donkaye

I, too, have written an article on speed brakes that can be found on my website at https://donkaye.com/useful-aviation-articles. That article pretty well describes how to use speed brakes. I do automatically "pop" them on touchdown. I have found them be effective from touchdown speed to about 75% of touchdown speed. Below 200 feet, if you are too fast for the runway length, I'd recommend going around rather than applying the speed brakes. You will get an immediate 200 ft/min increase in descent rate that could slam you into the ground at that altitude.

As a flight instructor, FF gives you ⅓ off, so I do have it in addition to Garmin Pilot. It does some things that GP won't, like give you 3D pictures of any airport and a 3D view of your planned flight. Having said that, its interface is quite a bit different that GP, enough so that Brian Schiff has devoted many hours online to describe how it works. I started the series, but just didn't have the time to see it all the way through. Since most of my avionics are Garmin, I have used GP primarily since it came out. Before Garmin screwed it up again, when it worked, database concierge made it easy to upload databases. A couple of months ago Garmin changed something and it hasn't worked right since. Many on BT confirmed the same thing. When I did my upgrade, EIS wasn't available. Having said that, I wouldn't want it. It takes up too much screen real estate and with the exception of iPad compatibility doesn't have some of the functionality that I have and want with the MVP-50. I have found the 60/40 PFD/MFD screen sizes with the ability to reverse them to be especially useful on the TXi. Enroute, I change to 40/60 for bigger map functionality. This is especially useful on the flight plan page where several more columns become available. At least for me, after 10 years of use, and with several replacement upgrades like the G500 TXi from the G500, I wouldn't change a thing on my upgrade. "What if" flight plan diversion scenarios can and have been done extremely rapidly with a switch to disconnect the 760 from the 750 so I can examine weather alternatives without altering the current flight plan. If I wanted to, I could then push the new diversion plan back to the 750.

That won't work well. It will place the 760 too low and give you less flexibility. You need the attachment like I have for best placement.

Here's a better picture of the 796 mount in the plane, but the mount is the same except for the 760 adaptor.

Here are a couple of pictures:

I can see, if you use the Garmin mount, how there could be an imbalance. I use a RAM mount that mounts underneath the control column, not on top and away from the yoke (creating a possible 760 CG issue), as the Garmin mount does. I went with the RAM mount because the Garmin mount had no flexibility and was unstable (vibrated). I've attached a picture showing how the 760 adaptor allows the 760 to be in the center of the yoke and up against the yoke creating no imbalance with yoke movement, since you're turning around the CG of the yoke.

Have you ever done it? There's absolutely not difference in balance that I have been able to notice in my 32 years and 10,650 hours of Mooney time. I'd say more, but it's just not worth the effort any more. Clearly, my experience is getting through to no one. As with other valuable contributors, I'm close to leaving Mooneyspace...

Without extensive use I don't think many appreciate (with the exception of Marc who actually took my advice with his upgrade) the value of the flight dedicated Aera 760 on the yoke. The notion that it's a "big pig" on the yoke is far from the truth. It's a big improvement over the sizes of the 696 and 796, and even those were a blessing on the yoke. While I use the iPad as a backup to my backup, I just don't trust it. You never know when it's going to fail due to overheating. I don't want to be depending on it on approach and have it go blank at an inopportune time. I've never had that be an issue with any of the Garmin handhelds, and I've owned them all except the 196.

That should be a nice setup. I have a few recommendations from my experience; 1. Mount the 760 on the yoke. I use mine so much that it would be a real pain to have to constantly reach over to get the information I want "right now". It's also easily moveable. 2. Add the LHS system. It is reasonably inexpensive and ever so useful. 3. I know it's a matter of taste, but having the outstanding graphical interface with the GTN 750 Xi makes the GMA 35c my choice for the audio panel notwithstanding the great reviews of the PMA 450B.

