kortopates

You should have a Hoskins FF read out in the far right of the cockpit. Be aware you can wire that in parallel to your EDM. But rather than upgrade the 730, I'd just use the 830 color display upgrade through Spruce for about 1K after you return you core 730 display. Then you can truly easily add more sensors. But without even FF, the pre-cambrian era monitor is pretty worthless. The 830 needs a bit more panel space to accommodate than the 730 but oh so worth it. Eli's suggestion for APU is great one. But, I'd get that battery minder first; unless you plan or expect to replace the present battery any time soon anyway. And also be aware you can buy a 24V 20 AMP power supply on Ebay really cheap and then buy the aviation connector and wire from Spruce and make one for probably less than half the cost of a new one. I think I had ~$150 into mine. The Power supply to get a small computer rack mountable power supply and they work great, you can precisely set the voltage to the same output as your voltage regulator output - not that you have too.

And what a beautiful location for an Eagle too! Out of curiosity, what is your Eagles useful load?

You didn't mention you would have other partner owners? The LLC only provides liability protection when another partner owner is flying it and is involved in a mishap. It doesn't provide any protection when you're flying it. Also different states charge different fees, for example Calif charges $800 a year for an LLC. But if your the only LLC member/owner, its just an added annual expense. I don't know about business expenses though since my plane is purely a toy. Like some others have mentioned I'd only want FI as well. And once you've tasted turbo performance, I don't know many that could ever go back to NA. But that's me. IMO the buying decision is much easier than what the detailed spreadsheet with pivot tables we often see implies. [emoji6] Simply decide how much you're willing to devote to your annual flying budget per year. IMO you need to be comfortable with at least $20K. The acquisition cost won't even factor into it after the first year (unless perhaps financing it).

Its exactly the same ES engine with altitude compensating fuel pump, but a much smarter operator! So I really doubt it.

As Skip stated above, it's mounted behind the far right quarter panel with all the CB. The whole thing pulls out about 4-5", not a lot but enough. Besides being secured from the front it's also secured with hardware from below and the outside fuselage - don't really recommend tackling this till you look at the documentation in the service manual that provides all the details of what you need to know. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed, as I am sure your aware there is a 2200' peak just 4 nm to the north. But the plane only got 1 nm to the north before it literally fell out of the sky where the terrain was only ~300''. There was an eye witness that actually corrected the pilot on the radio when he announced he was holding at RWY 29 for IFR release, saying it was RWY 11 and the pilot acknowledged that: "Petaluma traffic, Mooney departing Runway 29"; the witness then transmitted "Runway 11" to which the pilot replied, "Thank you. I appreciate the help." He observed the airplane depart runway 11 and climb to an altitude about 300 ft above ground level before initiating a shallow left turn and disappearing into the fog. Unfortunately, the witness's radio transmission didn't stop the pilot from changing his plan and then knowingly depart from RWY 11 apparently without knowledge of the ODP. Following the ODP for RWY 11 would have been easier for his IMC departure as well. But the pilot didn't follow either ODP. Both ODPs called for climbing to 1500' before making any turns. If the pilot truly turned left at only 300' AGL that too was contrary to the standard IFR departure with no turns till 400' agl off the departure end - as everyone is aware. But we probably can't assume the eye witness was that accurate about his estimate of 300' AGL and give him the benefit of the doubt on that one. But departing into low IMC or at night without following the ODP is a deadly mistake in the mountainous terrain of the west we see sadly repeated over and over again out here.

Recall this thread back from April 2018, when IFR pilot took off from Petaluma, CA in IFR conditions and came down a mile from the airport. We now have the NTSB factual report out here https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/ReportGeneratorFile.ashx?EventID=20180407X35303&AKey=1&RType=Final&IType=FA Although the pilot made some mistakes, including telling ATC he was going to depart RWY 29, but was holding at RWY 11 and then departed RWY 11 after getting his release and void time. Pilot didn't fly the ODP and instead climbed to about 300' before turning left and climbing into the fog (per witness). But apparently what brought the plane down was water in the fuel, not CFIT and the plane came down at a very steep angle burying the engine in 3' of mud. Investigators found approx a 50-50 mixture of water and fuel in the fuel divider. They also provided a picture of the left fuel cap showing cracking in the outer o-ring. No mention was made of the inner o-rings but did mention the right cap was thermally damaged (post crash fire). More about the water from the report: "Another witness reported that the accident airplane landed at O69 around 1645 the day before the accident and taxied to the fuel island. He stated that he helped the pilot obtain fuel, observed him sump the airplane's fuel tanks after refueling, and instructed him where to park for the evening. He stated that the accident pilot queried a FedEx pilot on the appropriate instrument departure procedure for runway 29...." So we know the pilot was observed sumping the tanks after refueling the day before departure, but we don't really know if he sumped the tanks again before departure after the plane had been out in the rain. But if he had, he probably would have found the water in the fuel since it brought the plane down very quickly after departure. However, the NTSB doesn't assign a cause to the accident - its only a "Factual" report. There is no greater risk of water in the fuel than after our plane has been sitting on the ramp in the rain.

This sure looks like the outboard sump drain on the Monroy tanks, you can see the two rivets that secure the fitting on the inside. Also the Mooney OAT is much smaller, on an inspection panel and on the left wing - this looks like the Right wings unless the image is reversed.

No, you pull the prop through just enough so the impulse coupling fires. Then pull the prop back to before 25 BTDC and set the mag to engine timing to your 25 degrees.

Only medical O2 requires a doctors prescription - not welding O2 and ABO. Some gas shops in my area actually have a different storefront for Medical use which is not where you want to go. Although ALL oxygen comes from the same dry source from any gas provider these days there is an important difference in the way the tanks are filled - or so I am told. All O2 cylinders that are for breathing are required to be cleaned as part of the filling process. Where I buy it, ABO is really cheap so I pay a few bucks extra for it, and truth be told I want to run the risk of getting violated as an A&P/IA if an inspector from the FAA drops by. But I would think if you let your air shops know what your O2 was for, they would do the same cleaning of your tank even for welding 02 with your refill. (But to be fully effective, its probably important to be sure you started with a clean tank after the last hydo or inspection and have every re-fill done with the cleaning regimen; which means you would need to own your tanks like myself and always have to wait for them to refill your own tanks.) But ask your shop, that's what I did and they told me about the different cleaning regimen for breathable O2. With my owned ABO tanks, I am in and out in 10 minutes by exchanging them. I have found not all shops give reasonable pricing on ABO. My original nearby provider pricing kept going up higher and higher, so I switched over to welding O2 for awhile purely for $. But I became increasingly concerned about risk of being sanctioned since I keep the bottles in my hangar and found a much more affordable industrial gas supplier I now use with a bit of drive but which enabled me to go back to ABO at cheaper prices than my local national brand welding O2 supplier prices.

The highest legal ceiling of the Mooney's is the 252 with a FL280. RVSM starts at FL290, so FL280 is not a problem. RVSM Equipment and training requirements aren't out of reach for Mooney pilots, but our O2 system is really a bigger barrier. Our re-breather type masks that we use in the Mooney is technically only approved to 25K, above 25000' we're supposed to be using diluter demand O2 mask, which are rather expensive at almost $4K https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pspages/aeroxdoning13-12359.php But in fairness, these days we go by the much more important Pulse Ox and virtually all of us monitor our O2 Sat at altitude and would know if our O2 system wasn't keeping up with the altitude, which should keep all safe to the aircraft's certified ceiling. That said though, O2 will be the limiting factor in venturing above into RVSM airspace for us. But don't even need any thing special to fly at FL27

So saddened to hear of Bob's passing. I never got to meet Bob, but we corresponded a lot over the years, both through MooneySpace and as well as a Savvy client where it was a honor to work with Bob. He was a total gentlemen and a very warm soul and will be deeply missed by all of us. Paul

Over 1140 in my 252 converted Encore, but loaded with everything including O2, except TKS, unlike an Eagle.

Yes, I am sorry the way it turned out. I was really arguing that since it wasn't required equipment it shouldn't matter and the speed brake installation wasn't at all modified. But in the end Precise Flight was saying they never certified it off the standby alone and the installation is no longer in accordance with the STC (which is the real legal issue). But IMO its still shouldn't be an issue since the Precise system was certified to get its vacuum off the vacuum manifold, whether dual manifold with 2 vacuum sources such as the 252 or single manifold with only 1 vacuum source like a 231, and it shouldn't really matter if an installation went from dual sources to a single source with no change in plumbing. The other issue is that I don't think Precise really has any remaining staff that is still knowledgeable about the old vacuum brakes.

Once you line up the parts - including a new hose or fuel line and likely new cylinder drain ports (if you have old style), then about an hour not including de-cowling and cowling. It doesn't change the operation of the primer switch for starting, it just puts fuel directly into the cylinders now without the diverter valve, just like Dan said above. There was a lead time on getting the parts some time ago when this mandatory SB first came out and everyone was complying since TCM mentioned a bad diverter valve had brought down a plane. But the SB has never reached AD status; supposedly FAA is reviewing/considering it. Perhaps getting the parts now will be easier and quicker now.

Good to know Bob. Also there was a fuel exhaustion emergency in an M20E over WA popularized by an AOPA ASI video, something like "Trapped on top?" that demonstrated that you get to more of the unusable fuel by pitching up to climb attitude. The fuel pick up is towards the back of the tank, so after our M20E pilot had run out of fuel in level flight, as well as in the descent, he glided till he almost had the emergency field made except for a jet blast barrier in front of the runway. He pulled the nose up to avoid impact with the barrier and as he did the fuel pickup found fuel and the engine came to life to clear the barrier and land on the over side! I wouldn't count on it, but something to remember.....

I will say it really looks to me like they were practicing a 180 power off landing given the short approach, continuous turn to the field and probably aiming for the IFR landing bars 1000' down just like I teach - except of course gear goes down before starting. Some people practice these with the gear up till they are assured of making it to the field (although I don't think that was ever in doubt in this case) - and this can happen. Of course all the chatter about nothing to do with the landing was an added distraction. In all likelihood, the majority of GU landing incidents have the gear horn going off the entire time as well, yet it never registers,

Fiasco is right. It sounds eerily similar to the mid-air I was thinking about composing my prior response. Sounds like your tower controller was either saturated or just totally caught off guard by the other plane coming down final faster than expected. In the accident I was thinking of, the controller was in training and the supervisor had gone on break and meanwhile traffic went up in the pattern beyond what the controller could handle alone. Then a fast crewed 135 turbo prop was coming in on a long right base while a solo pilot C172 doing touch & goes in the pattern on a right downwind. The controller apparently didn't see the impending collision till late because of other traffic and but got a call off to the C172 to do a 360 - it proabbly would have been in time too but but the wrong C172 answered back, tying up the frequency! The other plane wasn't even a factor since they were leaving the pattern, but dutifully it a 360. The controller may have goofed on the call sign too; probably not the fault of the second C172 pilot either. But by then time was up and there was no second chance to fix it, the two aircraft met as the C172 just turned to base - no one survived. Somewhat like your case, the controller just wasn't ready for that level of traffic yet either. Sorry I if sounded like your situation was pilot reluctance not a controller issue.

Lots of good advice above. The problem with doing your instrument rating in your own plane is that right now you may not know what you really need and will want for training till perhaps you get started and get some exposure to some of the different modern avionics out there. Also I would discourage anymore from getting their rating with VOR's alone; although many do but your instrument training will be very limited that way. Club aircraft in my locale are typically much better equipped than any budget owner aircraft bought to save rental money cost. Also I would shy you away from a K for under $100. What ever you buy I'd recommend it being a nice example of the model and well maintained; not the cheapest example you can find. That will slow your training down to a crawl as you take care of unforeseen deferred maintenance. A 231 is also a handful to manage with the fixed (bolt) or manual (merlin) wastegate. I personally wasn't all that satisfied with my 231 till I upgraded to the 252 and now have the ideal turbo upgraded to the Encore. Turbo adds whole another level of capability to the plane. There have been countless trips I would have canceled in an NA aircraft that I was still able to fly with the turbo. But it also requires you to fly in the upper teens for the main benefits of much faster cruise and ability to fly over the weather. Its not out of the question for a recently minted C172 private pilot to transition to K model. But expect it'll take more than 10-15 hrs in type that most clubs require for a complex checkout; because the plane is a handful. I had a client that was a very good new C172 pilot, yet it still took him 30+ hrs to transition in part because his business only allowed him to get away once a week; and then of course we couldn't fly every week. But for most of us, once you go Turbo, you won't go back to NA. But if this is mainly just for continued training it will more likely just slow the training process down with more unneeded complexity. A 252 on the other hand is as easy as flying a J model.

I wondered how much of that was attitude versus anything else. It appears he lives under the SOCAL Bravo though so that’s not possible. But regardless, I am sure before this is over he’ll be an expert in airspace regs after all the expensive remedial training he’ll get with a CFI, if they don’t revoke his cert. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Plus they offer a nickel chrome finish and for some cylinders including my TSIO-360 and they’re the only ones that do. They’re affordable and good quality. My only complaint has been getting core deposits back - in fact they still owe me! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not trying to sound judgmental here. I know we all have our own comfort levels and differing experience levels with busy airports. But in my neighborhood, under the busiest TRACON in the world, we can't solo a student pilot till they are able to perform a 360 in the pattern. Unfortunately they're a way of life here and because of multiple runways we have different pattern heights on different runways as well. Request to do a 360 don't always occur on the downwind, they occur equally few miles out before getting onto final as well. I clearly can't know the circumstance that day but apparently the controller wanted to steer you away from final before you intercepted it. It may well have been late on the controllers part, but better late than sorry. We've had too many midair collisions here in the pattern, one still very fresh in the memory of all our pilots.

"Unable" doesn't apply here. About the only reason I can see he could ignore the clearance requirement before entering the Bravo would be if the pilot was having an emergency in which case the controller wouldn't deny a clearance but would offer him everything she had to help. "Unable" is for before an deviation has already occurred when issued an instruction and while you and the controller still have time to try something else. But even then "unable" should come with at least a brief explanation and preferably an offer of an alternative means of compliance with the controller stated intentions (such as avoiding traffic). Professional use of "unable" doesn't lead to tying up the frequency with forcing the controller to play 20 questions on the frequency. If controller tells you to turn immediately for traffic I hope no one would seriously consider saying "unable" - this was essentially the case here when he entered Bravo without a clearance. Personally, this sounds like simple "road rage" by the pilot. The FAA inspector will talk to him after Las Vegas approach forwards the data to them but I suspect the pilot will be seeing both a suspension and remedial training at the very least. His anti-authority attitude gone wild really deserves the maximum IMO.

You can tell by the aircraft history on flightaware. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Although a pilot/owner is allowed to remove and replace screws under preventative maintenance as mentioned above, recognize the only approved replacement parts/hardware is listed in your IPC. Anything else is considered a alteration or modification. A minor modification can be approved by an A&P but not under preventative maintenance. Thus its best to seek the guidance of your IA performing your annuals before making modifications to avoid surprises later. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk