kortopates

Simple, the STC is not approved for G1000 equipped aircraft. https://static.garmin.com/pumac/sa01899wi_aml_03.pdf Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Of course I totally agree. My comments where from the perspective of getting a field approval from the FAA for a G1000 that is still supported. I don't see the FAA sticking their neck to approve a replacement suite for G1000 without going through the STC process - which is neither cheap nor quick. But with respect to the G1000 version that Mooney chose to certify they have pretty much always chosen earlier versions that latter version with more functionality. For example when they offered a WAAS upgrade they picked the version that had the issue with about 160 LP approaches that couldn't be loaded because they had a zero VDA that broke that version of the WAAS. These days they are back to non-zero VDAs so I think that resolved itself over time. There where other limitation with Weather I recall too. But I agree with you, I'd rather keep my state of art upgradeable avionics that are not tied to the TCDS to be able to update.

Good luck finding a FSDO that would entertain signing off a field approval to replace a fully supported G1000 Mooney, simply because it’s not upgradable. Don Maxwell has been talking about getting an STC to replace a G1000 installation for years - don’t know if he’s put much effort into it. Someday i think it will happen but probably not likely as long as Garmin is still supporting them. It’s really not a bad system but limited without WAAS. But even there new owners are finding GIA-63W’s to do the upgrade. But an Nxi upgrade isn’t even remotely possible for now. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ignition would have to be absolutely terrible to prevent getting good repeatable sweeps. It shouldn’t be a factor at peak. It’s much more likely to be from technique or poor mixture - but 0.6 is far from poor. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The factory staffing level has deteriorated to the point that they lost their ability to modify the type certificate. They’ll have to get a new serious infusion of capital or new ownership with $ to staff up before they can tackle such a project. For now they can only produce parts. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are people out there that are very good with maintaining out scott 2 stage regulators; namely C&L Aero. When the day comes, Mooney already has an improved installation with the Precise built in system, but it will be more expensive than replacing the altitude compensating stage on the on our Scott regulators. The main stages are very repairable now. I prefer the Precise demand conserver - works like the O2D2 but no electronics or power to fail but more $$. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Shouldn’t, free play is usually removed by changing out shims. Different shim sizes are listed in the IPC and available from LASAR or your favorite MSC. LASAR also used to rebuild them like new as well. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good question- the K are a more complicated install because they have anti-siphon filler necks that the long bodies do not. Whether it changes the install i am not certain but it’s a more significant alteration. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The $1300 version could be the newer part # that is riveted versus the original spot welded part #. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You have 2, fig 64 & 65 and always painted. the exhaust tail pipe is right below the right hand one and pointed down away such that most exhausts doesn’t hit the belly till after these parts that cover brake master cylinders - both sides if you have dual brakes. never seen them unpainted and mooney parts are aluminum. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The taller the vertical development the stronger the elevator ride. The updraft is strongest in the upper portion as well. Although it varies I am personally deviating for anything more than 5K and often smaller. Just a week ago i deviated for about 4-5k and so did an airliner right behind me - we were both descending to different airports in the Vegas area. IMO deviate when any doubt, ATC is always helpful and understanding. Further if in strong updraft/downdraft i’ll let ATC know i am unable to hold altitude temporarily- sometimes i’ll get a block altitude but mostly not, (probably from flying in the teens with little traffic). Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As for who was actually flying, given the grand father is an ATP/CFI, assuming he was a current CFII, it shouldn’t matter. I’ll bet since he was operating the radio, he was in the right seat. As very current CFII and plane owner about the only time i am in the right seat is if I am solo, otherwise my wife is in the left seat regardless of who’s flying. Of course absolutely nobody intentionally flys into a thunderstorm nor even a large growing cumulus with large vertical development. It would be no surprise when that the aircraft encountered severe turbulence penetrating convection and the pilot then disconnected the autopilot and then lost control. In the past with my BK KFC-150 AP, one could definitely fly the plane better in turbulence without it. With the new digital GFC-500 with yaw damper perhaps it could do better job if just trying to maintain heading without altitude hold. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All true but airmets for icing don’t constitute known icing. “Known icing conditions" involve circumstances where a reasonable pilot would expect a substantial likelihood of ice formation on the aircraft based upon all information available to that pilot. I prefer the FAA Legal interpretation from Bell 2009 https://www.faa.gov/media/14431 For some pilots it just takes freezing temps and clouds but in this case it sure looks like a reasonable pilot would conclude icing conditions were very likely. I am more and more of the opinion this was due to convection, first with an updraft so common in cumulus with significant vertical development. The final report is going to be an interesting read if they cover this in depth. But not very timely 2 years from now. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed, but if he didn’t get a rather complete briefing i suspect he would be too busy after departure to see airmets. But he could have been doing that before he landed at Chattanooga. The thing that makes we question LOC from icing is that the aircraft never got slow before losing control. Once level it sped up to 183 kts grnd speed before what appears to be LOC. So Now i am wondering if it was severe turbulence as in convective clouds. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pilot was on an IFR flight plan to Burlington NC. They were on the ground for 40 minutes before starting this flight that ended in about 18 minutes. About 12 minutes to climb up to 7000' only after 7 minutes of cruise it was over. Was the pilot able to get a wx briefing before departure (if only self brief)? Does look like spatial D but could have just as easily been LOC from icing. Hope the preliminary offers some insights. 3 people gone - so sad.