How time flies! Next month it will be 30 years of flight instructing for me. During that time I've been through a lot of instrument trainings. The fastest I've done an accelerated training has been 8 days. The student was one of the best I've ever had. He was also 26 years old. From my experience age does make a difference in regards to the instrument rating. Younger people seem to have an easier time with it. The flight instructor makes all the difference in how a student progresses. Unfortunately, many are just too judgmental. Perspective for me has made things better for students. By that I mean by having poor instruction in several instances in the past myself, I can usually see what is holding someone back from progress. With the new modern avionics instrument training has become almost too easy. Building a consistent instrument scan used to take at least 8 hours. With the modern PFD, where all instruments can be taken in and interpreted with a single glance, that time has been reduced by several hours. Gone are the days of ADF training and its complications. Dive an drive for all practical purposes is a thing of the past even with LNAV approaches flown with the latest GPSs that provide either glide path or advisory glide path. Even analog approaches like VOR can be flown with GPS providing primary lateral and vertical guidance with the actual VOR being monitored. With poor instruction, both ground and air, I had a hard time with holding patterns. With proper training they are so, so simple to both visualize and fly. I can now teach them in a couple of hours. Same thing with DME Arcs. I like talking to ATC. They listen to people all day long and can tell the pros from, well, those who have not taken the time to become proficient on the words of the AIM. Only several times in all my years of flying have I ever been denied a request. How you speak determines whether they can "trust" you with an unusual request. Many times the Instrument Rating is a life changing event. I've seen several people's personality change. I've seen timid people become more assertive at the end of the training. All of this is to say: 1. If you are older, expect there could be some challenges. The proficient instructor, who has been through this before should take that in stride and not berate you for not "getting It" faster. 2. The instructor makes all the difference in the world. One who encourages will get the job done; one who doesn't needs to be fired. 3. Modern avionics does make the rating easier. My advice is to not get discouraged, find a local "experienced" instrument instructor who is a "Professional" flight instructor (not part time) and finish the rating with "casual urgency", if that makes sense.

Since this was brought up again, I tried to open Turbotax 2022 yesterday while doing EOY tax planning and it failed to open after a Turbotax required update. The Company that sold it to me, BigHomeTax.com, failed to respond so I called Intuit, gave them my startup code and they proceeded to tell me it was no good. BigHomeTax is not an authorized Seller. Since I need the program, they gave me a 20% discount on last years' product. All in all it cost me more than just buying the Program from Amazon last year. Although it's big thread drift that maybe can help someone else, at least in my case, thank goodness there is a Turbotax. At under $100, for what it does, it's one of the best programs I have outside of Quicken for the Mac, the best program for me out there. At 260 pages filed and 473 pages including all worksheets, I shudder to think what I would have to pay to have it prepared by someone else. I wouldn't have any time to Flight Instruct. And to think that just out of school (more than a few years ago) I hand prepared other people's taxes for H & R Block at $1/hour just so I could learn taxes.

Having had it for the 31 years I've owned my Bravo, I have to say it is probably one of the most expensive items to maintain on the airplane. While I've never had to use it, I have turned it on on occasion and i am glad to have it from a comfort level point of view.

In simple terms and "covertly" (my definition) spelled out in some of Garmin's user manuals (I saw it in one of the G1000 GFC700 documents that I can't find now), I think what Marc is saying is with autoswitch on, when the Nav source changes, the AP will not go into default roll/pitch mode, but if autoswitch is off and the Nav source is changed MANUALLY, the AP becomes stupid and will revert to default roll/pitch mode.

Yes, the example I gave above with the hold in lieu of PT on the KSCK ILS29R approach.

The problem with that from my point of view is that you don't have control of when it switches. Things can happen (or don't happen) after the switch that is unintended.

This won't answer the above questions but: 1. My plane lives at a Class C Airport, KSJC, where I have a hangar and that has an ILS. It is Notam'd "OUT" at least 20% of the time while work is being done to the runways. 2. Given a choice, and that's close to 100%, I don't use an ILS anymore except maybe to practice and teach. 3. I don't trust "Autoswitch", so I personally have disabled it. For example, with autoswitch enabled, running the ILS into KSCK from IPDEW with the Hold in lieu of PT on my "own Nav", having been told to "Cross IPDEW at 3,000, Cleared ILS 29R Approach" and with both VNAV and APR armed, the plane properly crosses IPDEW and then descends to 1,800 to cross IPDEW inbound at 1,800. As the plane turns inbound to intercept the LOC, the CDI autoswitches and that's it for flying the ILS on AP. The plane goes to "la la land" not knowing what to do. 4. In 3 above with autoswitch disabled, I fly the PT in NAV mode using VNAV and once at 1,800 inbound switch the CDI to VLOC and push APR. As long as you remember to flip the NAV frequency to the ILS (the GTN places it in the standby register automatically when you load the approach), the GS and ILS are flown perfectly. I use the KISS principle.

Why would you even consider doing that? If there is one thing I wouldn't give up it's the MVP-50. It provides more information of the types I'm looking for than any engine monitor out there. The EIS takes up valuable screen real estate, has smaller characters, and doesn't provide much of the information I want including a separate register to give me trip fuel used that resets automatically on engine startup.

I think the most intuitive one is the one you use. I have both, as a result of the discount FF gives to flight instructors. The app I use most is Garmin Pilot because the interface is basically the same as every other product I use. I find FF convoluted and not intuitively obvious, but there are some things I like about it that GP doesn't have. There is a FF course being given by Brian Schiff and Mike Jesch right now. They have been having 2 hour lessons each month for many months now. How easy can FF be to learn with hours and hours of lessons needed to really understand it. GP is pretty simple to use even if you don't have prior experience.

