donkaye

I've described safely landing in strong crosswind in the past (35-45 KTS) so I won't belabor the point other than to make a couple of comments: 1. High stall speed is good when it comes to crosswind landings because the airplane is done flying sooner with approach or no flaps. 2. Flying a higher speed approach = more rudder control. 3. Full flaps in gusty conditions is dangerous in my opinion because just when you think you are down and safe a good size gust could come along and ruin your day. 4. Variable approach speeds depending on wind strength is not a bad thing when needed to control stall speed with the use of flaps, The critical thing to me is that the speed is adjusted such that the crab angle on final is less than about 15°. Obviously, to successfully land in these types of conditions involves lots of practices working up to those conditions. Give me a good windy day with a good crosswind and I'm out practicing. See you there.

There was a big thread on this awhile back. Many seemed to like the vivity multifocal lens That lens it very expensive at about $5,000/eye per my sister who had them implanted a couple of months ago. I got the Toric lens with long range focal distance, since I had astigmatism and wasn't aware of the vivity lens. They were $2,000 per eye. Medicare pays for the operation and regular lens. I paid the extra for the toric lens. The operation was a non event and took about 10 minutes. I had the eyes done separately 3 weeks apart. The biggest deal were the eyedrops that were needed for 5 weeks. My sister said she had eyedrops that performed multiple functions and were a non issue for her. Without going into the details of Special Issuance 3rd Class for 20/25 in both eyes, after the operation and confirmation of corrected Commercial standard vision, I was able to get my 2nd Class Medical back immediately.

The music, news, and even the old radio shows are with the minimal cost. Around busy areas I don't use it much, but when on cross country trips when you have to ping ATC to make sure you haven't lost them, I use it all the time.

It's a lot more than just pucks. If I remember correctly, it involves new axels and gears doors along with the whole 4 puck assembly. It also may have involved different disks, too. Plus there is a lot of labor involved, as the gear doors have to be trimmed to fit.

So I just completed a basic training with a new student who bought an Acclaim Type-S. He had just gotten his Private license a few weeks earlier. I didn't have the time to teach him about the LA area so I referred him to another good friend and 787 Captain for additional training in the LA area. My friend objected to several items from my teaching: First, he wanted all trims set before taxiing, and second he really objected to my teaching where the aim point should be, about 400 feet before the threshold. That all sounds reasonable, right? Wrong! Set the rudder trim full right before taxiing and the plane will want to go right all the way down the taxiway because the rudder is connected to the nose wheel in the Mooney. Aim for the threshold and you'll have difficulty landing on a very short runway such as Oceano (L52) with the long body Mooney. I always teach to land assuming a short runway. Unless you have an extended amount of time teaching in such planes even a really good non Mooney instructor really wouldn't know that. I have a few hours teaching Mooneys (see https://donkaye.com/flight-instruction). Personally, I don't know of anyone else with more Mooney teaching time. I've specialized in Mooney instruction nearly full time for the past 31 years. I know how to control speed down to the knot and slope to less than a degree and I teach the same. So when I say the pucks need to be changed in the long body Mooney with the old 2 puck braking system about every 70 hours, it's not because I come in too fast. There was a reason Mooney changed to the 4 puck system. 2 pucks on a 2740 pound airplane are quite different than 2 pucks on a 3368 pound airplane. Of course you could land and not apply brakes and chew up a lot of runway. Of course you could aim for the threshold and sometimes due to obstacles you have to. But most of the time you don't have to. The 4 puck braking system on all long body Mooneys starting with 27-107 (mine is 27-106. I just missed it) was a big benefit and a worthy upgrade. I agree with the Rolls Royce comments having owned mine since 1979.

3K for O2 Bottle plus installation; 12K for upgraded brake system. Without the upgraded brakes the pucks have to be replaced about every 70 hours.

In the end who wants to wait nearly 2 years for an engine to fly their recently purchased airplane?

With the TIO540AF1A engine I'm not sure Lycoming would even give a core credit. I look at that airplane and remember mine 30 years ago. It's really sad to have to say that there exists a TLS (it is not a Bravo) that basically has no value as a usable airplane without inputting an unreasonable amount of money, but that is the case with this airplane in my opinion. I wouldn't trust flying it in it's present condition at all. Of course everyone knows that we all got our airplanes at a discount. Right? Most, if not all of them were sold at less than the cost to produce them. It's not an accident that they aren't made anymore. We are the lucky ones.

Realistic Price: 119,500 (Asking)+110,000(Engine+Installation (2 Year Wait))+3,000 (New O2 Tank)+12,000(New 4 Puck Brakes)+125,000 (New Avionics)=369,500 = Find a different Airplane

I guess I probably pay more than anyone for subscriptions. I call up every year and negotiate a price on both subscriptions and the car subscriptions. I have two Sirius subscriptions; XM for the older GDL 69A I have in the airplane and SXM on the Aera 760 through the GDL 52. I absolutely insist on having the real time weather of the WX500. All solutions are strictly strategic, even the WX500 Stormscope. Actually the most valuable to me is the Aera 760 through the GDL 52 and I wouldn't leave home without it for both teaching and cross country flying in any airplane. It normalizes all airplanes in more ways than can be discussed here. After seeing how I used it on a recent trip from Oklahoma City to San Jose, California, the student, who had just purchase his Acclaim Type S, and accepted the training would be done in San Jose, immediately purchased the 760 and GDL52 even though his airplane has the G1000. Information on the 760 can be accessed much faster than on the G1000 plus you can play a lot of "what if" scenarios without interfering with the G1000 navigation. From experience having the XM or SXM available on the ground is a big plus versus FIS-B. The same goes for the WX500 Stormscope. There have been times when I've had the Stormscope on the TXi, XM on the GTN 750, ADS-B on the GTN 650, and SXM on the Aera 760. The photos are from a flight from Sioux Falls to Rapid City. A perfectly safe flight with lots of "outs" and confirmation of route from ATC.

Empty weight is 2,544. Maximum gross weight is 3,368. Useful load is 824 pounds.

No, Fizan did not have a Type -S Acclaim. I flew his airplane back East to him from Santa Barbara when he bought it, and did his training in the middle of winter in Chicago. Brrrrrr. Yes, for short runways it would be better. We flew down to Hawthorne today in 1.5 hours, 15 minutes better than my plane. He'll be commuting back and forth from Texas to LA.

Yes, I've flown a number of Rockets. I even did a couple of instrument ratings in them. For some reason the 310HP Acclaim SEEMS to have much more power.

The 310 HP on the Ovation seems different to me than the same on the Acclaim. I recommended it to a student who lived in Truckee. He got it and it really makes a difference at the higher DAs. Not so with the Acclaim. Regarding the rudder, I was surprised that it did not make as much of a difference as I thought it would. However, my student did not like the rudder trim nor do I on the later model long bodies. When trimming with it, it doesn't stop when you release the trim switch, but overshoots. He actually found he liked just trimming the rudder to neutral on takeoff. On my Bravo the trim works as expected, and stops when you release the switch.

It's always been said that you can never have too much horsepower. Over the past week I found that personally not to be true. The student, who just got his private a couple of weeks ago, purchased an Acclaim Type-S that had the 310 HP upgrade. I've got a lot of time in Acclaims, but hadn't flown one with the 310 HP conversion. We flew it from near Oklahoma City (KOUN) to San Jose, California last Sunday. Because it had air-conditioning and TKS, it was load limited. We did the trip with a 10 knot headwind most of the way and 2 fuel stops in a little under 7 hours. I trained him all week and being a young 28 years old I was able to sign him off on his High Performance and Complex Endorsements by the end of today. At full power you're pushed back into the seat and the vibration is more than I like. We used full power for the short Palo Alto and Livermore short runway, but a more comfortable power setting was about 30" MP or about 90% Power. On takeoff with full power its burning 38 gal/hr, and in cruise its about 20.5 gal/hr. If you're thinking about doing the upgrade, I might think again.

