kortopates

I bring along this this shaker siphon tool when traveling in Mexico where fuel can sometimes be problematic. It doesn't weigh anyway and requires no sucking - just shaking the end to bring the fuel up and then gravity takes over. Clever and easy and best of all no fuel fumes in the mouth. Shaker Siphon Hose

Technically anything not listed under Preventative Maintenance requires A&P supervision - so I would think yes. And some would also extend that reasoning to say that in a retractable gear Mooney, a pilot really isn't allowed to change a tire since when changing a tire on a retractable AC the FAA guidance under 43.13b requires us to make multiple gear swings to ensure the new tire doesn't catch anywhere and the gear doors are still properly rigged since these additional activities fall out of the scope of PM on retractable aircraft. Until it happened to me, I used to buy in to the argument of some that if you don't change the tire brand/model you should be safe to skip the gear swing checks. But then I put on a new FCIII tire which did bind when the old worn one did not. This had me stumped till I traced the issue to a new shock link tower installed when the tire had about half it's tread. It was off dimensionally just enough to cause the problem. Replacing the pretty new shock link with yet another new one solved my problem. That was one time I was glad I didn't skip the gear checks or I would have had problems soon after. Personally, I've always suggested the same advice that I am required to follow as an A&P, if you've never done the task before, always seek supervision from an A&P that has the first time you take it on to make sure you learn how to do it properly; even its only changing the oil or a spark plug. There is the legal aspect and then there is safety and protecting those that fly with you.

A 500 hr IRAN should be all you need till you overhaul the entire engine. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Airspeed safety switch speed is in the Maintenance manual, IIRC its in the 60-67 kts range. If you have jacks, you can test it out in your hangar to verify if its in spec per your Maintenance manual cause I'd bet you were probably over the spec'd speed since its pretty low. But also next to your gear switch in the cabin should be a red switch that illuminate when the gear switch is up but the air speed safety switch is preventing the gear from rising along with the horn activating. You only need to push the illuminated red switch to bypass the airspeed safety switch and raise the gear. Not absolutely sure which year the bypass switch started but I thought with the early J's and its been retrofitted to many F's and can be added if you don't have one yet. That's the correct action while climbing out of a high density airport whenever necessary. Were are you at KSEE? I am Sky Harbor D-7 near Circle Air. Come say hello some time whenever near by.

All good points, but Garmin has never been the hold up or issue here with respect to upgrades or lack thereof. At least from Garmin's perspective they'll say they have the upgrade path buts it's up to the airframe manufacturer to go through the certification process in order to amend the type certificate. Thus Mooney and not Garmin, bears most of the responsibility and cost to see this happen which is the critical differentiator between STC'd retrofit avioincs and fully integrated airframe manufacturer installed avioincs like the G1000. Thus the primary point of this discussion by many of us is that for G1000 type of airframe approved avioincs is that we become entirely dependent on airframe manufacturer for the approval process. It's an interesting question how much Mooney's without WAAS will devalue relative to those with. But it's a real shortcoming these days with all of the avialable GPS approaches with some form of glideslope. But obviously we still have a couple hundred longbodies flying without the benefit of WAAS that didn't see the need to upgrade when it was available for a fraction of cost I imagine it will become down the road. Plus there are still lots of GNS non-WAAS boxes still flying with many only getting upgraded when they break. Of course the big difference is there may not even be a defined upgrade path for those non-WAAS G1000 Mooneys for quite sometime till Mooney approves one. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's certainly related if the mag securing hardware has become loose to shift the timing and leak oil from the mag. A few have been known to literally fall off from not re-installing or re-torquing with new and proper lock washers per a Lycoming SB. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Draining fuel, outside of the hangar, and storing in the hangar are all dangerous activities. Your hangar agreement most likely prohibits Storing fuel in your hangar as well. These are reason enough most of don't top off tanks till we know our fuel requirements for the next trip. Perhaps most importantly there is no known benefit to keeping your tanks full versus partially wet; especially in the hangar. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Its also required for each annual since otherwise its not possible to properly inspect i.e. notice cracks and oil leaks. 14 CFR Part 43 Appendix D (a) Each person performing an annual or 100 hour inspection, .... He shall thoroughly clean the aircraft and aircraft engine.

Like Lance @LANCECASPER says above - no water. The standard is mineral spirits applied with a wand using an air compressor - after covering or avoiding things like the vacuum pump and mags. Get with your A&P or IA to do it the first time. After its cleaned up its important to re-lubricate all the controls. TCM has a Service Bulletin on this that you would want to review; although pretty straight forward.

Keep going you have only scratched the surface - transponder, engine analyzer, audio panel... And if it had the GFC700 then wow - new auto pilot! Doubtful it would happen. Further an update by Mooney for the Nxi could be a long time off. Where is the incentive for Mooney? After a very long time Mooney approved a G1000 WAAS version but given how a couple hundred longbodies didn't buy in beyond ADS/B, if I was Mooney I sure wouldn't expect to see more than a fraction of the fleet to adopt the Nxi. It's a much bigger update. Which makes it hard to justify for both Mooney and the owner. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, but these are projector bulbs only about $10 each if you are willing to Dremel down/sand and solder a couple wires. Search Mooneyspace for bulb part number. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A complete or near complete injector blockage has to be exceedingly rare. And I'd have to think if it would be far more likely to occur only after maintenance which included the injectors. After all, the screen in the fuel divider is going to capture anything large enough to fully block an injector - that's what its designed to do and should do. But it easy enough to introduce a large debris such a fragment from a cut o-ring gasket as the injector is re-installed which I assume is likely what happened here. Where else would it have come from that wouldn't have been caught by the fuel divider screen? I do appreciate you sharing your experience of a fully blocked injector and I assumed from Antares description it was in references to the typical partially blocked injector that I have seen the data for hundred's of times. Yet I haven't seen it all and always learning and can't recall ever seeing a fully blocked one in flight just appear. Yet I am also primed to check for this after maintenance and suggest how to do so at engine run-up. I've had to re-install an injector myself from nipping the o-ring on reinstall and causing a blockage issue.

The Citation pilot was trying to bully you out of the way - plain in simple. It happens and is very irritating when it does. At our busiest uncontrolled SOCAL airport in the San Diego area, we have a large sky diving operation. The pilots of which have tried to bully other traffic out of the way as well. I am not referring to entering the airspace after they have jumpers away, but jump pilots asking other pilots to break off their approach so they don't have to wait for you to let loose of their jumpers - while their waiting for the TRACON to give them the all clear because of the other traffic. At this airport though, doing practice approaches without at least flight following is impossible. As long as your talking to SOCAL, they'll sequence the jump activity between the approaches so that everybody gets their turn; despite occasional calls by the jump pilot on the CTAF asking you to break off. But still the jump planes can be a bit too quick IMO to loose their jumpers - at least I am always a bit nerved when I hear jumpers away and we haven't quite gotten to the MAP yet. Even if they are jumping from over 10'K above us. So I suspect that like at my crowded uncontrolled airport, you too wouldn't be seeing such rampant bullying if you were also talking to approach.

I personally don't see any similarities between loosing a turbo charger and a clogged injector. First off, recognize clogged injectors happen at different various levels of clogging. Its the small obstruction at takeoff that is the concern or troublesome. While a severe clog is going to reduce power in that cylinder to the point of being below 65% or even cease combustion. So what you need to be primed for is responding to partial clog on takeoff or in full power climb. Its not going to make your other cylinders too rich but the one cylinder will be too lean driving up both that cylinders EGT and TIT. As a result the one cylinder is in danger of detonation from the reduced FF to it at high power. (If you see the high EGT become erratic and drop off while CHT escalates its in detonation with severe harmful IPC levels.) With a partial clog keeping the cylinder still near peak or on the ROP side at high power, CHT will be escalating to well above 400F quickly; and even faster north if detonation begins. So your action is to reduce power ASAP to avoid the escalating CHT and chance of a pre-ignition event taking over. Quickly reducing power to under 65% power will ensure the cylinder is not harmed and you'll still have the other 5 cylinders producing normal power enabling you to not to continue on but get you down safely without rushing. If a clog appears in cruise its that much more easier to deal with since it will be that much easier to get power below 65% to avoid harmful high CHT escalation; plus you'll have more time to recognize it more likely as a escalating CHT. Again a severe clog with just take the cylinder offline from going too lean. (Loosing one of 6 cylinders may not be that noticeable, but 4 cyl rajay installation would be a whole other matter!) A couple of times I have noticed a partial clog occur in a cylinder during the runup by seeing an abnormal increase in EGT as RPM is brought up with throttle; a high EGT that is not erratic or not from misfire. If you catch something like this don't takeoff unless you can get it too clear. To attempt to clear, go to full power with brakes on and see if the full fuel pressure/fuel flow clears it or not. If it does, your good to go. If not taxi back - you just averted risking destroying a cylinder and possible takeoff emergency by being tuned into your engine analyzer. Regarding a turbo charger failure. Keep in mind this is much greater emergency than you may realize because it may include a huge exhaust leak ready to create a fire which is the greatest eminent threat at altitude. Once spooled down, its very unlikely you'll get it re-started again till the lower teens anyway, which is now just to help you make it to your emergency airport of landing. But yes, without the turbo spinning and the simplicity of the TCM fuel injection which doesn't regulate FF based on air density, the FF will be much too rich and will require more MAP than available at high altitude before you'll have much chance of getting it restarted; even with a leaned mixture. What is a bit similar to loosing a turbo-charger is loosing the engine driven fuel pump, since with the loss of a fuel pump you loose the ability to regulate FF based on throttle - you have to be careful to accompany throttle changes with mixture changes. Depending on the airframe/engine you may also loose the ability to get sufficient FF for full power with only the aux pump as well.

After reading through this thread you all make the case that by the numbers the 252 Encore is the definitely the sweat spot in (turbo) efficiency. With a useful load of 1134 lbs and fuel burn in the NA range of 12-13 flown ROP or 10-10.5 GPH flown LOP and doing over 180+KTAS at 16K its at the apex of Mooney efficiency. Nor it does it really give anything up with its 75.6 Gal Tanks which are extended-able to 105.6 gal. But with plenty of time in the longbody's its fair to say its principal drawback is that it needs to go high even more so than the Bravo and Acclaim to get its performance or to put it another way the higher horsepower Bravo and Acclaim will allow faster lower level cruise by as much as 20 knots and steeper climb gradients yet with considerably higher fuel burn rates. But the Encore is still climbing at 700-800'/min too the flight levels. With Dual alternators and being FIKI capable, the only other con in IMO is that its still not a long body. I do find that each successive stretch of the Mooney airframe has led to a more stable platform with the Acclaim at the top. If operational efficiency wasn't a concern for me I'd trade my Encore for an Acclaim in a heart beat since I do feel its Mooney's ultimate achievement, but I appreciate the miserly fuel flow of the 252/Encore with flight level turbo performance which makes the Encore Mooney's ultimate in effeciency. And has been said above, turbo isn't just for high density altitude takeoff's and topping mountain ranges; it provides so much more capability to cross country flight in finding smooth air and enabling flying above weather in VMC - I don't think I could ever go back to a NA aircraft unless I was limited to making hamburger runs.

That was my experience as well - 3.5 hrs exactly! Although a long time ago, I was already commercial SEL and instrument current and got my Multi commercial instrument add-on in that time - just also like @N201MKTurbo experience over a weekend. Although doing it that quickly I didn't get the benefit of ever flying the twin with both engines running- or maybe it did include one takeoff with both engines without a engine failure. At the time I wondered how they could charge full twin hourly rates when all you did was fly around with just one engine.

Hopefully you got the new orange card bundled with the new orange datawriter to write to the new orange data card. Terrain data is the most static data of aviation databases. I never bothered to update mine when I had dual 430W's for over a dozen years - scorched earth just doesn't change much. But Jeppesen nav data is a bit more complete than Garmin's for showing private airports; maybe more too.

Get yours overhauled. Your engine rebuilder should be able to help you there. If not, try KRN Aviation in Chandler AZ. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am unfamiliar with a standby alternator on the K's, but look for a panel switch to turn on rather than just the CB. Still I don't think it should be powered without the master on. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The first step in a writing data is to erase the old data - hence why the card may be blank now. But if refreshing the driver and it still can't recognize the card it's likely bad. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do they have a STC to install only the switch with conventional mags? Honestly, I think it takes too much valuable panel space for many of us. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We've seen Craig request users to withdraw copyrighted Mooney manuals posted to Mooneyspace before. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually the AIM was updated in 2016 to clarify that you can navigate by GPS provided you are still able to monitor the raw navaid signal, such as with a second CDI or EFIS that allows you to use both. This is really meant for NPA procedures since you need the glideslope with an ILS. Otherwise you've been spot on above. Check it out. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Its critical for the OP to understand the basic concepts before getting into buttonology. Vectors and heading are synonymous period. You aren't flying a heading in GPSS mode ( you are flying a GPS course). Failing to turn to the assigned heading can and will get you a pilot deviation if you end up getting to close to other IFR traffic causing a TA. Best to go practice this with an instructor till you fully understand your equipment. GPSS is entirely appropriate if the controller clears you direct to some IAF and clears you for the approach. But on a vector in heading mode you are setting up the AP to intercept final. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nah, in time expect to see both the GFC 500 and 600 to become available. Remember it will depend less on airframe and more on whether it's for G5's installed or G500 installed. Lots of G500's are installed in midbody and longbody Mooneys. Of course more G5's on the vintage models. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk