kortopates

I transition trained a recent PPL to the 231. It took quite awhile, much longer than it should have. Mainly because the guy was a very busy business owner. Most weeks we flew once, and occasionally twice or not at all. When he was ready to be signed off I felt he had likely done twice the hours he should have needed. But a significant reason for extra time was that he never learned cross wind landings in his private and he really learned them for the first time in the Mooney. I insisted on proficiency in them in part because his planned frequent destinations required it (desert south west). When he was done he was good at them and knew his aircraft systems and all his equipment as well as the emergency procedures - which is a giant leap from the simple C172. Find yourself a good Mooney specific instructor that knows turbo's in your area and work with him. Turbo knowledge is critical too so that the instructor can teach you how to properly manage the engine to improve longevity. My other suggestion is to take your time because your "needs" so to speak will change drastically as you advance and become more experienced. So your more experienced pilot partner will actually be a huge asset in helping to guide you. I am 252 owner. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You absolutely can put the 115 ft3 tank in. Your A&P or shop should have no problem figuring it out with your Models IPC to get the correct model tank. That will avoid otherwise unnecessary paper work. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bravo! pun intended of course, very well done Dave!

I think you're wise enough to realize threads on this and most forums take on their own directions based on the most recent post(s). In reality, your just one element in the conversation among many. Keeping involved as you have been doing is probably the only way to get the information you seek. I think its a pretty civil and friendly too but I think any forum that allows people to be anonymous is not going to be as civil and respectful as one that requires identities. I am primarily basing that opinion though on the Bonanza group that I think is best behaved forum I am aware of. But I don't peruse that many - these are too time consuming! The operating cost question is way too general of a question for me to touch. Virtually no two pilot owners maintain and operate their aircraft in a similar manner. At the very expensive end is the operator that way use his plane to commute for business that needs to maximize his/her dispatch rate and minimize downtime for maintenance. Such a owner will also more likely acquire replacement parts as new or exchange and overnight them if need be. They are also more likely to tend to address squawks right away rather than allow them to accumulate. And they are less likely to have the time to participate in doing any of their own maintenance. The other extreme is the owner that maintains their birds entirely on condition, always trying to repair their parts before buying any part on exchange, and generally very involved in their planes maintenance often doing the full extent of allowed owner preventive maintenance. The the budgets between the two aren't even close to one another. To certain extent that even carries over into hangar, insurance and other fixed cost that would think are pretty standard but their not. But their are specifics you can focus on, like the typical inspection cost for a specific model in your area - but not annual cost cause then we're back to big variations.

Thanks for your vote of confidence Mitch. I wish those topics weren't taboo for me but of course that kind of information has to be left to company officials, the marketing dept and PR folks. I will add one more sentiment as to why my optimism is so much higher since coming to China these past 6 weeks. And understand 6 weeks is nothing - I am still a neophyte here with Mooney and only a pilot. But since coming here I have seen the bigger picture. Some time ago, perhaps shortly after Jerry took the helm of Mooney, he related that they had very well defined road map or plans for the next 5, 10, 15 years (or thereabouts) for the company's future. That's an understatement! The big disconnect I see in America is that we are all limited to the myopic view of the M20's - or more specifically Kerrville. But the reality is that the M20's are only the tip of the iceberg of a much bigger picture. The M20's are just one piece of a much larger plan with much greater commitment than I could have imagined till coming here; and that's why my enthusiasm and optimism have increased so much since arriving. Of course I am not the person that can get into specific's. But I can illustrate by referencing some public information. To begin with the commonly referred too "Chinese investors" is the Meijing Group. A quick five second read on the whom they are is here: http://www.bloomberg.com/Research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapid=247899467 The fascinating thing to me is that Meijing group is a huge China success story very much like Amazon or Facebook in the US; excepts its roots are in real estate development. I am using the internet comparison because that's more my background. Meijing is led by Veronica, the CEO (forgive me, but I can't even say, let alone spell her last name!, so I'll refer to her by her English first name.) Veronica is a China Dream success story come true and is very young and beautiful to boot. Although her company was founded on real estate development she has since diversified into other areas including aviation, health care management, wine industry and more. The best reference I am currently aware of that illustrates her sense of where she's going with Mooney and GA in China is this web page: http://www.mjgroup.cn/xinwenzhongxin/jituanxinwen/2015-01-15/1282.html (If you bring this up in a browser like Chrome its makes it very easy to use the google translate feature to make it somewhat readable,) The first picture is the hangar-factory of where I am based now at Soaring. The second picture includes Veronica in middle. (I have seen much better pictures of her and if you peruse the their website you'll see more of her elsewhere). The third picture is a new Acclaim, known as "Zhengzhou No. 1", that was a milestone of sorts to demonstrate how a new Mooney coming off the Kerrville's production line can then be partially disassembled for crating and shipment to China and then reassembled here at Soaring to become a Chinese certified and registered Mooney for sale. The point of this though, although not well depicted in the one article referenced, is that Veronica and her company's strategic focus is on the bigger picture of building their future GA market share in China rather than a US centric concern of the M20's competitiveness with Cirrus sales in the US. I suspect our beloved M20's are just one small part, although a vital part, of their future plans for GA in China. No doubt short term goals of getting the M10's and Ultra's certified and into production are critical too. But I really believe they have the long term view and resources to see this through and can survive the typical hiccups along the way. They also appear to be very savvy and the reality that Mitch alluded too about business being business is very real; meaning the only certainty is that they will continue to evolve their plans and goals to meet the needs of the perceived market place; and I am referring to the China marketplace where the potential is so much bigger than the US. I remain hopeful and optimistic that the M20's and Kerrville will continue to play a vital role in all this.

