kortopates

Not only is re-testing with likely re-balancing required but depending on how your engine is overhauled its unlikely to come back with your old gami’s injectors unless you take action at the start to ensure so. Gami does charge a fee for updating with an overhaul. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All mooney’s use the same Sonalerts PN’s till the G1000 provided voice alerts. Sounds like (pardon the pun) your throttle switch is coming on with to high of a manifold pressure. you can check what your service manual says, it varies by model but i recall 16-17” (but wouldn’t trust that). But suggest checking yours to the spec and having it adjusted if it’s set too high. Reducing the volume sounds like a bad idea - it’s supposed to be annoying enough to prevent gear up landings but fails miserably. these days there are better technology aides including the new LHS. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I highly recommend Adlog.com after the first year it’s under $50 a year annually. see their website for what they provide. I sign off my own annuals but i got to believe the service will save you more than the subscription cost when your IA has to do your AD report since they will all be neatly organized in a 3 ring binder with a new checklist at each annual. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You mean after you buy and install an appropriate fuel pressure transducer? then go into programming mode to enable its display following instructions in your pilot guide. It’s required, it being your factory oem fuel pressure gauge because Mooney published limitations on fuel pressure. Your EDM-830 doesn’t legally replace the factory gauge so you might prefer to put your $ towards fixing it; else upgrade to an EDM-900 so you can ditch the factory gauges. you should realize there is a ton of required equipment on your Mooney not listed in 91.205 starting with the stall horn. Modern mooney’s include a KOEL list that gets more complete the more recent the manufacturing date. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As the maintainer and the primary financer of my Mooney, I couldn't agree more with this.

I am looking forward to being a UFO!!! No touch and goes here, never saw the point in it. But i’ve done plenty of go arounds from before touching and after touching but would much rather spend my time doing approaches, and other maneuvers like power off landings other different kinds of landings and takeoffs i put my students through on a Wings flight review. But what others do is up to them. Just never saw the point after learning the sight picture and i am flying most every day. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

True story, a relatively new pilot getting checked out in an arrow without any prior retract time wanted to check out the safety features he read about the gear not coming up on the ground due squat switch (or whatever it uses) so to make sure this was working on his pre-flight he moved gear lever to the up position. Oops - Test failed! Now it had several squawks! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Very surprising that an accident pilot would offer such insights to the NTSB. Even though the NTSB can't recommend a 709 checkride, I believe the FAA can after reviewing the report and of course concluding their own investigation. And in the same vein how do you think a underwriter would respond at insurance renewal time or for new policy if they had read this? Of course discussing this with the pilot might come across differently from just reading his musings, but this reads like he may have an issue with resignation which I expect both the FAA and any underwriter would have an issue with. Maybe it was resignation that kept him from deviating to a closer fuel stop when the 2nd low fuel light came on! I'am always very interested in the human factors side of what leads to accidents and its very rare IMO that NTSB report dockets have these details to share - even though this may not reflect the pilot mindset during the flight, nevertheless its still enlightening for things we all need to guard against.

Most everyone follows the same convention that Mooneyspace forum uses, meaning with the J model. But there are several things that contributed besides a seemingly arbitrary model year such as the important change to the GAMA standardized POH format in '76

And airways, RF leg support, programmable holds your AP will fly, visual approaches (many with GS) to virtually every runway in its database and improved VTF support on approaches (VTF includes the waypoints behind the FAF) and of course a much better moving map on the larger screen 750. And one of favorites: DB Concierge support with the FS-510! no more data card programming except for the terrain which is seldom updated anyway. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You'd hope that would be enough but after you have lots of hours in type, its really not difficult at all. Sadly we often see multiple gear up landings per week.

I just spoke with Brandon at Absolute Aero (HWD) - they would be happy to do a dynamic prop balance for you two. They charge $850 flat rate. Contact them again, Matt and Brandon there are usually more attentive to email. I work with Brandon through Savvy trust you'll be happy with them.

Even if its underinsured, I'll bet some mechanic will be pick it up and have in flying soon. That's not hard to repair as @EricJ said

I've tried too at angle and believe your right - its not possible. Upside down might be possible but can't remember that for sure - would have to try again.

The destination distance was 75 nm to the south. The plane actually make 64.5 miles to the accident site. How many folks would attempt a 75 nm flight on 1/4" tank? and the other tank with the fuel light on? <2.5G Hopefully none for a long time after being reminded of the risk. The POH says not to take off with less than 12 gallons in the tank, that's right at 1/3 tank. 9 out of 10 times these accidents are always the result of the simplest thing. My heart goes out to him because I am betting he's an older pilot that is now uninsurable even with training wheels.

Great reasoning, but the stakes are much higher than $1K. A new baggage door will run more like $5K not counting painting it. Just saying… Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How hard it is to open the latch isn’t relevant. Try the following, with the door fully open, and the handle latched, press in on each pin. it will open, sometimes without much force. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The test stand is incompatible with testing mixture distribution but there is no rush to do. Mixture distribution shouldn’t be tested till after break-in is complete because we want to do slow sweeps below 65% power not at 75% power for breaking in. Concur it usually takes a few iterations to get the mixture distribution dialed in but isn’t a concern. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All 3 I mentioned at earlier PPP's. Talk to Bud the next time you're at a PPP, I believe the last 2 PPP incidents where with his students and he swore verifying they were shut, just not locked.

You don't have to get the Medeco locks from Aircraft Security, you can go down to any local Medeco locksmith and get them and have them installed as a minor alteration. Its true that they won't prevent a really determined thief, but in the majority of cases when a thief is confronted with security devices such as these they will just walk over to the next airplane that is unsecured and leave yours alone. Seen this happen a number of times. The most common time to see the door open is on the runway, followed by in climb with the least to occur in cruise. The faster the speed the more damage. When it happens on aborted takeoff you might get by without any damage or just breaking the hold open arm. When it happens in climb the door generally doesn't depart but the deformed door will need to be replaced. Its when it happens in cruise that the door is likely to depart. Years ago at PPP's we had a rash of 3 in rather quick succession including one departure that damaged the vertical stab that led to the policy of locking them before flight. That was a couple decades ago. We haven't had any open since and I believe the word has really spread among Mooney pilot community such that few Mooney pilots don't lock them; but there will always be those that forget too. To get a true count we'd have to ask the factory how many replacement doors they have made.

Actually many of us consider it essential and most of the Mooney PPP instructors won’t fly with you unless it is locked simply because we have seen many baggage doors open in flight causing damage over the years - but never seen a verified locked door open in flight. If it opens in cruise it’s going to depart the aircraft and likely do damage in flight. Just a few years ago a UK pilot had that happen and the door got wedged in the elevator making the aircraft very difficult to control. But luckily there was a large grass field directly below them that enabled them to safely make an emergency landing. You can read about it here on Mooneyspace. Then contrast the great many doors that have opened on the runway and in flight with how often the baggage door was used by first responders to rescue a crew member - that’s a zero to the best of my knowledge. Every rescue i’ve seen the roof was literally cut off, neck braces put on and then they were carefully lifted out of the cockpit on a backboard. Even with the gear going through the wing, the door is still openable. i do know of a couple cases where the baggage door was used for self rescue when after landing they couldn’t get the door to open and there was no one around to hand the keys too through the storm window to have someone unlock it for you. But that’s due to a bad lock that needs replacing. These are only $5 Chicago cabinet locks unless you upgrade them to more secure Medco locks, as i have done on mine after i had to get rescued on the ground due to a bad lock. All of the modern mooney’s have a factory mechanism to open a locked baggage door from the inside. But what you describe is a great option for similar method to unlock from inside the vintage mooney’s. Just not as secure as the factory method. Personally i suggest you reconsider and make it a habit to lock your baggage door before every flight. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Indeed, but the average was twice that and in the range of TCM position tuned injectors. Can’t go by your single lowest one. It’s the repeatable average that counts. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Smart man or should i say pilot Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I fly exclusively from the right seat, with right side brakes, when my pilot wife is in the left seat. But i don’t fly solo from the right seat. The ignition switch. as an example, is too far away in an emergency. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Its not nearly as complicated or mysterious as your suggesting - or perhaps over thinking it. Every engine as a "maximum cruise power" even though you may not find it stated directly as such; both NA and especially Turbo. But it is also seen as the maximum horsepower listed in the cruise tables. The definition refers to upper limit in HP for leaning to be allowed. That is only full rich or very limited leaning should be done above that max cruise power. And this is exactly what the chart is saying. Furthermore 1550F TIT is too high! as I'll try to explain. I counsel that it shouldn't go above 1450F which is a limit used on the bigger bore TCM Turbo's, as I have seen many partial power losses hitting 1550 and detonation events getting that lean above max cruise power. More so in the TSIO-360's than the bigger turbo's. (If you really know what you're doing you can safely get away with running LOP above max cruise e.g. 80% and some here do, but if you're not expert at doing it, you can get into trouble very quickly.) So now that's we've established this isn't a power setting for cruising (unless you want to cruise full rich at max FF) its really only for climb power. And I counsel all my savvy clients that if your TIT is exceeding 1450F at full power full rich, your fuel flow is to low. I prefer to see it no higher than 1350F In the bigger Turbo's such as the TSIO-550's in the Acclaims, Cirrus and Corvalis the POH says to specifically turn on the aux boost pump when your TIT exceeds 1450F in climb! (1450F not 1550F), Cirrus even has you climb from seal level with the aux boost pump on to help ensure FF stays high. Rocket Engineering actually has a limitation in the POH that full power engine TIT limitation is 1450F. So think of 1550F as a real redline not to exceed when you aren't at or below max cruise power where you can lean to higher TIT's. But just like we don't run at redline CHT temps, the more practical conservative advice is to use 1450F since 1550F is aggressive. Add with a worn TIT probe which may be under indicating as much as 100-150F its a setup for impending disaster with partial power loss and detonation damage very quickly.