donkaye

Good question.

It wasn't correctible with lenses.

For those who have not heard the term, MFT is defined as Medical Flight Test. It took 4½ months, but the day finally arrived on Tuesday. Tuesday turned out to be one of the worst days of the year due to a "bomb cyclone" that hit the Bay Area. The FAA examiner agreed to do the ground portion that day and rescheduled the flying portion for today, Thursday. This whole process started last October when I did not make the vision part of the 2nd Class Medical for the first time. My left eye was 25/20 instead of 20/20. I met all the other requirements. He issued me the 3rd Class and said it was possible to get a Special Issuance by taking a MFT. I decided to go for it, as there were some things I like to do that require the 2nd Class. Little did I know the hoops that I would have go through due to that minor issue. First, I had to get in touch with the Local Medical Branch of the FAA in Los Angeles. They requested a bunch of documentation from the Optometrist. After reviewing that they required me to see an Ophthalmologist and added a bunch more requirements. By now it was December and the documentation was reviewed by the Regional Flight Surgeon in Los Angeles. Apparently, the results were good enough that they finally sent me a LOA to take a MFT good for 6 months. Then the process of getting an Appointment with the FSDO started. I called and called, but no one would return my calls. I finally went down there in person and rang and rang the bell. Surprisingly, the FSDO Manager came down and we discussed what I needed. He said he needed the letter before he could schedule it. I showed him the LOA that had been emailed to me, but that was not sufficient. Several more weeks passed (I received the certified LOA letter the day after I spoke with the FSDO Manager) but no response. I started calling and calling again. Finally, I got an email that my case had been assigned to an ASI (Air Safety Inspector). After some more emails back and forth, I got one from the ASI that he could schedule me for the exam in two weeks. I was thinking the exam would be some simple test of going up and flying around to see that I could see and that would do it. Little did I know that the test was covered in a special FAA Order 8900.1 Vol. 5, CH 8, Sec. 1. I read it. It was extensive. Uh Oh. This is serious business. Recognize that when you go up with the FAA everything may be on the line. You're being evaluated. For those interested I've attached the email describing what the appointment would entail. The examiner was very nice, but he was going to go by the book. I spent hours getting the documentation organized like I have told my students to do before an exam. Actually that was good because I took the time to make sure all my aircraft supplements were up to date. He appreciated that I had bookmarked all the critical aircraft airworthy inspections. He didn't require any paper charts, but did want to see that what I used in flight were current. It had been years since I used a VFR Chart so I had previously spent some hours reviewing all items on that chart and what they meant. He spent a lot of time reviewing the Weight and Balance for the Flight. Today was the big day. Last night I found that today was the day for data updates. That was a surprise. I loaded up the data on cards but have always used Database Concierge for transfer to the GTN 750. Big mistake. When I went out to the plane a couple of hours early to make sure I was on time, I spent a hour trying to get the Concierge to work. It wouldn't and I'm done with using it in the future. Garmin just doesn't have their act together with it in my opinion. Luckily, I brought my computer for contingencies, and dowloaded the data to a card at Atlantic. The flight was fair and covered all the items on the checklist. There was a helicopter spotted and he asked me to estimate how far away it was. He asked me where a certain airport was and whether I thought I could make it if I lost an engine. I said I could and he said "do it". It turned out to be pretty easy. I had been worried that he might asked me to do it off airport. That would have been more difficult. He asked me to read a number of items on the panel. That was easy. He then asked me to identify a certain landmark and I couldn't find it. It turns out it was almost totally covered in cloud. He picked another landmark and I identified it immediately. He asked me some items that required me to use the Aera 760 and I got through those. Then it said, "let's go back to San Jose". Part of the test was showing I could land the plane. Since I have made a landing video, that would have been a little embarrassing had I messed that up, but it turned out to be a greaser. Once back at the hangar, I shut own. Only then did he say I had "passed".

I bought the 3 blade hub and prop cover from Bruce's to protect the de-ice boots from the sun, but it works for keeping out water, too. It easily is applied. The first version was not as good as the second. It had snaps. The second version has zippers and works really well. It's color coded with your airplane's color.

I experienced the same thing during my test. I was interested in whether Smart Glide would recompute an airport that came into range when initially no airports were in range. It wouldn't. I pushed the alternate airport button and the Smart Glide then worked for the recently acquired airport.

My POH says to pull the prop control out for better glide performance. There may be enough oil pressure to move the blades or there may not be enough pressure. Who knows? If there is enough pressure, the blades will move. If there is not enough pressure they won't. Either way it can't hurt to move it all the way out. It may help.

I did when I tested it out a few days ago, as I was flying over the mountains east of Salinas where I did the testing. I just didn't put 2 and 2 together at that time when I was just testing the system. I'll be more careful to look next time.

So, based on the above, the best glide airport provides terrain and obstacle clearance. It also considers wind and METAR data if a compatible weather source is provided (see 3 above).

Better yet:

Only the Rocket and Missile have a full feathering prop. I've attached the page from the POH of the M. Untitled Extract Pages.pdf

I'm not sure about all of the other Mooney POHs, but at the bottom of the graph "Maximum Glide Distance Model M20M it states "Greater glide distance can be attained by moving the propeller control FULL AFT (LOW RPM). As part of my transition trainings I do the glide demo, and when the prop is pulled full aft at idle, you can hear the prop change angles and definitely feel and see the descent rate decrease by more than 200 ft/min in all the Mooney models I have flown and that is all of them except the D and G. I assume the D and G would behave in the same manner.

Smart glide has been available on selected Garmin GPSs for some time. I really hadn't gone out and practiced with it, though. I did yesterday. If you have it and think that in an emergency you can easily push the button to enable it and your worries are over, you have another thing coming. Without extensively studying the manual, going out and practicing, and then coming back to really re-read the manual, the whole process can be overwhelming. A lot of data shows up on the screen or screens and where to look requires practice and studying the manual. Someone once asked, "Why would you need both the 750 and 650"? I can say that at least one of the reasons is Smart Glide. The 750 provides the map and the 650 the Emergency Page all at once. The main reason for this post, though, is a test I did. I activated Smart Glide and waited for it to compute where it wanted to go. The GFC 500 engaged and the plane turned towards the chosen airport. During this time the pitch changed in the process of going towards best glide speed. Remember to remove power to idle! If you don't, the plane will pitch up and climb in an effort to get to best glide. Once established at best glide speed and stable, I looked at the projected arrival altitude over the airport. I did this with the prop in. If you want to become a believer in why it is so important the pull the prop control all the way out is such a situation, all you have to do is perform the test I did. When I pulled the prop control out and waited a couple of seconds, the arrival altitude over the airport increased by 450 feet. Of course, the higher you start out the better it will be. Remember to pull the prop control in an emergency.

Sorry for the thread drift. Sources of fuel information: 1. MVP-50 2. Shadin Miniflow 3. GTNXi 750 4. Wing sight gauges For me the primary source of fuel information is Page 1 of the MVP-50. It shows most accurate amount from the FF transducer, followed by less accurate amount from the wing tank fuel senders, and FF. Without doing anything the Shadin shows FF. The wing sight gauges are reasonably accurate from 11 gallons to 33 gallons and would be a third backup. As a 4th source the GTN is as accurate as the MVP-50 and Shadin but isn't immediately available without multiple touches, although I suppose I could use the Telligence capability of the GMA35c. That's somewhat unreliable, as the voice commands don't work all that well for me in flight. The main reason for keeping the Shadin, as mentioned above, is that I had it. With the knob on the right I can, with a couple of knob turns, get good information like fuel at remaining at destination, without having to go to the Fuel Management page of the MVP-50. With all the information that I have, I haven't ever used the Fuel Planning page of the GTN. Although not asked, the main reasons I chose the MVP-50 instead of the JPI are twofold: First, much larger characters and second the Fuel Management Page (see photos 1 and 2 below). The Fuel Management page has 2 registers: Fuel used on the current trip only and fuel used since last fueled. I have found the fuel used per trip or trip leg to be very useful. Notwithstanding wind, I can go back years and see how much fuel I use on a particular trip of multiple legs (such as going Oshkosk) and easily plan trip and where I stopped for fuel based on actual numbers (see photo below). Also, in going to students I can accurately see how much fuel I used for reimbursement purposes. A long answer to a simple question, but maybe it will help someone on decision making for an engine monitor as part of their upgrade.

With the knob on the Shadin I can quickly get important numbers without having to switch pages on the MVP-50. Secondly, I have 2 sources of fuel remaining. Third, I already had the Shadin and space to put it.

Accurate Aero, LLC in Minden, Nevada.

It was a fixed price job.

Mine took 3 weeks. I got daily pictures. I had 4 servos installed and there was a lot of wiring to the G500TXi, a new G5, Audio, and other things. It's a big job and it was done on time and budget.

I love the GFC 500. It is so much better than the KFC 150. The brushless servo design is so much better than the BK servos and much less expensive should they have to be replaced at some point. We're hearing a lot about issues with the GFC 500 and I hope those issues get resolved for those having problems with it. However, for me, with all of its functionality the GFC 500 is worth every penny I paid for it. Knock on wood, 3 years and going strong in all phases of its operation.

Does your elevator "glide like butter" when you move it during preflight? Is there any resistance "at all" any place in the total movement? If it doesn't "glide" or there is resistance at any time during the movement, then you will have pitch oscillation issues--at least with the M Model Mooney. The KFC 150 was not so sensitive to resistance, but the GFC 500 is. I personally was very embarrassed when I went to Garmin on my way to Oshkosh several years ago. As one of the first M installations, I was experiencing pitch oscillation and they agreed to let me come to Olathe to look at it. First, the pilot who did the flight testing for the M flew with me and acknowledged there was a problem. Back on the ground they found the problem instantly when they opened up the O2 and number 2 battery inspection cover. The installer had not installed the braces for the pitch trim servo, so the assembly was moving back and forth during flight. I think Trek has said most of the issues are installation problems.

There are advantages to keeping the mechanical backup (or keeping it on a separate circuit along with the number 2 Nav source) and there are disadvantages. After weighing both sides, I chose to eliminate the mechanical CDI. That does mean that the G500TXi (or in your case GI 275) is the sole source of certified navigation. In my case, if the TXi fails, then the G5 will take over and the autopilot will function off of the GTN 750. If the 750 fails and I still have the TXi, the AP will operate from the 650. If the whole electrical system fails, then attitude will be controlled by the G5 and navigation will be from either the Aera 760 or the iPad. Keeping the system as one unit means having the AP if I have the TXi and the 750 fails. Certainly there are more combinations of failure modes, but for me keeping all units working as one system provide more benefits for major failure modes than separating them. If you separate them, then for sure you don't have the AP if you have a major system failure in your primary navigation system.

AF, (I know who you are, but figured you might not want me to use your name) it took me a few seconds to figure out who I had taught from Austria. Then the light bulb went on. I'm glad you're monitoring the forum. Thank you for the complement!

For what I use it for, it works acceptably. I need to run the calibration again because when the engine is running in cruise sometimes its results are not correct. On the ground when switching radios it almost always works properly. Bottom line, I'm glad to have it. As an audio panel, I really do like the GMA 35C interface to the GTN 750.

GTN 750 in 2013 $14,200 GTN 750Xi in 2023 $19,695 I rest my case.

This may seem like heresy, but I think you should borrow the money and do your complete panel upgrade now. Reason? I think at least for the next two years, and maybe even longer, we are going to have inflation hitting us in the face. Once people start accepting the massive price increases, as it seems they have, it becomes a self fulfilling prophesy. I think the cost of borrowed money in the long run would be less than the increased cost of the equipment 4-5 years from now. I think my panel upgrade in today's prices would at least 50% more than it cost me when I did the upgrade years ago.

Maybe, but because of my confidence in and having viewed their structural integrity during assembly in Kerrville, where I would take a Mooney into turbulence and feel completely comfortable like last week coming out of Hayward with winds 26G51, I wouldn't even consider getting into a Cirrus in those conditions.