sounds reasonable, verify what Vx is, it’s 12 degrees in most. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Try an oil ring solvent flush first. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They are both 70 amp TCM Alternators with different part #’s simply because one is gear driven and the other belt driven. Because the belt driven alternator is always turning faster, do to the way it’s set up, it naturally already takes 80%+ of the load. Which is good because it’s easier to access and maintain. Because of the load difference the #1 should go a long time. I have just about 2000 hrs on my #1 alternator drive coupling and no issues ever so far. I change the brushes out when ever i have it off for almost any reason to avoid ever having to remove it for brush change - which i have never has to do. TCM recommends changing them out at 500 hrs but i personally think that’s excessive plus we really don’t see dual alternator failures. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

John, you can very accurately measure your spread at much lower power setting, such as 20-22” MAP or more closer to 22-24 with a lower prop rpm; capture your sweeps with your engine monitor. Plus at that lower power setting you can do full 30 sec LOP May checks to check the health of your ignition. With the lower power setting your TIT won’t spike so high. You mentioned your holding with couple tenth of the target MAP doing the spreads - that’s excellent but up to 1/2” is usually good enough. But that is more challenging with very poor mixture compared to very good mixture. BTW, if you still have your old GAMI injectors i’d just send to John-Paul and they’ll clean and bench test to insure they’re still to spec and return for a modest fee. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unless you get a platinum edition TCM engine the stock injectors are terrible yielding 1.5 or worse Gami spread. The TCM Position Tuned injectors will get you just above 0.5 at 0.6 - 0.7 on average. I have yet to see a TSIO-360 that will run any where near 60F LOP. About 35F is the limit with good mixture and fine wires; partly due to the Slick mags. A Surefly can help some and a few have switched to Bendix mags. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.aircrafthose.com/ can’t go wrong as they guarantee fit too and have no age limit. But lots of other folks do these including aircraftspruce. You can, or your A&P, can just make them too, but make they have ability to pressure test them before installing. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not trying to speak for Jon, but a pretty obvious one in my mind is TFRs. We all know we need to stay out of TFR’s but VIP TFR’s often allow exceptions when you read the small pint. Some allow flying in and through as long as we’re talking to ATC while squawking while others don’t. Some of the more complicated ones are divided into 2 areas with an outer ring that we can fly in if squawking and talking. Flight conditions and time constraints might make it challenging to read all the fine print while flying. True these questions can be posed to ATC but if you’re aways out from their airspace FSS is the better one. Then there are simpler ones like your a ways out planning an approach using a VOR and you see a NOTAM for your approach that the TACAN is out of service - i can see some pilots wondering does mean just DME or Azimuth as well? There are lots of NOTAMS that can be confusing that we could do a little research on the ground but when discovering them in the air we may need a little help. Incidentally, i have to add a “Properly trained PIC” is non-sensical. Even on the day of our checkride we don’t know everything. The adage that the certificate is nothing more than a license to learn is right attitude IMO. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We had inspectors from a neighboring FSDO conduct ramp checks at one our local fields over the course of several days. We all wondered why they were doing so outside of there own jurisdiction. If i recall correctly it was part of a new inspectors training. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quite the conspiracy theorist! lol Only partially true, it’s a “Ply Rating” - not a ply count. it’s been since before my time that the rating actually matched the count. With modern materials they make 4 and 6 ply “rated” tires with fewer than that many physical plies and have been doing this for decades. Think of it as a standard rather than a count. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In the US I've only lost GPS for brief few moments on multiple occasions in different trainers - never my aircraft. Took a long time to figure out but it stemmed from a interference from the radio on the SEE tower frequency where apparently a harmonic from a separate radio on the 120.7 ctaf freq was killing the GPS signal and the unit would have to re-acquire them - all taking time and this happening crossing the FAF added additional challenges. (using the GPS radio was never a problem and the solution for those installations with this issue). But flying out of the US I have been jammed several times since those jammers are very cheap and easy to get a hold of. Those losses last for many minutes depending on altitude till you get far enough away. Not a big deal when VMC but a real pain in IMC. In all of these occasions it wouldn't matter how many GPS's you had, but in the latter jamming scenario I tried a portable as well without success.