It happens a lot. The cheap Chicago cabinet locks used wear over the many years we have put them into service and then the vibration causes them to rotate down into the locked position. You're going to need new locks or it will continue to happen at a greater frequency. You can replace them with same cheap Chicago locks of you can go to a much better quality and more secure Medeco locks. If you really want to enhance security you can also re-key the ignition with a Medeco lock (as the factory currently does) in addition to the cabin door and baggage door. But I just did the two doors myself. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You bet I am. I am very lucky - I get to contract with two of my most favorite company's in Aviation: Mooney and Mike Busch's Savvy Maintenance! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hi Larry, Yes I'll be here through Sept 22. Who knows, but I might even come back out for some airshows. I am in the Kansas of China, literally the middle of the country in Zhengzhou, capital of Henan. It's a city of 12million, but I am located 30mi east of downtown in the suburb Shangjie with an airport that is known as the GA and Experimental Capital of China. A location shared by many other aviation businesses in China. But although my location is nearby some tourist destinations, including the Shaolin Temple (Birthplace of Kung Fu), my location is far removed from tourism, which makes me a Class B celebrity I think I am the first western seen by a great many of the locals. To make the point further, when I walk around it's very common for people to ask to take my picture, but in China that means a picture of us both together. I hardly mind since 90% of those brave enough to ask are young woman. So I'll usually ask for one with my phone and I have quite a collection already. Don't get me started on the airspace issues. It makes no sense and seems arbitrary and capricious. But when you need higher you'll get higher but in the south and east my limited understanding is yes, you'll be kept down to around 1000m for short hops. But for longer hops that go west and north you can get cleared into the O2 altitudes. The good news is that the government is reviewing these restrictions right now and I understand they have given assurances to lift them in s few years. But as I tried to allude to earlier, they need more than the support of the CAAC (Chinese FAA) they also need the support of the military which the CAAC has no authority over. Personally, I think the GA community here needs some lobbyist in Beijing to keep pushing the airspace issues further. One last point. To me the big China irony is that the roads are complete chaos with traffic, between cars, scooters, bikes etc with hardly anybody seemingly obey traffic lights. But not in the sky where it's far far more conservative or lacking in sharing the airspace with other traffic. Regarding infrastructure though. I am very impressed with airport facilities out here. They had the land and didn't mess around and built large airports with large runways and huge terminals to allow for lots of future growth. Radar surveillance is pretty thorough too but of course we have no satellite based weather so frankly it's hard to fly with out after so many years of flying with it. It's Almost like flying in Mexico and Central America. On ownership, my understanding is it is not yet possible for a private citizens to own an aircraft. Instead, aircraft are owned by businesses which include FBO and clubs that provide and maintain the aircraft and in some cases even pilots. But private ownership is probably not far off. But I agree with many of your points; especially that Chinese ownership will help a lot here. I am on Wechat when you make it over here. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I must say I was also very impressed by George's graphics too - and how quickly he put them together since responses were flying back and forth at er - Mooney speeds! I was beginning to wonder if he was also a physics professor like my wife and Erik.

You don't say what kind of vacuum pump. I will say this though in an effort to be helpful, some of the vacuum pump manufacturers provide their own specific gasket for their pumps (e.g. Tempest. if that applies to your pump, make sure they are using the correct gasket and not the generic part number.

I think the more modern the aircraft the more accurate the POH data is. Mine is very close.

Although book values may have their marketing biases to some degree - so I can't disagree with you. However overall I think book values provide a more objective comparison compared to what I expect would be our more subjective reports. Where you aware that 252 POH book cruise speeds are ~10 kts faster than the 231 book speeds (for same power of course)? Perhaps a bit exaggerated but Mooney did a lot to reduce drag with the 252 cowl and airframe - one drawback though is that 252 only has one naca vent on the co-pilot side. i.e, I don't have your naca vent on the pilot side too because in theory it reduced drag. I wonder though. The cowling was a bigger real improvement though.

Not confusing - just a typo that I really thought I had corrected but will go back to correct again - yes I meant critical altitude for sure since I was referring to climb rate - not ceilings. Thanks!!

The 231, unmodified, is very limited with its incomplete turbo installation and why its critical altiutde is only around (IRC) 15300'. Contrast that with a real full turbo installation of the 252 with many other enhancements that raise the critical altitude to 23000'. Here is the 252 rate of climb chart. At 14000' the 310HP R/S model ROC has dropped to approx 525'/min while the 252 is doing 1000'! 252 Rate of Climb.pdf

I think this is spot on. I am midway into a short-term gig flying for Mooney Intl in China and I am super excited about Mooney's prospects here in China. GA is truly on the verge of an explosion here. There is a growing affluent middle class in China that is developing a pent up demand for GA. Not just to become pilots but also to leverage the potential utility of GA travel by hiring both plane and pilot for travel. But just looking at the growing pilot training interest here the only real competitors are new Cessna and Cirrus. China doesn't have an old 60's to 70's era GA fleet to draw on for training here; all GA training is being done with new imported aircraft, mostly Cessna and Cirrus. We all know the new Cessna and Cirrus trainers are very expensive. From my view, only the Cessna Turbo Skyhawk JT-A. and the Mooney M10T & J are positioned for success here because of their diesel engines. AVGAS is available but still rare here; giving a strong edge to those powered by Jet-A. Both Cessna and Mooney are using the same Continental CD Diesel engines. But just like in our beloved M20's series, the M10T & J should should provide much improved efficiency and economy with their modern sleek composite lighter airframes. The M10J retractable will use the same larger CD-155 used in the Cessna but have a 11" wider cabin and in theory cruise over 30 kts faster than the Cessna. The fixed gear M10T uses the smaller more fuel efficient CD-135. I am making these comparisons solely to make the point that here in China the bar is not as high as you might think to be a big success in the GA training market that will explode in a few more years. Currently there are no 2+1 modern trainer airframes available here. My sense of the Chinese culture here is that although safety is very important, speed and efficiency far out weights concerns for a parachute and the M10T and M20J really look to blow away the foreseeable training competitors here. In addition to the aircraft, Mooney is also able to provide Redbird Full Motion simulators for their M20's due to their teaming with Redbird. I am sure that will enhance their competitiveness here in the training market; which is not individual owners but flight schools that will operate at the fleet level. For the advanced pilots, the M20's will of course have to compere head on with the Cirrus here just like in America but personally I think Mooney still has a lot of time to work on improving its competitiveness if it really needs too. Its already getting lots of interest for being the fastest production aircraft. But I agree with Scott that improving useful load is more likely the bigger market factor. Still though success here in China is not just in the hands of the manufacturers. Unlike in America, it's seemingly much more complicated here by vast restricted airspace, government regulations and the military use of the airspace. I have been told that the government here is very committed to opening the airspace and claims they will within a few years (around ADS-B time in the US). A greater uncertainty though is the military's willingness to share the airspace with GA. Currently the government really has no control over the military, that is really going to have to come down from upper level government in Beijing. Air pollution is the other red herring that will challenge initial training that requires VFR conditions; especially to get away from the traffic pattern. So there are a lot of other complicating factors out of the control of airplane manufactures adding a lot of risk to the future GA timeline here. I suspect these issues will slow things down some but I really doubt they can stop the inevitable explosion of GA here. And for that I am really excited for Mooney - from my view they seem very well poised to be a winner.