In my opinion the Alpha Systems Eagle AOA is worth every penny of its cost. I've had and used mine since 11/24/14. If used properly, it's almost impossible to have a bad landing. I think it is important to read the Rogers Report attached below when determining how to calibrate the unit. From the Report, for accuracy, it is important that the 2 calibration points be located as close to each other as possible. The flap module was not available when i got my unit, and even if it was, I wouldn't use it. I, and a number of other people, calibrated the high speed point as the top of the White Arc in the clean configuration adjusted for weight, the low speed at Vso fully configured in the landing configuration, corrected for weight. The Donut is calibrated at 1.3 Vso. DeltaPAOA_wide_screen.pdf AOA and speeds 2.pdf

Without being sarcastic, if you are considering one of the earlier short bodied Mooneys, they are relatively inexpensive. Why don't you buy both types of planes? I once had a student who had cashed out of a tech company and couldn't make up his mind between a Mooney Bravo and a Bonanza A36. His wife suggested he buy both and he did. He added a PC 12 a few years later.

After a lesson and long chat with a student at Hayward last year, I took off into a 52 knot direct headwind. I was like a helicopter. I had checked the winds at San Jose and they were 26 knots with a small crosswind component. The trip home was bumpy and I was glad to be alone, but it was totally uneventful. Preplanning was important, though.

I understand the principle of setting minimums for yourself and that is a good thing, but you want to constantly be improving your skills. 28 knots feels uncomfortable for you now so set a lower limit for now. But go up with an instructor in heavier winds to be able to raise that limit. Sometimes you will arrive at an airport and not how what the winds are. Then what? Although I can't explain it, there will come time when you will know your airplane well enough that you can comfortably set up for a crosswind approach not knowing the wind and while on the approach (even on landing) know it is time to find another airport, all with no anxiety.

The truth is that with enough speed you won't run out of rudder. With the higher stall speed with no flaps the plane will be done flying quicker when on the ground. The problem can occur that after on the ground and slowing and with full aileron, the plane can't hold the runway. In that case you are at a speed that you can immediately add power and go around without any more side slip. So far I have never had a crosswind where that happened when I am on the ground. I have touched down at 105 knots with a 40 knot direct crosswind with no headwind component many years ago. The runway was long so there was time to slow down to a point where the weight of the airplane was enough to counter the force of the crosswind.

The answer to that question is that it depends. First off, slipping to a landing in a crosswind is in my experience a very poor method to use. It requires too much work and passengers don't like it. Unlike the crabbing method, it's also hard to tell the magnitude of the crosswind. With crabbing it's easy to tell magnitude by the angle of the crab to maintain the centerline. That angle tells you what you need to know regarding flap configuration and speed. If lined up on final with full flaps and normal approach speed, and your crab angle is greater than about 15°, then it's time to change things. Flaps should go to approach or none and speed should increase enough to bring the crab angle back to 15°. In any event no less than 10 knot increase to account for the stall speed increase with little or no flaps. Transition to the wing low method for landing. The plane needs to be flown onto the runway with a soft field technique. As you reduce speed and increase aileron into the wind, maintain runway centerline. If full aileron has been applied and the plane starts to drift, apply full power and go around. Using this method a crosswind limitation cannot be stated, as it depends on the circumstance (headwind and crosswind components). So, I can't give you a crosswind maximum that you should follow. As more experience is gained, your limitation will increase. This is meant to be a general overview on how to handle large crosswinds and not a lesson in landing in crosswinds. For that you really should go out with an experienced Mooney instructor in large crosswinds (25 to 30 knot direct crosswinds with no headwind component). Our airplanes can handle those. Also, longer runways than usual may be needed depending on the headwind component. Also, not to be forgotten is that with the increase in stall speed with no flaps, the airplane is done flying sooner, a good thing in such conditions. While crosswinds can be challenging, that are also fun. Oftentimes when we have strong winds out here, I'm off to the airport to practice. I recommend the same for you.

Jim, GP couldn't be simpler, if in the settings menu you scroll down to "Appearance" and select "Home" menu. A house will appear in the upper left hand corner of the display. Tapping on the house will open a display the looks exactly like the home display on the GTN 750. Tap the Flight Plan icon. A choice is presented: Enter your flight plan including SIDs and airways in a straight line or, like the old GNS 480, enter an Origin , Destination, and enroute waypoints to complete your flight plan. The end result is the same. Then in the lower right hand corner tap "Create Trip". Fill out the "Form", Tap Brief, Then Tap "File" and you're done. If I were you, I'd spend a few minutes trying out the above. While GP doesn't have all the bells and whistles of FF, I can enter a FP, Brief, and File on the fly in just a couple of minutes. So can you.

As a flight instructor, you get a 33% discount on Forefight. Garmin Pilot's interface is just like the GTN series navigators, so very easy to use. Brian Schiff and Mike Jesch gave online seminars that lasted about 1½ hours each that extended more than 16 weeks on the operation of Foreflight. I'm sorry, but I just didn't have the patience or time to attend after about 2 sessions. To me Foreflight has so many options as to be unworkable for me. I do use the 3D portion to look at unfamiliar airports, though. Maybe it's because I've used it since it first came out, but GP is my program of choice. For an uncomplicated weather flight I can brief and file in a couple of minutes. Not so in Foreflight for me. Through the use of either the FS 210 or FS 510 flight plan changes made on the GTN auto transfer to GP without thought. You can go the other direction, but I don't. I prefer setting up a flight on the GTN and having it transfer to GP. I'm probably the exception, but I prefer Jeppesen Approach Plates. For that I have to buy an expensive subscription for the iPad. However, with it I get Jepp Charts on the Aera 760. I probably pay more for aviation subscriptions than anyone, but as a flight instructor I need/want the ones I have. 1. Garmin Onepak for the G500 TXi, GTN 750 and GTN 650-includes Garmin Flight Charts and all database for the Aera 760. 2. Garmin Pilot Basic. 3. Jeppesen Charts for the iPad (4 Seats) and the Aera 760. Two are used: GP and Foreflight. Aera 760 is included for a price. 4. Foreflight Pro version (33% flight instructor discount). 5. Two full subscriptions to Sirius XM Weather including Audio (Very Expensive-Audio price negotiable, weather is not). One is used for the GDL 69A in the airplane and the other is used for the GDL 52 that I use both in the airplane and in flight instructing. Buying the Onepak and Jeppesen Charts at Airventure provides a 10% discount each.

I'm on my 3rd engine. With the avionics upgrade, prop and engine replacement a few years ago as the result of a maintenance issue (all zero time remans), GAMI injectors, and the new Surefly Mag, the plane is better than new.

The good news and the bad news. After nearly 3 hours of buffing and wet sanding and other things, Mark, at Top Gun was able to nearly eliminate the staining on my wing. If you really look closely you can still see it a little bit, but I am happy with the result. The bad news on the other hand is that it cost me nearly $500 of his time. Still less than repainting, but I'm not thrilled about it. As much as I want to support G100UL, I won't be using it. Mark confirmed it was the matt used by the fueler that caused the damage, as indicated by the pattern it left on the wing. Mark and his Dad, Tom, have maintained my airplane since I bought it 32 years ago. He personally upgraded my first engine to the Bravo, and changed out the other two himself. Needless to say he really knows engines. We talked today. I told him how well G100UL performed. He commented that it was probably great for the engine itself, but maybe not so great for other parts of the airplane. He was surprised at the difficulty he had in removing the stains, as he thought he could remove it more easily. He apologized for how long it took. There have been times when I have accidentally overfilled a tank and fuel ran all the way down the wing. I don't want to chance that happening with G100UL. It's just too easy to screw up. And so ends my experiment for now.