Yes, I have gotten more conservative since the 2012 post. I now don't want to see TIT over 1600. Although my BS Degree was in Electrical Engineering, I accept the speeds I get, not what the POH says I should get, assuming the configurations are correct. For the Bravo, the POH doesn't even give percent power settings. You've got to figure it out by looking at the Red Lycoming Engine Manual. Each Mooney is different. They didn't come off of a mechanical assembly line. Some are faster than others. Unless there is a gross speed difference, a 5 knot difference doesn't concern me much. Now a 20 knot difference invariably is a configuration issue from my teaching and flying experience. Pitch plus power plus configuration gives performance. For gross differences it's usually a flap issue or a speed brake issue or cowl flap issue. In the first case the flaps not being fully retracted after climb. In the second case I've had people not realize the speed brakes were extended. Especially in the second case that seems inconceivable, since there is so much disturbance over the wings. The same goes for not closing the cowl flaps after level off. That will account for at least a 3 knot speed difference. I took both the in person APS Course and their online course. I have nothing against LOP. I just haven't been successful with my engines in getting them to run smoothly enough for me to feel comfortable with it. I have one Bravo student who insists on running his LOP, and it always seems rough to me. He has also spent lots of shop time with problems with his engine. I do have GAMIs on my engine, though. Based on the Lycoming charts for the TIO540AF1B engine I'm comfortable flying cross country at 29"/2400 rpm (75% Power). I lean to just under 1600 TIT then confirm the FF at between 17.5 and 18.5 gal/hr. Like Mike Busch I just go there immediately without leaning to peak and then richening. I never get in the Red Box that way. Next time I fly I'll do a quick check on how much ROP it is. I got the original setting from doing that many years ago, so I expect it to be about 100°.

Yes, TIT.

Although I had ordered the engine previously, just before the change the density controller went out on the way back from Oshkosh. The engine itself was running well, but I was doing a lot of instrument flying and was beginning to feel uncomfortable. With a controller repair it probably could have gone on longer, just like Mike Bush with 5,000 hours on his engines, which I think were Lycoming TIO540s.

So much nonsense and over thinking in my opinion! How do you get any flying done? I've flown my plane, as of today 4,125.38 hours and am on my 3rd engine. As mentioned before, my 1st engine went to 2,295 hours after the Bravo conversion at 1,300 hours. The second engine had 1,600 hours on it and would have made it to TBO were it not for a shop incident. In the interest of saving over $50,000 I decided to replace the engine at that time rather than doing a tear down and still having to replace that engine about 3 years later based on my flying time per year. As mentioned previously, at mid time I needed to overhaul both the turbo and waste gate on both engines. I had exhaust work done on both engines. The exhaust is the weakest part of that engine. Now I lean to TIT of just under 1600 and confirm FF of 17.5 to 18.3 depending of time aloft with 18.3 being the 1st hour and 17.5 thereafter. Even GAMI's George Braly couldn't explain the difference. Be my guest if you want to tax your brain with any deeper thought about how to lean this engine. This is how I've run my engines for the past 31 years that I've owned my plane. BTW I don't run my engine LOP. Even with a GAMi spread of .3 neither I nor my usual passenger likes the occasional roughness or the speed reduction.

Regarding your second paragraph, my engines obviously were Bravo engines. After the shop incident in late September 2018, I immediately put my order in with Air Power. I was quote 8 to 10 weeks. Th engine arrived in mid December. They were within a week of quoted time. Definitely not the case today. I had to put up $7,000 with the order and the balance when it was ready to ship. No time was lost during the time of the order and the time it arrived. Insurance issues took a couple of weeks, but the shop's insurance company couldn't have been more cooperative. Lots of parts were ordered from Mooney, but they arrived fairly quickly, so when the engine arrived it was installed within a couple of weeks. As with previous engines, I was required to give Air Power a check for about $29,000 to be held until the returned core was approved. If the core was not approved, then that money would be gone. The core has always been accepted.

When you're young your life seems infinite. The cliche "Life is short" brings a response, "Yea, sure", snicker snicker. However, there comes a time in seemingly short order when that cliche is not so funny anymore. A 6 month downtime above all other considerations is then unacceptable.

That may be true, but that can't be guaranteed, I don't want the airplane down all that time, and the engine isn't zero timed. I'm on my 3rd Reman Lycoming Factory engine. Bottom line, considering the cost of an engine and what I said above, I feel more comfortable with a factory engine.