donkaye

Without meaning to be sarcastic, it is time to upgrade to the GFC 500 if you don't want to spend a lot of money troubleshooting the KFC 150. The KFC 150 is over 30 years old and I'm sure some components were not temperature compensated at that time. Finding out which one could be time consuming. OTOH, if it is a known issue, an autopilot specialist like Bob Weber could assist. He can be found at 616-822-1999 M-F 8am-6pm Eastern Time or email at bobweber@webairconsulting.com.

Also, one of the best additions to the GFC 500, over the KFC 150.

It's probably best not to find out and just keep the YD off in that case until you are in level flight.

Per the GFC 500 setup you are supposed to set it for 100%. You are not allowed to deviate from any required setting on the G5. Regarding hand flying in turbulence: first I try to pick a time to fly to minimize it. If that is not possible and I get unexpected turbulence in the air, I go higher. If that doesn't work and the AP is "overworking" the yoke, I disconnect the AP and hand fly. I can damp the turbulence much better than the AP by going with the flow. I use my eyes and not an FD or any raw data, if I understand the question properly. The exception is that the YD can anticipate better than I can so I leave it on, as it is independent of the autopilot when the AP is off.

I posted this on Beechtalk, but for those not following BT, I think this would be useful here, too. I ran a GFC 500 YD test today. I have rudder trim, but kept it centered for takeoff. Given the HP of my airplane, there is a lot of P-factor and torque associated with a takeoff. I took off and held right rudder. At 800 feet, I turned on the YD and released the right rudder pressure I had been applying. The ball would not center. I turned off the YD, applied full right rudder trim, and turned the YD back on. The ball remained centered. I leveled off, increased speed, then turned the YD off. Upon release of the YD, the plane significantly "kicked" left indicating the YD servo had been working pretty hard. I centered the ball with rudder trim and engaged the YD. It remained centered. Conclusions: As mentioned in previous posts and by Garmin, the YD is not a rudder trim. Its purpose is to dampen yaw in turbulence, and based on its inputs, better coordinate turns. If you have rudder trim, use it as appropriate to center the ball, THEN engage the YD. So, for example, in the climb engage it after the rudder has been trimmed. Turn it off when leveling off, trim for cruise flight, THEN turn it back on. Results will be as expected; yaw damping in turbulence and coordination in turns. Some additional comments: The GFC 500 is really good, but I've found that if turbulence is moderate, I can fly turbulence much better than it can. Having said that, the YD stays on, as it really dampens yaw in turbulence better than I can. If you're upgrading to the GFC 500, complete the package with the addition of the YD. You will be glad you did.

I, too, have flown the regular 280 HP Ovation across the US many times, while on tour with one of my students. Several times flying the MEA Westbound I needed to get to 16,000 feet. It was a struggle and my GS was 70 knots at times, since the winds at altitude were huge and there was no option to go lower. The flexibility of turbocharging could really have been used. Certainly the 310 HP is better, but that just means you have a little more power to go a little higher. I personally like to be at least 5,000 feet above the highest obstacle and like climb capability at those altitudes for unexpected turbulence or other potential emergency situations.

The Ovation is a great airplane, but if you are considering flying all over Europe, it is NOT the airplane for you. By the time you hit 11,000 feet it's really starting to poop out in climb performance. That even goes for the 310 HP conversion that is absolutely terrific on a sea level climb, but also poops out at the higher altitudes. The turbocharged Mooney models have critical altitudes (i.e. 100% power to the critical altitude) over 20,000 feet. The comfort of going up into the high teens or even 25,000 feet in the turbocharged Mooney models cannot be overestimated, if you plan on flying the Alps or other mountainous areas. As far as extra costs go, expect a turbo and waste gate overhaul midtime and a lot more money on an engine change at TBO should you choose a turbo version. Regarding training in a high performance Mooney, it can be done (you can always fly the plane slow), but expect it to take more time to get your rating.

Congratulations, Marc!

I thought I recognized that registration number. I've flown your plane 12.7 hours when I transitioned Dave Norinsky from his previous J to the Bravo. We flew it from Don Maxwells to Petaluma, California in one long day.

Yikes! An easier way of recording and reviewing data might have been the following: Engine Breakin N91595.xlsx

I stayed and watched my very experienced avionics guru do the install of the LHS System. Without any wasted time it took 7 hours. 3 hours day 1 to cut the inspection plate, install the unit, and run the wires to the panel, and 3 hours day 2 to run the wires behind the panel, install an on/off switch, and wire up a circuit breaker. As a person who has probably done more landings than anyone on the list over the past 29 years, including thousands and thousands of landings in my 6,500+ hours teaching and transitioning students, and doing a landing video, the LHS system is worth having. The safety of having the gear callout alone make it worth the price, and for an airplane, a small price it is. Even I find the 1 foot callout helps make every single landing work out well. For those new to their airplane it's just one more assist in learning to land properly.

I calibrated the donut at 1.3Vso. No quick mental calculations are necessary for weight dependent final approach speed. At gross weight the donut appears at about 71 knots.

I knew this was a problem at least 5 years ago. I spoke with Tom Bowen, then Chief Engineer at Mooney at the time about it. At the time they said they were looking into it. The Plessey springs were no longer being manufactured. That is why I have recommended that a buyer of any Bravo or other Mooney adjust the price of the plane if it had a Plessey Actuator because they were likely to have to replace it--minimum $10,000 for a rebuilt Eaton one to much more ($15,000?) for a new one.

I have the Alpha Systems Eagle with HUD on my glare shield, and use it on every landing. Calibrated properly, it caused me to reduce my approach speed by nearly 5 knots.

Sorry, they were gone long go. If a rebuilt actuator is even available, I think they used to run about $10K. Laser had them. Tom Rouch from Top Gun is not refurbishing them any more. I knew that Tom was getting ready to retire, so I bit the bullet and had him rebuild one while I still could.

Yes. Less airflow over the wing with power at idle.

Nothing wrong with having TKS. I just said that sometimes "It makes the decision making process easier".

Sometimes NOT having TKS is a blessing. It makes the decision making process easier. You clearly just don't go. Also, even if you are an airline pilot, transition training is a must. Without judging too much at this stage, looking at the flightaware track overlaying the weather, and in view of the pireps, I think prudence would indicate it would have been best to stay on the ground wishing you were in the air than vice versa. The Bravo is a great airplane, but at 3,368 pounds gross weight, it is but a feather in weather that Mother Nature can throw at us.

I think Wayne flew for Continental for most of his career and loved Mooneys. I was fortunate enough to fly part way with him once going to a Mooney PPP in Missouri. His landing in the Ovation I remember was smooth as silk. Many of the old Masters including Wayne have flown West. Wayne was certainly one of the best. He and Jerry Johnson often would make the CFI assignments, and they just seemed to have a knack for putting the right personalities together. I certainly miss Wayne, who answered so many of my early questions. I thought that article was good enough to be included many years ago in the articles I've posted on my website.

My servos weren't in the included batch of bad servos.

If rigged properly, the Mooney is a pretty docile airplane compared to the C150. If the pitch/power relationship was taught properly, transitioning to a Mooney would not be difficult. Unfortunately, from my experience with transitioning students, most instructors don't teach primary students this concept properly. The result is speed control is an issue with many people transitioning to the Mooney. Once the easy method of speed control is mastered, flying the Mooney is no different than flying the more draggy airplanes. Landings are an issue for most transitioning pilots, too, because of the simplistic landing gear structure. To save weight and complexity Mooney went with shock disks. This means that the transitioning pilot needs to really be able to control the rate of descent on touchdown. This goes back to really understanding the pitch/power relationship and slope management, which, from my experience, is also not taught well by many primary instructors. Without oleo struts to absorb the shock of a landing with too much vertical speed, the combination of too much forward speed and vertical descent rate will lead to a bounce from which many new students are not properly prepared to recover. So the transitioning student must necessarily be trained to understand the pitch/power relationship so well that they can control their speed within a knot or two in combination with slope to maintain the descent rate necessary to touch down lightly on the mains. The perfect landing occurs when the energy available for flying is dissipated at such a rate that it is just above zero as the mains touch down. A good Mooney specific instructor will be able to provide this guidance to make for a fairly easy transition for most. The attached document contains the secret to making good landings. Precision Flying With Don Kaye 8-11 .pdf

I'll tell you what bothers me. Since I bought my Mooney in August of 1992, the management and ownership of Mooney has changed at least 5 times. Each group tried "turnaround 101" with the early groups, lean and mean, letting the buildings fall apart to the latest group who fixed the building and had terrible sales efforts. Listening to "know it alls" tell how easy it would have been to make Mooney successful don't have a clue in my opinion. Mooneys with their roll cage, substantially overbuilt wing, and thousand of man hours of careful assembly just aren't economically feasible to build. Thank goodness we own one from a time when they probably weren't economically feasible to build, but they were built anyway, most likely at a loss. It looks like there won't be any future new Mooney owners to benefit from those who loved the Mooney more than they loved their money.

What a useless thread and people like the previous poster, who probably doesn't even own a Mooney, doesn't help it one bit. Why he's even on Mooneyspace is a good question.

Call the main Mooney number and leave a message. I called to set up an appointment and received a call back. Michael Kineese is in charge of Service.

Oh to reminisce... The best sales force I can remember for Mooney was when I became interested in one in the early 1990's. They had outstanding sales people all around the Country and kept several demonstrators that got traded around to all of them. I built a lot of time moving those demonstrators around. In fact I ended up with a very low time one that I own to this day. Regarding the Service Center in Kerrville; I flew from California down to Kerrville early this month to have the present Kerrville team look at a problem that I have had for the past 5 years. Because of a long term employee, they found the problem immediately. It was a very old issue that had not recently been communicated to the MSCs, so I can't fault mine for not being able to address it properly. The plant was quiet, but the Service Center had quite a few planes in it being serviced. And after 30 years, they did have the needed parts in inventory for the update. At 11,992 hours I expect to hit 12,000 in the next few days. Of that, 10,155 are Mooney time. Obviously, that is not an accident. I feel most comfortable in a Mooney, and not just because of its strength. The design of the seats is such that I can fly all day and never feel uncomfortable. I broke in a C182 engine a few weeks ago, and after 2 hours, even though there is more room in the plane, I was happy to get out of it. The seat angle was just too uncomfortable. I can't imagine flying all day in one of them. Even though the rest of the world might not "get it", we Mooney Owners certainly do. The Mooney is just the best single engine piston airplane ever built. It's too bad it doesn't make economic sense to build them.