kortopates

You really need to take the time to do some reading so you can make a better informed decision since ultimately the value received is limited to what you'll appreciate. But the technology has improved greatly. As far as approach types though there is little difference. Only one new approach type is added for approaches with RF legs with support only provided by GTN's unless Avidyne got that in their recent update ( it wasn't originally). But when we get into utilitarian improvements, including approach leg types we see lots of improvement. For example we now have support for heading mode legs which we didn't have on the old boxes. Heading mode legs are used on just about every missed approach - so we get much improved guidance on the missed. We also get support for airways , ability to program holds, and on the GTNs ability to program a visual approach into any runway at any airport which is great situational awareness tool. Many are satisfied enough to just see the color higher resolution touch screen which makes the larger units much more practical for also serving MFD roles. Avidyne takes that a step further with synthetic vision but I think GTN's have the edge on approach support. But it comes down to whatever makes sense for you and very clearly a GNS, as long as it has WAAS, will get the job done just fine even without FS210; but the FS sure gives it some new life. But I personally wouldn't accept a non WAAS box in 2018. Regardless of what you have in the panel, a WAAS box can keep you alive in partial panel and enable you fly partial panel to ATP standards with its 5 Hz GPS update compared to the 1 Hz non-WAAS update rate. I only scratched the surface, so you'll have to study up and decide for yourself how happy you are with an oder box and your IPad. But in contrast I sure wouldn't want to rely on using my iPad interface. I have it, but I prefer to interface with my GTNs and the rest of my panel directly. But no matter what you opt for, get to know your avionics intimately in VFR conditions first so your equipment is a tool rather than a distraction. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely, a repair station can issue repairman certificates to someone that is not an A&P nor IA and can have them participate in the annual and do whatever they are approved to do. An IA or shop without a repair station certificate can use people in training to do work that is supervised by an A&P except for the annual inspection which must be legally done by an IA (its not legal to supervise even though it happens). But in every case it's FAA certificated mechanic or repairman that's signing off on the work; with the exception Clarence brought up. Yes, A&P school is huge time commitment for 2.5 years, but for this pilot it was pure entertainment and always learning. And a bit sleep deprived too. It was only really rough a couple semesters when there was no way around not having a Friday night class which cramped our weekend plans. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely right. Perhaps the only exception to the rule about work done outside of the US in that I don't know of any other country we recognize their certificated mechanics like Canada.

We covered above that you don't have to own it. A certificated pilot that is "owned or operated by that pilot" may perform preventative maintenance. see CFR Part 43.3 (g) I've known lots of pilots with lots of years with their aircraft that have never taken the cowling off and put it back on and have no interest (or time) to do so. Piloting and preventative maintenance are really entirely different skill sets.

Indeed we were. but luckily you clarified that N registered aircraft can only be maintained by FAA certified mechanics or repair stations, with FAA oversight, no matter where in the world the work is done. And thankfully we do have FAA approved repair stations all over the world.

Having been through the community college A&P program some years ago, I can provide a couple of informed comments. Its actually a 2.5 year or 5 semester full time program, far far more training than any pilot certificate or more comparable a professional pilot program from ab initio to professional multi pilot or ATP. Given the rigor of the training and lack of pay for graduates it quite obvious why we don't have an abundance of A&P's. Each semester if done full time to finish in the minimum 2.5 yrs. I did it at night after by daytime engineering job, 4 nights from 4pm to 10:30pm. The first semester covers the General classes which prepared you for the General exam. Any pilot wanting to do preventative maintenance would be well served to take the General class. Highly valuable and the only class I originally was committed too. It covers methods and practices and many more basics. In my case, it just opened the door to recognizing how little I knew building a thirst for more. With General completed you could go off for a full year of Airframe or full year of Powerplant. In terms of non-applicable classes to Mooney pilots, there was only one in the powerplant year, covering turbine engines, and one in the airframe covering wood/fabric/composites & finishing; but since it covered finishing/painting it wasn't totally inapplicable. So it was really just one night over one of the 2 semesters for those topics. Not really that much that you could really say doesn't apply to piston and Mooney pilots. If you have a local community college offering the program it reduces the cost to essentially nothing - meaning just your time. Then after 5 semesters of full time study/work, most A&P go to work for major companies like the airlines, military maintainers, production facilities (e.g., military drones, Boeing production, helicopters) - almost everything but GA since GA only pays $20+ an hour to start with the least benefits. Contrast that to a much shorter auto mechanic program where you get trained to be a certified Toyota mechanic or the like in much less time and realize you'll be making better money not just by the hour but also with the promise of being rewarded being efficient at flat rate work. (Cirrus is the only aircraft manufacturer that has gone to flat rate estimates for maintenance, but I don't know how comprehensive that is). It then takes another 3 years of experience before an A&P is eligible to apply for the IA. With the IA the, A&P/IA can perform and approve major alterations & repairs (which includes STC's) and perform annual inspections which equates to god like status in the eyes of the FAA.

I don't know if this is the one being referred too, but try searching for Advantage Aviation at KBJC https://www.pilotcareercenter.com/Pilot-Training-Flight-School/USA/Colorado/674/Advantage-Aviation Don't even know if they are still in business but given its a flight school rather than a club, solo opportunities may be limited.

It's the holes for the roll pins that tend to become enlarged resulting in the rod end becoming loose that can cause their demise. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Operate" is defined in part 1 too [emoji846] Got to be flying it. I'd say it works for any rental pilot that is trusted to do the work by an owner when stranded away E.g. fouled plug. But good luck, most owners I know in a local club I fly with are not that trusting. Operate, with respect to aircraft, means use, cause to use or authorize to use aircraft, for the purpose (except as provided in §91.13 of this chapter) of air navigation including the piloting of aircraft, with or without the right of legal control (as owner, lessee, or otherwise). Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FWIW 43.3 (g) spells out only a certificated pilot under part 61 can perform preventative maintenance with the exception of sport pilots without further requirements. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Since a pilot owner asked the question, I assumed that even though it wasn't stated specifically. But I probably should have added the pilot signs it with his Pvt or Cml or ATP certificate number in lieu of an A&P as required for any authorized preventative maintenance work done. But yes, as[mention=8913]Bob_Belville[/mention] and[mention=6995] neilpilot[/mention] point out only a pilot owner is authorized to perform preventative maintenance if I misunderstood the intent of the question. Re-reading I see I totally missed - if not a certificated pilot. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, you sign the engine log book with an entry done in accordance with 43.9 (a) Most of us also include that the engine was satisfactorily leak checked as well. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not clear why since every modern Mooney has the battery(s) in the back? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually to be really discerning on the terminology, we have bounces and we have porpoising. The distinction in porpoising requires the nose wheel to hit first on a bounce which then leads to increasingly nose high bounces until real serious damage or its corrected. Bouncing alone, off the mains, will still occur if the plane doesn't settle on the runway gently as wings are losing lift to support it. Thus one can bounce from stalling the wings up to high and falling out of the sky from several feet or just coming down too quickly without holding it off with too much speed and lift. But its the latter bounce with too much speed while the wings still have plenty of lift that will very easily lead to porpoising if the pilot doesn't prevent (hold off) the nose wheel from contacting before the mains. I've seen a bad bounce rupture the rubber disk in the nose wheel from falling out of the sky! Flaring too high is the time to ease a bit of power back in to cushion the landing. Frankly the Ovation is easier to land than vintage birds, its more stable. Although some people like to deploy speed brakes in the flare I personally hate the idea of making any large configuration changes while flaring (speed brakes or flaps). Just be patient and hold it off (unless its a very strong x-wind and then fly it on gently if really necessary). On the ground though I've been know to raise flaps and/or pop speed brakes on short fields but we have to be really careful - too many people have raised the gear intending to raise flaps for the ultimate short field approach (and not impossible in a Mooney as we've read about here as well).

Of course there is no ADS-B lightning strike data available yet, but as mentioned their is talk of adding it and has been for a few years. And although a spherics device is the only true real time device I surely would not discount the 5+ min delayed XM and WSI strike data as "useless" any more than the 15 min NEXRAD data. Yes, one should know better than try to rely on for it tactical usage. But it has very valuable strategic usage to those of us on longer cross country flights. For instance, my WX-500 helps ensuring keeping a healthy distance away from any nearby storms, while my XM is showing me the big picture out several hundred miles which allows me to deviate around large disturbance areas before I ever get that close and have to make much larger course deviations. Without the XM lightning data I would have no ability to distinguish convective weather from non-convective at a distance till I got close enough to see it with my WX-500 within a reasonably accurate range (which frankly isn't that accurate at all). We really don't have the technology in our GA planes for real tactical avoidance but we do have some awesome strategic tools; at least compared to before satellite based NEXRAD and lightning data in the cockpit.

NOAA only makes the cloud to ground data available publicly for redistribution. The data we have access to in the cockpit is limited to cloud to ground strikes. It all stems from the public domain data NOAA provides that is redistributed by NOAA and to us in the air by Sirus XM and WSI. It is quite interesting how Vaisala has been working on adding cloud to cloud strikes (or strokes as the scientific papers refer too).to their NLDN and although as you said, NOAA has access to this. NOAA's access is limited to internal forecasting use and NOAA agreement forbids them from sharing this data real time outside of NOAA and the military A little reading on this reveals that its actually quite difficult to accurately map cloud to cloud strikes compared to ground strikes. Vaisala reported only 50% detection efficiency in 2015 and the more public Blitzortung.org group that can't distinguish between intra-cloud and ground strikes also echos that. So currently the real time public domain NLDN that's available to us in the cockpit remains to ground strikes only. see https://my.vaisala.net/en/press/news/2017/Pages/Page_2096429.aspx http://www.nco.ncep.noaa.gov/sib/restricted_data/restricted_data_pmb/lightning/

What real time lightning data source do you know that includes more than cloud to ground data? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Great to see. But lightning, if and when it's included, will still be limited to ground based strike's. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i certainly understand that, but NEXRAD radar through XM or ADS-B FIS-B do not include lighting strikes. XM does include lightning strikes with their higher end packages but keep in mind they only include ground strikes and none of the more common cloud-to-cloud strikes important in developing convection.

Neither is touch screen only. The GTN has a knob just like the older GNS series so you can use either.

I don't know - the jack is just the first step and lots of things can go wrong leaving the plane unsecured on single jack; especially on a ramp. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There has to be a major error here. Typical mid bodies are in the low to mid 40" cg. Go through the superceded W&B and Iam sure you'll find the issue. Pretty crazy if it's been being flown since importing without a valid W&B, so glad you're helping the owner/pilot out. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As@Bob_Belville suggested, after you verity it's the unit, send it to L3 for servicing. But if you have a compatible MFD or GPS consider putting the repair cost towards a WX-500 integrated solution instead. That will allow displaying it's output in combination with XM or FIS-B nexrad etc Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Define extra segments? All I can tell is it looks like it has a burned out segment for the 4 in what might be 346 or worse if it should be an 8. But display issues like missing segments are not field repairable. But if it was me, i'd find another location and upgrade to the 830 before fixing the display. Incidentally, most display issues are caused from over tightening the attach screws. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not really, I don't believe their will be any hard cutoff. I expect there will be plenty of overlap to give people choices. It's going to take time, but they have the interest in glass equipped Mooneys which are plentiful. Hard cutoffs like that would be unprecedented with Garmim. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk