donkaye

The stall horn sounds the same as it did before, as it should at the same AOA. At 1.2 Vso the stall horn does not sound on approach until the end of the flare. I normally won't fly the approach at 1.2 Vso, No need with a runway of at least 2700 feet. A comfortable approach speed is the donut at 1.3 Vso with the speed varying with the weight.

I don't like it coming on too early. It doesn't in mine. It come on 5 knots above stall. Regarding the AOA, it also gives you an audible warning as you are approaching the donut. Today, before I took my airplane in to the avionics shop to try and get the AP to function the way I think it ought to function, I flew a test of the Altitude Preselect and returned to San Jose. It was glass smooth so I just approached with the upper half of the donut showing. This is 1.2 Vso in my plane. The pitch attitude was quite a bit higher than I had been flying for 22 years and the approach speed with full fuel and only me on board turned out to be a surprising 68 knots, a speed I never would have flown without the AOA. The landing was perfect and very short, but the comfort level was 100%. I had to taxi up to the first turnoff. I am definitely becoming attached to the AOA, much more so than I would have thought.

To see the value of an AOA all one has to do is go up, slow to about 100 knots, bank 30°, and load the wing with back pressure until you hear the stall warning. Then look at the speed that the stall warning comes on. As most people know from their initial flight training, it will be significantly higher than in level flight, since the stall speed increases as the square root of the load factor. The AOA will show you immediately the developing problem independent of the airspeed indicator, whose level flight stall indication is now incorrect.

I think you are doing a disservice to our community by criticizing the use of an AOA. First of all they are not that expensive. In addition to providing a more accurate way of determining approach speeds at various weights, CG position and DA, it also allows quick determination of Vx, Vy, maximum endurance, maximum range, Vg, and especially the ability of avoid accelerated stalls. While accelerated stalls are not a usual occurrence, an inadvertent one could be deadly and has lead to many an accident. I can only recommend putting one in and using it. Only Phil Verghese and I have put one in so far as I know. Both of us are flight instructors and I think I speak for Phil, too, when I say we are very glad to have this additional tool. I attended a seminar in Oshkosh last summer where a number of Universities discussed using them in their flight programs.

With all the airspeed charts for various weights and conditions on the jets (at least the Citations that I have flown) it sounds like you wouldn't need it. We don't have all those charts compiled for the Mooney. Do you "need" an AOA for the Mooney? No. But airspeed can vary up up to 15 knots for various weights in the Mooney. I used to do gross calculations for landing weight and adjust my approach speed accordingly. I don't do that any more. I check the donut look at the speed and fly that speed while monitoring the donut. The donut is set for 1.3 Vso. I feel very comfortable flying 1.2 Vso (the upper half of the donut) in smooth conditions. The pitch attitude is a bit higher than I have taught in the past, and of course, more power is required, since you are behind the power curve a little more. The difference is close to 6 knots. This makes for a significant difference in landing distances. Could I do this before? Yes, but not with the accuracy and comfort level that I have now for all weights between heavy and light. However, if you want to continue with guesstimates, that's certainly up to you. It worked for me for 22 years.

There's another opening on the other side for that battery removal.

Thanks for the information on how to upload pictures. These 2 show the Alpha Systems Interface box mounted vertically and the Valkyrie HUD on the Glareshield. The Flight Stream 210 is mounted in front of the item with the Cable marked KAA15, but you can't see it in this photo. I'll take a picture of it when I go to the plane.

You're doing the best thing by installing it with the upgrade. The 210 was not available when I did my upgrade. so the install was quite a bit more expensive. We installed it on the avionics rack in the back because there was only a short run to the GDL 69A and GDL 88. The tough one was running it forward to the GTN 750, but I did the install with the installation of the Alpha Systems AOA, and the interface box was also installed in the rear. I'd attached a picture of it but Mooneyspace is not at all as convenient as Beechtalk for quickly adding an attachment. If it is, maybe someone can tell me how to do it without having to load the pictures in a special area first, something I don't want to do. I can't emphasize enough the benefit of the AOA!!!

Not to hijack this thread, but I really like my AOA. I had it installed just after Phil's and Phil assisted me with my Calibration, since he had already done his. You can land on a dime with it.

Notwithstanding some of the comments of those who made a thoughtful decision for them to buy a non WAAS G1000 Mooney, in my opinion, you would be making a big mistake to buy such a Mooney. At the very least wait until next year and see if Mooney comes up with an upgrade solution, then discount the price of the airplane by the amount of the upgrade cost. The difference between WAAS and non WAAS is usually nearly 400' for the difference between an LPV and LNAV approach. This is significant. Here in California, often in the winter time in the Valley you would be able to get in with an LPV approach and not with an LNAV approach. Also, ADS-B traffic, especially with Garmin Target Trend, is unbelievably beneficial right now. I just wouldn't want to buy an airplane whose ability to be converted is not completely clear and with the ability to do so resting outside of your control.

I refuse to do any ferrying or cross country flying without Oxygen. You need a pulse Oximeter to check your O2 saturation level. It should be above 94%, preferably above 96%. I can just about guarantee you that if you are a flat lander flying at 9-10 thousand feet without O2 it will be much lower. This leads to headaches, fatigue, and then poor judgment.

I wouldn't touch the plane with a 10 foot pole! That steel I beam was stressed to 9.5G during a Mooney Company stress test before the jig failed. Imagine the force to cause it to bend.

I was referring to the GX Bravo which finished production before the WAAS G1000 were available. Definitely new hardware and paperwork. I don't believe the new Acclaims have ADS-B yet. I'm sure with Mooney up and running again in time they will go back and fix the problem. but new expensive hardware will be required for WAAS and additional hardware for ADS-B. Only Mooney can fix the problem, since the airplanes were certified by Mooney with this product.

So called?????

I've had mine for 22 years. 30K per year for 100 hours per year is pretty close. If not in the North, TKS not necessary and costs a lot to maintain. I like 2.5 hours trips so if you are anything like me FORGET ONE WITH THE LONG RANGE TANKS. You never really know how much fuel you have in the plane. With the standard 89 gallons the plane is a 2 person, full fuel, and full baggage airplane, so unless you fly alone the long rage tanks are a waste, especially if you have TKS, too. DON'T buy a G1000 airplane. The WAAS upgrade path is non existent at present. When you do buy the plane make sure you get good Mooney specific instruction from a person well versed in the Bravo.

I've upgraded my Bravo with nearly every conceivable piece of avionics out there and I have much less than that amount in the plane. I suspect your plan is not a viable one.

1. Easy on the ears (8'/second). 2. Approximately 3° slope; same as the ILS. 3. Nominal slope below which an engine out aim point will not be met. 4. Simplifies descent rate mental calculation.

As was mentioned earlier, it is best not to go below 15"MP in descent to keep the engine driving the prop. Reducing prop RPM is also a power reduction (100 RPM is about = to 1" MP is about = to 3% power), so reduce prop RPM to anywhere outside of a prohibited area of prop operation as part of a power reduction. I will typically stay high for as long as possible to get both the benefit of higher true airspeed and often a smoother ride. While I prefer a 500 ft/min descent rate for passenger comfort, when at 17,000 feet I am not going to start down 34 minutes out. When I do start a descent I will still go as fast as both turbulence and airspeed limitation will allow. When it is time to slow down I will gradually bring the MP down to 20", then the RPM down to 2,000, then the MP down to 15". Gear, speed brakes, flaps, S-turns are still available tools if needed, but should only be needed for descents from very high terrain to low terrain that occurs within a short period of time such as the Sierras into Bakersfield for example.

See my answer here: http://mooneyspace.com/topic/13596-avoid-shock-cooling-on-decent/#entry176040

Sorry, but that is absolutely ridiculous and increases pilot workload unnecessarily. Think about it. CHTs at cruise even in the worst case shouldn't be above 380°F. At idle they are about 250°F That is 130°F differential. At the recommended maximum cooling rate of 50° per minute, that is about 2.5 minutes. So you could keep power up significantly longer. When shooting an ILS into San Jose with lots of airliner traffic, I keep 160 knots until the outer marker and am able to slow to 75 knots at touchdown, a slowdowns distance of 5 miles. I'm on my second engine now. The first one went 2295 hours before I preemptively swapped it for a reman. I have 1100 hour on the reman now. I recommend rethinking your procedure and if possible taking the APS engine management course, one of the best courses I have ever taken.

1000 AMUs? I thought an AMU was $1,000.

I had a small problem with error messages on my GDL 88 and more recently with the display on the GTX 330ES. They were immediately replaced by Garmin. I'lll stick with my nearly all Garmin panel, thank you. There is definitely a benefit of owning the Big Elephant in the room.

I found reading the documentation a lot of fun, but this is coming from a past electrical engineer. You will love the GTN 650 and you got the best engine analyzer being made at present, the MVP-50. Just make sure your avionics shop TIGHTENS all the CHT and EGS connections. EI has a cluggy connection method and I have found myself back at the shop 3 times now tightening several connections that came loose and gave fluctuating CHT, EGT, and TIT indications. Also make sure you got the fast responding probes.

Those books are good. One other MUST read is "Severe Weather Flying" by Denis Newton. I've read it multiple times.