kortopates

This is what I have installed as well and love it - for about 15 years now. I do pull the breaker when practicing slow flight and stalls since it pretty loud. But for normal flying its an awesome device! Highly recommend it. As @Mr Bill says above, not only a whole lot cheaper than rebuilding the airplane, but it will save a whole lot of Mooney's from being totaled by insurance. Although some still get fixed, many get relegated to being parted out while the number of flying Mooney's decline.

That's great news and a very plausible explanation for all this grief. Considering the aux pump has been replaced its even better news that this should be all behind you once its all cleaned up.

Yesterday we had a another K model join the mix of 5 Mooney's to land with the gear up in the last 7 reporting days. Not a good streak for us Mooney pilots.

We'll have to wait for the fuel injection specialist to bench test your servo and let you know what caused the issue. But its likely the same debris you found in the fuel divider is responsible for gumming up internals of the servo's and significantly reducing its ability to precisely meter fuel. That's my guess any way. As mentioned via savvy, its still potential concern to make sure there isn't any more of this stuff upstream that could cause further havoc after you re-install the fuel components. If I am right about the debris being the issue, knowing what the debris material is is and its likely source could prove valuable. But you'll find out soon enough what the fuel guys learns and he too may have some suggestions on that.

Good observations and so sadly so typical. The pattern is a more risky aspect of the flying we do; especially when we include the runway as well and I believe strongly that the risk all go up dramatically from flying poor patterns. Mark @midlifeflyer is right above in that this risk doesn't stem from lack of engine reliability. But @Mooneymite and @Marauder nail it above. Its the very fear of banking that leads to wide and long patterns, that sets up pilot for all the common mishaps since it leads to going slow and level with lots of power once the pilot gets low. It especially contributes to the fatal stall spin accidents and has certainly got to compound much of the runway loss of control we see from pilots dragging it in with lots of power to the runway. Such a practice leaves them with large excess of forward energy compared to if they were coming in steeper with very little power with the flare dissipating a much greater proportion of the remaining forward energy in the roll out. But that very fear of over banking, is causing pilots to instead maintain high AOA, often with lots of power once they realize they are low, and they end up putting themselves into the danger they were improperly trying to avoid. Its add to their vulnerability to downdrafts and stall/spin etc. Yet their fear of steeper bank angles is unfounded by the laws of physics when one is no longer maintaining 1G unaccelerated level flight but is in a descent with a negative AOA with the wings unloaded. So I believe the issue is largely training to learn that by starting a constant descent from abeam the intended point of landing and unloading the wing that a trimmed aircraft is in no danger of stalling in the pattern. At least not while their maintaining that constant descent to the runway. Things only go wrong when they start pulling the yoke back. Keep the pattern to a standard pattern and there won't be a need.

Suggest some nylon spiral wrap. It just looks like it will chaff through in no time. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Enforcement will be as simple as it is now. If they fly out of or into a towered field they'll be nailed for sure. But if it's in and out of uncontrolled fields they'll probably get away with it every time. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have a similar setup, and with a switch to select between my #1 and #2 GTNs. Pretty simple to add.

yes, silly, its not what "you" call them but their position on the panel and what they control that determines primary.

Wow! "It take a good 6 hrs to reassemble correctly The tail bolts back on in less than hr and the rest of time is reinstalling the wiring plugs all are marked." I just can't imagine anything going wrong! Nor can I imagine why there is only i bid on it!

I always have the gear down as I am entering the pattern since it helps stabilize and slows the aircraft to pattern speed. But I very much share the sentiment or concern of wanting to make sure the runway can always be made. But IMO, the solution to ensuring this is in the pattern we fly. I fly and encourage the FAA standard pattern of 1/2 to max 1 mile abeam (right out of the FAA flying handbook). My typical pattern is right at the middle of that at ~2/3 to 3/4 nm abeam the runway and start the base at the 45 degree mark. I am not worried about not making the airport with that pattern. But my third and final check is on short final looking at the numbers, which always includes checking the floor indicator. Yet at an uncontrolled field, and even towered airports, I constantly get behind someone in a much slower C150 or C172 that thinks they're a B747 with a 1.5 mile abeam downwind and then fly a good mile past the 45 for good measure. I haven't forgotten why student pilots fly those kind of patterns, but too many CFI's do them a disservice by not teaching a proper pattern that begins with the power reduction and descent abeam the intended landing point. Its my biggest pet peeve in the pattern as I do feel vulnerable following traffic like that when there is no reason for it. Easily fixed too by an instructor that starts pulling the power for them!

Generally, or perhaps I should say most commonly, the intent of this test is to verify all the cylinders are getting an even amount of fuel relative to each other. Its not so much the volume but that the height or volume of all the bottles is very close to one another. Without gami or position tuned injectors they should be very even and to test for that its more commonly done with the fuel injectors on first - unless one was really expecting clogged fuel divider was altering the fuel but typically one would try that after finding the fuel flow was not evenly distributed and the try it without the injectors to attempt to isolate it between the divider output and the injectors.

Be careful out there. The summer flying season appears to be well underway and in the last 5 reporting or business days, the FAA incidents/accidents data base is listing 4 Mooney's that landed with the gear up: a C, E, J & M model. Although most probably not all were accidental forgetting to lower the gear, that is the most common cause (including some of the "reported" gear collapses). Stay vigilant, it can happen to any of us when distracted. https://www.asias.faa.gov/apex/f?p=100:93:::NO:::

Many of us with glass panels, both G500 and Aspen, have gone with the ESI-500 since it was designed to be a glass backup and it also provides navigation backup. Its really the best option out there for a glass backup and an elegant solution - but its expensive.

very brief post doesn't give us much to go on, but if you have an engine monitor the first thing would be to download the data and confirm what happened and for how long. But if you truly exceeded lycoming redline of 500F I'd be borescoping the cylinder(s) before further flight as well as looking for signs of any cylinder cracks or other excessive heat damage.

You just need to enable showing positional flights in your flightaware settings. Then it will show all your ads/b data. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am really not buying a flight test is required. If the system holds pressure when turned off that proves the high pressure lines are okay as well as the regulator is shutting off and the fill port isn't leaking. If you are only losing air when operating it, that suggest a leak in the low pressure lines and outlets. Have you turned on the regulator and then checked all the outlets and low pressure lines? Despite being altitude compensating its still putting out enough pressure at sea level to find a leak - just try leaving it on. Its hard to believe the regulator that isn't leaking when off then leaks when on somehow? You can also try contacting https://www.c-l-aero.com/ in Redding CA, they specialize in O2 systems and can help you troubleshoot and are the ones to rebuild your regulator when the day does come. So they know all the possible failure modes. I'd give them a call, they're very helpful folks.

Don't confuse Date of Manufacture with Model year. Its just like cars, manufacturing of 79 models began in the fall/winter of '78. Your FAA registration doesn't list Model year, only manufacture date. There was an STC for the 231 to modify earlier bench seats to fold down - i had it done to a prior 231. I can't recall who's but expect a call to LASAR would be fruitful.

I don't think Zeftronics has anything approved for the 28V systems. But the IPC part no's should be good and LASAR can tell you your options. Also their is a repair station in NY that can repair all our 28V regulators - Consolidated Aircraft Supply https://www.consolac.com/ they're not cheap but nor is the cost of replacing Mooney regulators.

You'd bet wrong. There was more than one version of single pick brakes used between your C and the midbody. The long bodies and Encore use a double puck brake. However, this doesn't improve braking action like you might think. It mainly improves how long the pads last. Same tires with same contact area, albeit more weight. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

+1, start here, very easy to do! These shouldn't be leaking O2 when you turn on the O2 without anything plugged in. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, with the caveat being RNAV GPS Approaches with RF legs which do not require special authorization, just the equipment. For an example, see KCRQ GPS X 24. These require a navigator that supports RF legs and a auto slewing HSI. Which usually means a glass EFIS but doesn't have to. The GTN navigators support RF leg approaches. Obviously the RNP is a tighter tolerance version that requires more equipment including use of AP & flight director, IIRC, and training. I doubt we'll ever see the RNP version in GA, but the GPS version has been available to us since the GTN's provided them - maybe a couple years ago. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Never been anywhere that compares, so I've always felt the sunshine tax was well worth it! Thank goodness not everyone agrees but a lot do. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just like the original G500 does. If the G500 AHRS fails, one still has the GTX345 as backup to use by bluetooth connecting to it.

Its a J model and so far only the incident/accident report that just says "Aircraft Landed on grass". https://www.asias.faa.gov/apex/f?p=100:96:12169316330885::::P96_ENTRY_DATE,P96_MAKE_NAME,P96_FATAL_FLG:20-JUN-18,MOONEY But it is being labelled as a accident, with substantial damage, and with pilot and pax both with minor injuries - hope they are okay.