I'd like a copy too if possible? But thanks for pointing this out as I was unaware but I imagine I could get one from Dan at LASAR too.

Honestly George, you don't have to live at a high density altitude location to benefit from the turbo and the redundancy of the 252. I have no disagreement that many turbo flights are done low. But on an average most of us make many more short flights than the make longer x-country flights and those short flights are usually done low for obvious reasons. But I can't recall ever a time that I went of any distance at or below 12K; I am always higher regardless of the direction. Plus I can't tell you how many times my flight would have been delayed at least a day if I didn't have the turbo capabilities to get on top and fly over the weather rather than it. And with the potential threat of icing, typically a NA aircraft evening with service ceilings in the low flight levels can be very disadvantaged with poor climb rates when they need to climb quickly. And like Jack expressed, redundancy has bailed me out numerous times being away from home, including having lost an alternator once in southern Mexico. It's something I would think you would value more as I assume your background is multi and turbine than single engine piston - but I may have misinterpreted your comments. Don't get me wrong either though, I think the 310 HP S & R's are excellent planes. But I also fly a new Acclaim for Mooney and I love it, but given the trade off's between the economy of operation and the faster speed of the Acclaim, I'll keep my 252 for now - which is also nearly fully converted to the Encore, which in IMHO. As for the O2 cannula and mask - using O2 has never bothered me. I don't know why some people don't like it and refer to it as a negative as you do. Even the NA crowd (which I like to poke fun at - all in jest :)) would benefit from less fatigue on longer x-country's in the lower teens if they used it. Known Ice FIKI is available for the 252 & Encore; so didn't understand your comment unless you were referring to a specific installation (maybe Jack's). I do agree entirely though that we may all prioritize our needs differently. For me, I could never imagine going back to a normally aspirated engine.

I can't see the gap, but I assume from the picture you are referring to a gap in the rear engine baffling - probably on the center side where its close to the engine and alternator. But this isn't the firewall but rear engine baffling. Good job though in finding and plugging the air leaks. At Savvy, we are always telling our clients to focus on the baffling after we have ruled out the other items as you have and we see symptoms like yours. Many A&Ps tell our pilots the baffling is fine, but the clients that persist and persevere as you did often make very significant progress. I am not sure what the tape is doing on the upper rear flexible baffling material - possibly covering slits? But this is a very common overlooked area. One really has to check this area carefully with the top cowling in place - putting a shop light where the alternator/oil cooler helps since if you see light coming through from the front air inlets then you know you have significant leakage. At least that how I suggest checking that area. One also has to ensure the flexible baffling is either not so worn and flexible or too far from the top cowl mating surface that it can easily fold over in flight allowing huge air flow losses. Newer stiff silicone baffling usually cures that if the gap is not too large.

Really it's all about Anthony's #2 - the only real effect is that it will seem like it takes forever to accelerate to rotation speed as a lot more runway goes by and once airborne it will seem like a long time to accelerate to Vy - because it is. But the difference is entirely because the higher the DA the more TAS becomes greater than IAS. The airplane pretty much performs identically at any altitude at the same IAS - it obviously just takes a lot longer to get up to a faster TAS. #1 is actually a plus and why a TC aircraft will go ~2 Kts TAS faster for every 1000' DA increase in altitude with the same power (IAS will be the same) which is why us turbo guys don't like to stay low and share the crowded sub-teen airspace with the likes of the NA crowds that have no clue on what they're missing out on. [emoji846] The inexperienced NA pilot will suggest a turbo only becomes useful with a tailwind - typically going east. Although there is some truth to that, the reality is more often the NA pilot will be flying lower under, in or between layers with the weather and turbulence while the turbo pilot will find smooth sunny VMC conditions on top of it all. What about those fierce head winds? They're there alright, but rarely does the head wind component go up with altitude uniformly and faster than the 2kts per 1000' we gain in TAS meaning that by closely looking at the winds aloft you'll find an altitude that minimizes the headwind component and very rarely is it less than 10K out west were I fly. (Good flight planning apps take this into account for us). But even when it's is, I'll gladly take a few minutes penalty to climb to smooth sunny VMC air than cruise in the bumps to save some time. After all, the bumps rob you of a significant amount of airspeed anyway. Read the other thread of the K owner that just bought the 231 and flew his first x-xctry trip from Ohio to the west coast - he sure gets the utility now as you will hopefully too. Lastly I highly recommend you skip the 231's and go for the 252's or MB modified 231 (e.g. 262 mod) if you can afford it. With the MB you get a true complete turbo with a hydraulic controller that is often referred to as the "set and forget controller" which makes its an entirely different engine with numerous advantages discussed at length elsewhere. But they're rare and hence why we have many more 231 pilots on these pages that will argue they'll get much of the same performance with a highly mod'd 231 - there is a lot of truth to that but the MB is vastly simpler to operate and much better adapted to flying in the flight levels. If useful load is a concern; go for the 252 encore conversion or encore. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's highly unusual that a seller would help subsidize PPI cost. Heck, many brokers squawk very loudly at even taking the plane off field for a PPI in fear of the possible cost they may incur to get it back if something goes wrong away from their home base. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks Kortopates. I didn't know you could do a one time STC with the help of a DER. I spoke to the original installers today, and they will make an appointment to get a FAA Field Approval. I'm just hoping this works, otherwise I might have to pull out the HID's and intall LED's to make it legal. I'm told the FAA in Georgia is General Aviation friendly. Thanks again for your assistance. That's great news and really the best way to resolve this. The shop should not have any problem getting a field approval since the STC covered the K whose airframe is identical to the J model. ( and the F model too). You misunderstood John though - he has an F model that he installed the Ovation wing light housing into his F wing and then installed HID's into the housing. His field approval may be helpful if your lights are also in the wing which I am assuming they are. But your installer really won't have a problem getting approval with the Precise lights. The FAA is much less sympathetic with folks that buy unapproved HID's when there are approved options available and then want their help to install - that's when they don't care but you're not doing that. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Paul, JPI provided me with a snubber valve that fixed the fluctuating MAP problem several years ago. Chasing a different problem (OP, as I recall) I shipped them the unit and the transducers. While they had the unit they updated the firmware which was nice in that the new ver. allowed flipping the RPM & MAP displays. Do you know if they have to have the unit to update firmware? I know with the non-TSO'd units that the firmware can be updated in the field quite easily - because I have done it multiple times. But I can't say for sure on the the TSO'd units but I haven't updated one them yet and since they have locked down a lot of what used to be configurable claiming it would violate their TSO requirements it makes me wonder. They certainly have the means to support it but it would probably take a call to JPI to verify. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I suggest making an appointment at your local FSDO to get their advice for options here. There is always the option of getting a one time STC with the help of DAR but it will cost $. LED's are an option too but not cheap and a significant down grade. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

With so many different options for iPad mounts, cases and glare protection it's not surprising many of the combinations used are prone to overheating. But given so many of us don't have overheating problems I do believe if you select all your accessories carefully with regarding to overheating you should avoid this issue; even if you have it always on and charging - just in case you do need it as a backup unexpectedly. Mine is securely mounted on the yoke with a MyGo flight mount in my personal aircraft, my preferred method, on Velcro'd around my thigh in students airplanes. Never a problem. I also use the MyGo Flight glass protector and glare shield. I know there are many others solutions that will work too. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You can't go back to the original installer in GA to get the paperwork straightened out? That would be the most straightforward and logical approach unless there is more to the story? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk