donkaye

That's a VERY good setup.

I hear the GFC 500 with YD does wonders for the V Tail Bonanza.

I captured it from the AOPA weather website after I got home. Had it been a cross country, I would have stayed home today.

I was up early this morning to go out and train a student who had just upgraded his panel with three GI275s and the GFC 500. Weather was predicted to deteriorate with strong winds by early afternoon. True to the forecast we landed at Hayward about 12:30 with winds gusting to 31. There were some issues with the installation so I spent some time calling and talking to the installer about what needed be fixed. San Jose is fairly close to Hayward. I took off to return home a few minutes before this Metar. I was off the ground in nearly a helicopter takeoff distance. The flight back was "Sporty" to say the least, but quick with winds at 1,500 feet at about 46 knots. This was the perfect day for the YD. I was glad to be alone, since turbulence was close to severe all the way back.

It's purpose is to damp Yaw. I use it in an extended climb to do just that. On level off I turn it off, trim the rudder with the rudder trim switch, then turn it back on.

I've read some of the latest comments and reviewed what I had to say a couple of years ago. I have to say I haven't changed my opinion at all. For me it is just the best handheld that Garmin has produced. Those things that people don't like, I have found completely unnecessary like the AHARS and Checklists. The size is small, the case doesn't fall apart or is bulky like that of the 796. It doesn't overhead and sometimes shut down or get sluggish like the 796 sometimes did. I can quickly get to airport data and favored runway in use when used in conjunction with the GDL 52. Independently, from any GPS input I can get the full approach waypoints instead of just the final approach fix and missed approach waypoint. It has VFR approaches. You can overlay multiple weather products on a page instead just one. Although sometimes a couple of more taps are necessary to get to what I want, I've gotten the menus down so pat that I can get to any page I want faster than with the 796. Like pretty much anything in life, if you want to become expert at it, it takes time and a lot of practice. For me it was well worth that time.

No. 2 Motors, but only one feedback servo, the rudder YD. The other motor is manual with no feedback.

The rudder trim switch stays and works the same as it always has. For takeoff full rudder trim. At 800 ft YD on. On level off, YD off, trim for cruise, then YD on. At least that's the way I do it for minimum excess torque on the YD servo.

Gleim is comprehensive albeit dry in that the information is not spoon fed to you via videos. One of the things I liked about it was they give you the reasons for the wrong answers in addition to the right ones. I got in the high nineties (can't remember the exact numbers) on both the CFII written and AGI written that I took the same day many years ago after studying with Gleim. I missed one on the ATP written also using Gleim.

I have flight instructor insurance, but the insurance companies don't provide anywhere near the coverage required for the newer airplanes. I spent quite a bit of money late last year having my attorney draw up an Agreement of Waiver & Release of Liability for Flight Instruction for my Corporation and myself. I looked at the AOPA form, and it doesn't hold a candle to the one my attorney generated. I thought I would have use it to do an Acclaim Ultra training I did last month. It turned out her Insurance Company provided me a waiver of subrogation and added me on to her policy. Recently I have had several people ask me to be their instructor for their Instrument Rating. One is an RV-10 and the other is a DA40 NG. I don't have any time in either, so the likelihood of my getting added on to a policy with a waiver of subrogation is nil. Time to use the waiver. While I understand it may not stand up in court, at least it may be something of a deterrent to litigation. It is a horrible agreement---for the signor. After telling my first prospective student that I would be requiring the waiver and that it was a terrible agreement for him, I also said that I would understand, but would be unable to teach him if he didn't want to sign it. It will be interesting to see if it will be signed. I love teaching, but not at the expense of potentially losing what has taken decades to achieve...

The next time I go flying I'll try to video a IAS climb. It seems to hold +/- one or two knots for me in reasonably smooth conditions. Usually I engage it at the speed that I am going, but I will also try it from 10 to 20 knots different to see what happens. I'm actually quite happy with it. As an experiment, when the IAS starts oscillate hold the trim well to stop it. Then see if it starts to oscillate again.

My routing to KTUS has been: KRHV PMD BLH VICKO KTUS or to avoid Lemoore Airspace: KRHV AVE PMD BLH VICKO KTUS.

If you communicate with certainty, I've found controllers to be very accommodating in Socal. I always start with "If able" when I'm asking for something. Having said that, with family in San Diego I've made that trip countless times from KSJC. In fact, I just got back from KRNM a couple of days ago. Certainly it helps to have the instrument rating. Without it, for your trip, I'd take the high road and go relatively direct at 11,500 with O2 and come back at 12,500. I'd go KRHV-LHS-CA76-SAMOS-KSEE and come in the back way. This keeps you out of the Class B airspace. Have a good trip or call me to further discuss it. (408-499-9910)

That has absolutely NOT been my experience no matter what you read about sublimation. I had an inadvertent experience with ice many years ago before I really knew better. We were returning from a fly in at Coeur D'Alene, Idaho. Clouds were forecast at between 11,000 to tops at 15,000. I knew there was probably some ice in the clouds but figured with the power and climb rate of the M20M I'd only be in the clouds a few minutes before getting on top. Well, the bases were correct. Light rime ice started building slowly almost immediately upon entering the clouds. 12,000, 13,000, 14,000. I was looking up expecting to break out at 15,000; 16,000, the ice was getting worse, but it was getting lighter looking up. I considered descending, but knew I'd continue to build ice. 17,000, 18,000, 19,000. Finally, at 20,500 I broke out into bright sunshine. The right side of the airplane had more ice than the left. After leveling out, I tried to return the rudder trim to neutral. Not going to happen; it was frozen in place. I thought the ¼" of ice would sublimate off. After an hour, with a big "bang" the rudder broke free. The ice remained until we got above the freezing level, as we entered California. I learned my lesson those many years ago. Without ice protection, STAY OUT OF THE CLOUDS below the freezing level. Unless you are very near the freezing level, the ice isn't going to sublimate off.

I should mention that Barry Schiff in his Book "The Proficient Pilot, Volume1" describes another Landing method for large crosswinds. He describes landing a Cherokee 140 in a gusty 30 knot crosswind. While interesting and adaptable to a draggy airplane like the Cherokee with oleo struts, I think using it with an airplane such as the Mooney with rubber shock disks, is asking for big trouble.

Hi Victor, Yes, except per the over the fence speed in the attached file it would be 72+10+ ½ the gust factor. At those "fly on speeds" it is very important to fly the plane onto the runway with no descent rate that could cause a bounce. Throttle is then slowly withdrawn while adding aileron into the wind while maintaining directional control with the rudder. At any time during the slow down if full aileron has been applied, but more is needed to hold the runway, it's time to immediately go around. The most direct crosswind I have experienced in my plane was one time coming into San Jose as a front was approaching, landing runway was 12, and the steady wind was called out as 45 knots at 210°. I flew the plane on at 105 knots, no flaps, and used the procedure I just described. To date I have not had to go around using this procedure on a reasonable length runway. Oceano, L52, in central California was an exception. The runway is 2,360 feet at sea level. After doing my Landing Video we flew over there expecting to stay the night at a very nice rental Condo by the Beach. I didn't have the equipment I have today to give the wind on approach and there is no AWOS there, but at some point you have to commit to the landing. Once you do, there is no taking it back. I've seen a Bonanza stuck in the mud off the end of the runway in the past. At any rate, the first approach wasn't going to work so I went around. The second one also wasn't going to work, either, so I told Shirley that if it didn't look like it would work the 3rd time, we would go to Santa Barbara for the night. Somehow, the gusty crosswind let up just enough on the 3rd try that I was able to commit to the landing and landed successfully. However, short runways and large crosswinds usually don't work. You need the time and runway length to gradually slow down. Pages from Precision Flying With Don Kaye 8-11 .pdf

During the time of the training we did 48 full stop landings, which is par for the course.

I flew to Dallas this past week to do a transition training in an Acclaim Ultra. After the last few weeks in California with our deluge of rain, it was nice to get some clear weather for a change. The first 2 days went well with smooth air and calm winds. We got through most of what I like to do with regards to flying the airplane, including the necessary ground instruction. This prepared my student well for the 3rd day. A cold front moved through the previous night, and Wednesday dawned with strong winds. We got off to a late morning start due to lingering rains and the lack of any approaches to this Airpark, but that provided time to review the G1000NXi. Most of the smaller airports around the Dallas area where we were have single runways aligned North and South. The wind was strong out of the West. We first flew over to Bridgeport where we had worked in smooth air the previous 2 days and where, at 5,000ft long we could practice all the various types of landings I like to practice. It didn't hurt that the fuel prices at $4.95 were cheaper than I have seen in several years. With a single runway that was aligned 18-36, the AWOS called out the winds as 270° at 9G26. I had the student line up on final for 36 with full flaps just to see what the crab angle would be to hold the runway. It was close to 45°. My rule of thumb is anything greater than a 15° crab angle means reducing the flaps to either approach or no flaps and increasing speed by at least 10 knots plus ½ the gust factor. At 75 knots nominal approach speed that meant 75+10+9 or 94 knots. It was VERY bumpy and gusty on the approach, but at 95 there was enough rudder to be able to align the airplane with the runway in the transition from crab to wing low. The airplane needed to be flown onto the runway with touchdown at nearly 95. This obviously requires a reasonably long runway. The gusts were so bad that I needed to help with the landing. The one thing nice about partial or no flaps is that the stall speed is increased so the airplane is done flying at higher speed. At touchdown the power is gradually reduced as the plane slows. If at any time during the power reduction there was not enough rudder and aileron combination to hold the runway as the plane slowed, we could have immediately gone around. The landing was both challenging and exciting. In fact it was exciting enough that time would have been wasted doing any more "practicing" there. While fueling up I watched a C172 bounce down the runway, not able to make the landing and depart the field to who knows where. We looked for more desirable airports, but the best we could find was Mineral Wells aligned at 13-31. The takeoff from Bridgeport was by the book and we bounced on over to KMWL. The winds were still strong, but the crosswind component was more like gusty 20 knots. We were able to get in 17 full stop landings over the next few hours, and the student improved. We then went back over to Bridgeport for fuel. The winds were as bad a before, but this time favored runway 18. We came over the threshold at over 95 knots, touched down, bled off the speed gradually, and were able to complete the landing. This time I had the student fill up to get the airplane heavier for both a better ride and to have more options should we not be able to make the landing on the home airport of Propwash (16X) with its white fence just about on the threshold and 60x3000 foot dimensions. Frankly, with those winds I wasn't sure a landing could be made there, but close by Alliance with its 11,010 foot runway would surely work as a backup. It would be a short Uber ride back to the house. We lined up on final for runway 17. It was gusty, but nowhere near as bad as Bridgeport. Watching the crosswind and headwind component on the PFD was very helpful. There was a slight headwind component to help and we crossed the threshold at between 85 and 90 knots. The touchdown was smooth and I committed to the landing as we slowed, as there was enough rudder and aileron to complete the landing. I told the student that she got to see the full capability of the Mooney that day, but that she should not be going out on days like that until a lot more hours were under her belt. She thanked me for the opportunity of being able to fly that day and said how much she got out of the day. The Mooney is one great airplane.

If you're installing for the first time, I'd go ahead and do the full install with the extra 2 wires for GPS and Gear warning. I personally like the system as it was originally designed. I like to be reminded to check gear down. When the new unit came, I had it simply installed as before because the shop didn't have the time to install the other 2 wires. I have had the system call out altitude in rain, but I just flip a switch to disable the callouts. Maybe at Annual I'll have the other 2 wires attached. As far as using the system, the latest update is more accurate than the original and calls out system ready on startup. I look forward to hearing the callouts on approach, especially the last couple when very near the ground. I find it to be extremely accurate and makes it very easy to judge the rate of flare to "roll" the wheels on as the flying energy is fully dissipated. I think everyone should have one of these units.

Because LOP is dependent on FF, the Key Numbers approximation of power is not applicable. I have had a student get his Bravo to run LOP after spending a lot of money eliminating induction leaks and other things. After the fact, he has had a lot of engine maintenance. It's not supposed to be that way, but it is. I had issues with stabilizing TIT when I tried it after taking the in person APS Course put on by GAMI. I personally like the way the engine runs and the extra speed attained ROP even at the extra costs, so that is the way I'm flying my airplane.

I'm curious how many flight instructors on this list have and use a Waiver and Indemnification Agreement either in conjunction with being added on to a policy or separately?

I agree and won't teach instruments in actual conditions unless the plane is equipped with a backup AI. For the availability and cost nowadays, there's no reason to take the risk of flying needle, ball, and airspeed anymore.

That has not been my experience. I've been with the same company since I bought my plane 30 years ago. My insurance went up $350 over the previous year. Although not required, I do the Wings Basic and Advanced every year, and stay very current with flight instructing. I have found difficulty getting added on as an additional insured with waiver of subrogation. I do have flight instructor insurance. However, I have found it necessary to have my attorney of 40 years, one of the sharpest guys I have ever met, draw up an Agreement of Waiver and Release of Liability for Flight Instructing for those times when the add on is off the table. It pretty much covers everything under the sun. While it is no guarantee of not being sued, it would certainly be a discouragement for an attorney to try. Additionally, all my flight instruction is conducted within my C Corporation and I meticulously maintain its documentation. If you want to stay sharp both in life and in flying as you age, I find flying and teaching instruments to be highly beneficial.

I think it is time for a new instructor. There is NO WAY you should be anywhere near doing instrument approaches on your first lesson. The instrument rating is broken up into 4 major segments: 1 Attitude flying ((constant airspeed/rate climbs and descents with more complications (like adding turns to the climbs and descent) added as you become more proficient)). This should take about 8-10 hours. 2. Add the building blocks to instrument flying ( flying a course, compass turns using the magnetic compass, Understanding and using VORs in navigation, DME Arcs, and finally Holding Patterns, both using VOR and then GPS without the benefit of your GPS telling and flying the hold). This should take another 6+ hours. 3. Instrument Approaches. Approximately 15 hours. 4. Putting it all together by adding Communications to the workload. You should not move on to a new phase until you have the current phase down cold. If an instructor is experienced, they will keep the workload just on the edge of overload, but not go over it. By the time you're ready to take the test, it will be a non event. Flying actual alone after you have your rating, from a technical point of view, will be a lot easier than getting the rating because the work load will be so reduced. A good instructor will also have had you fly at least 4 hours of actual during the training. If you know the "Numbers" for each phase of flight (These should be determined at the very beginning of the training, as they differ slightly with each airplane), then it shouldn't make a difference which airplane you use. I've done trainings successfully in the C through the R models.

As a Mooney specific flight instructor, I've got extensive time in all models you are considering. While I like them all, and each has their strong points, I've owned my Bravo for 30 years, am on my 3rd engine, and went through the process of a major upgrade followed by additional relatively small ones as Garmin kept coming out with new "must have" equipment. Doing a major upgrade is really no fun, but the results make it all worth while. As I've said before, the Bravo is probably the best value out there, and once you've had a taste of a turbo, you'll not want to go without one whether you're East of the Mississippi or not. For example in the summertime on a hot muggy day, the sooner you get to 10,000 feet the better you and your passenger will like it. In the Southwest in the summertime around the Phoenix area, it's 12,500 feet before the thermal turbulence lets up. So, not surprisingly, I vote in favor of the Bravo for you.