kortopates

Not really true as long as you are referring to step down fixed inside of the FAF to MDA. Those step down fixes will be right at the computed descent angle as plotted on the chart and you'll be able to follow the +V glide slope angle to MDA. But you should not be following the glide slope through step down fixes outside of the FAF because those could have mandatory altitudes or maximum altitudes that are below the glide slope. You're not going to have a problem following +V crossing intermediate step down fixes past FAF before MDA. The biggest mistake is following any non-precision approach glide slope during the visual portion of the approach beyond MDA or DH without the required visual cues of 91.175 - this includes LNAV/VNAV, not just +V. Specifically anytime there is not a Visual descent point (VDP) plotted on the profile view, you should be alert for obstacles that penetrate the 20:1 slope between the TCH and the MDA or after descending below MDA. Only if a VDP is plotted are you relatively safe of descending without finding an obstacle penetrating the slope in the visual segment. But this intended to help you fly a stabilized approach to landing - not bust minimums. The key point is to level off at MDA and not descend before we have the cues required by 91.175. It wasn't that long ago, when Garmin provided +V on every non-precision approach with a computed descent angle and then the FAA started zero'ing the computed descent angles out when the FAA discovered pilots where not paying attention and trying to follow them to the runway despite a note that read "VGSI and descent angles not coincident". That note is to warn us that the Visual glide slope/VASI etc angle is not the same as the approach descent angle and therefore the need to level till we pick up the VASI before descending to the threshold because of obstacles. So for quite some time we lost +V on many approaches until Garmin made some updates. The FAA seems to be relaxing their constraints again and is allowing computed glide slopes on approaches that have the coincident issue but lets not forget that these end at MDA.

There are separate 100hr and 500hr inspections. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The article mentions the cell phone ping data placed them by Rogers Pass. I hope they have a better idea than just the vicinity of the pass, but that makes sense. The pass would make sense for anyone following the main highway traversing the range since it goes through at about 4400' in Glacier National Park. But right at the pass, the highway and lower terrrain jogs to the north to get around 3 high peaks just further east of the pass from 9400' to almost 10,800 with the higher one being Mt Sir McDonald which is just a little south of the pass. Wiki says even the pass gets an average November snowfall of about 65" and December gets another 85". Looks like searches will have the same challenges they had finding Steve Fossett due to the snow which preventing his discovery till the the following September - a year later. Of course we all hope the missing couple and plane are found soonest.

In the limitations section and you are correct it says the "selected" tank making you a test pilot because of the concern of unporting the fuel pick up. Of course ferry flights would be the only time most of us would consider flying this way.

Since you bring it up, Stacey mentioned they have cell phone ping data. If so and that was after the crash, that should take them directly to the site. We've seen that to be case a numerous times over the last few years. This was also how a local downed Mooney pilot friend was found after I gave his cell phone to the gal I mentioned above involved in the search. The coordinates took the team directly to the site. I assuming in this case they haven't been able to follow up because of assessility issues given its winter. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Both certified altimeter are quite close to each other and that's what counts considering the G5 altimeter is not certified for primary - only attitude is. So folks might be expecting more than it is? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good point, I wasn't thinking OEM pickup since Paul has a JPI EDM-900 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Revelstoke is where I was assuming. Its a beautiful area as is Penticton which I've visited as well on a Mooney trip. @stacey sorry for your loss. I have a friend that specializes in these kind of searches. She is a fellow colleague at Savvy and she and her company have been involved in many high profile searches. CNN used her many times when they were discussing the lost MH370. I can put you in touch if you PM me. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am not buying it. The 2 mag's are identical part no's - both have impulse coupling. Both are pressurized by the same UDP air and mag air filter. Both are required to be fitted with vented plug that uses a calibrated orifice. The RPM sensor doesn't change this, it fits on as a washer below the vented cap. There is actually an additional washer to protect the rpm sensor - it's quite delicate and easily broken and not cheap. With the only difference being the equivalent of a couple washers under the vented cap, I can't see how he would say that. However, there are some other installations such as the Cirrus SR22T where the Cirrus rpm sensor is being installed without a vented cap and it's lack of a vented cap is suspected of causing a lot early mag failures. But this isn't a problem with our Mooney's Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is no max differential published. But there is an implied one due to the limitation in the POH not to take off without at least 12 gal per tank. If you have a leak in the extended range tank only, you shouldn't have a problem with the main tank at half capacity. The extended tank is dry when the main is at half (18 gal).And likely you can more in than that before you get to the leak. I assume your leak is much worse than a seep, since a seep would not prevent you using it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, all G1000's sample once a sec. This is shown on the bottom of your Savvy data page. Sorry I have not looked at your data online just trying to give you some tips to help. Next steps would be to fix EGT4 and then fly the profile as shown on Savvy WOT at altitude. But as recommended, I'd consider cleaning the injectors soonest if it's been a long time. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unlike CHT probes that would last forever, (except the wires at the base of CHT probes eventually begin to break and cause fluctuations), the EGT probes suffer from tip erosion from being directly in the exhaust stream. In other words the tips of the probe are slowly burned off. When they do they need to be replaced as well. The erratic fluctuations though are usually the probe failing electrically (wires at the base of the probe or loose electrical connection). We've also had a lot of issues with the barrel connectors used on the EI probes. You'll also notice in some planes data you will see a constant low level noise on the EGTs and even CHT probes - this is almost always from poor installation by routing the EGT and CHT harness ty-wrapped directly to ignition leads. For short sections it won't cause problems but when ty-wrapped along ignitions wires from the front to the rear especially on 6 cyl engine it cause a real problem. This is a big no-no spelled out in the installation manual but installers still do it all the time. Why? I think its simply because the average pilot isn't yet very familiar enough with the workings of their engine analyzer and don't realize the issue and don't complain. So the installers continue to do it because they don't get any complaints and therefore think the manufacturers are making a lot a noise about nothing - but your folks data quality suffers. Other non-thermocouple probes are not so sensitive (like oil Pres, Oil Temp, MAP, RPM etc) but thermocouple probe wires need to be routed away from ignition leads and high current cables (e.g., alternator output) to provide the least background noise.

You should be able to get much better gami spreads. 0.8-1.0 isn't even believable. Truth is getting good gami spreads is not easy till you get some practice and set up your engine monitor. I suggest you read our Savvy Test profile instructions and do some testing http://content.savvyanalysis.com/static/pdf/SavvyAnalysisFlightTestProfiles.pdf But what @Txbyker Russ said about data sampling rate is your first priority. Before you can collect good data you'll need to set your monitors data sampling rate to its fastest rate, preferably in the 1-2 sec range, or the fastest it will support upto 1 sec rate. If you are truly not getting better than about 1 GPH there is something else wrong. The IO-550's do pretty well, some need gami's but its not the norm yet many will benefit by them. Looking at your EGT spread though, if you haven't has the injectors cleaned in awhile I'd suggest cleaning them to see if that can bring in the lean outliers 6, 2 & 1 in closer. I see what you mean about 4, its not the cause of your large spread, but we don't yet know where it will fall when the probe issue is fixed, but I'd guess on the rich side.

What they cover is pretty well spelled out so I would review the policy with that in mind. But doubt you’ll find anything to address lost airplane logs and for sure your pilot log book is not covered. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You won't be able to get an accurate gami spread until you correct the EGT5 problem. If the fluctuations are uncorroborated by CHT4 I would be checking the EGT4 probe connection - make sure it's secure and tight. I wouldn't conclude an injector issue yet without CHT corroboration. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Clearly they are only for un-enclosed light installations. It doesn't look like their imbedded antenna design is at all compatible with enclosed lights but they could be working on something to support them - but this isn't it. Pretty cool though for a lot of planes. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The new GTN750 does in one box everything that your old combo did. You also can consider the Avidyne as well. Finally understand why you are having the issue. If your seat is full forward you really need the 3" rudder pedal extensions. That will get you further back so you can see the panel better. I'd do that first before making any panel changes since that should fix the main issue you're having now. These can be ordered through your favorite MSC and are not expensive. You really don't want anything in the far right that you are trying to read - it's too far away to be useful. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For the 310HP, the -G is configured as a -N, so you're going by the -N. I thought I explained that above but it doesn't show in Tapatalk. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly! When Mag teeth break off the ozoned out wheel (as opposed from maintenance) they seem to break most often right at startup and shutdown. So I prefer to check after every shutdown/startup, regardless if I just did a LOP Mag check before landing. Although in this scenario you'll most likely have a dead mag and should be real obvious. many things can happen including fouling a single plug from a rich descent which won't be quite so obvious.

Enjoy your flight!

I posted it above 3 post up, but for some reason only the bottom portion was visible till I just edited it above. The table shows a high number of 27.3 GPH and suggest targeting for 1 GPH higher or 28.3 GPH.

Perhaps the most scenic and spectacular tour around here is the 500' Class B transition around Linbergh on the coast called the Bay Tour. Its not documented anywhere officially but it begins just a couple miles north of Crystal Pier (on the sectional) where you call up SAN Tower (Lindbergh) and ask for the coastal transition at 500. Once they clear you into the Bravo, they will hand you off to North Island tower pretty quickly (so have your radios setup beforehand). When you contact North Island, just tell them you would like to do the bay tour. They will usually have you check in when rounding Point Loma, then you just fly dead center at 800' over the bay. A little before the bridge, they will ask your intentions (if you want to keep going south to Brown, turn around in south bay, etc). That's is very quick summary. There are some videos of this on youtube covering more of the details. Here is an example by one our own Mooneyspace mooney's @StinkBug If the Bay Tour sounds a bit too complicated for what you want I would recommend the VFR corridor over Lindbergh and then over the Bay along downtown. But this higher at 3500' southbound and 4500' northbound but is well documented on the San Diego TAC and doesn't require all the radio work, instead it uses special freq of 126.050 to talk to other corridor traffic. You could takeoff from MYF, climb to 3500 and go south and either make a 180 down south and come back north the same way at 4500' or you could drop to stay above 3000' but below 3500' and transition over Brown Field (above their Delta) and then up along the east side of San Miguel (below the Bravo ceiling of 3500'). Call MYF Tower abeam San Miguel for landing and then make a left for landing when exiting the Class B at the Cotton Woods gold course and aim right of Mt Helix back to MYF. That will make a loop out of the tour. Lastly the easiest of all low level coastline tours would be from Mt Soledad (VPSMS) up the coast line at 1500' below the bravo 1800' ceiling up to Del Mar or as far as you would like to go. But watch out for CRQ's delta along the coastline that goes to 2800' if you don't talk to them. But you can also get flight following for this off MYF with SOCAL on 119.6 (ask for it before departure with MYF ground to make it easiest for you).

Bendix makes a pressurized version of big tractor style S-1200 called the S-1250. Its used on some turbo's that like the 252 are certified to FL280, and RAM for example uses it on their Cessna 421 engine. As you bring it up, those larger tractor style mags are far more durable and reliable. But the problem is the vast majority if not all Turbo engine where the mags are installed on the back on the accessory case along with the TCM starter adapter that you couldn't possibly fit a pair of the larger footprint mags there. The space is just too tight. You are are left with small footprint mags by either Slick or Bendix. And really size seems to be everything, once you get into the smaller footprint sizes, the mags need a lot more maintenance regardless of whom makes them. But pressurized turbo mags flown IMC really need to be opened annually (or every 100 hrs) since the mag filter isn't at all 100% effective in keeping the mag dry.

My experience is the pressurized mag needs to be opened up every year; especially when operating through moisture (e.g., IMC and rain etc). The 500 hr IRAN must also be done every 5 years if not sooner and the magneto filter needs to get changed with every 500 hr inspection - if it doesn't show signs of contamination earlier. RAM's PMA's filter is better and more affordable than Continentals one too. Pressurized mags operate in a much harsher environment unlike the large footprint normally aspirated mags (like the Bendix S1200) that have been known to go to TBO without every being opened up. I'd be surprised if the other mag is much better looking inside.

SID 97-3 has been incorporated in CMI M-0 manual now. Mooney's M20-107 is for the original M20S & R's (240 and 280HP) and is not applicable to the 310HP variant. The 310HP is based on the G being setup as a IO-550-N and uses the IO-550-N numbers shown above. The table above is from the current CMI M-O manual dated July 2017 As @MIm20c suggest, its certainly important to talk to the shop to discuss your desire to set it up to the high number (rather than just in the range), such as by plus 1 GPH. I wouldn't set it up higher till it was shown to be really warranted.