask them to save the tapes. Depending on nexrad and cloud cover and movement in my vicinity, for negative lifted indices and K factors above 20 I'm staying on the ground.

Asking the question for me is enough to deviate. The better question is. "Should I go?" Asking that question means a definite "NO!" I've never been through a cumulus cloud where I didn't get bumped around to some extent. Not really a lot of fun. When I first got my airplane, if the storm scope didn't show any activity I felt comfortable going. Big mistake. I didn't know what I didn't know at the time. I learned fast after a couple of simple flights from Stockton to San Jose in clouds and turbulence so bad that I couldn't read the instrument panel. Putting the gear down and using the speed brakes stabilized things a little. Looking at the actual weather from Stockton to the Bay area those days, it looked dark. I can now attest to the fact that if weather looks bad, stormscope or not, it IS bad. With all the weather tools available today the decision making process is considerably easier. In the end, though, if you have to ask yourself the question, "Should I go?" the answer should be no. Abide by that rule and there will always be another day. Don't abide by it and maybe not.

Like I said, it had to be one of 3 things and you met one of them, LOP. As I said, I'm not interested in going slower or doing the things to my engine to try and get it to run LOP. Also, it's my understanding that Key numbers are only valid for operations ROP.

It means I do understand LOP and chose not run my engine in that manner. The Continental Engines do run pretty smoothly LOP and I have a number of my students who do chose to run their engines LOP. When I'm flying with them I often ask them if it makes more sense to save on the fuel and end up paying a lot more for my time. They usually move to ROP. Since I don't like the "feel" of LOP, especially in the Bravo, maybe I ought to increase my rates for LOP students vs ROP students.