kortopates

You need a minimum of 30 sec on each mag; preferably at a 1 sec sampling rate. plus you need to be leaned out to stress ignition; preferably at 50F LOP on richest cyl at less than 65% power. ground mag test will only show severe anomalies and are otherwise generally useless. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Once you get to know all of the great capabilities of the GI-275 I doubt you'll feel the same need for the old KI-209 Even without changing the #1 GI-275 out of Attitude mode, which you could do or toggle between HSI and ADI given you have the D3 for attitude also. But even in ADI mode you can enable both lateral and vertical deviation indicators - see page 41 of the GI-275 Pilots Guide, here is the pertinent extract: When valid navigation data is available, the 'CDI', 'HSI', and 'HSI Map' Pages always show deviation information. On the 'ADI' Page, lateral and vertical deviation indicators are not enabled by default. If deviation indicators on the 'ADI' Page are enabled before unit poweroff, deviations will be displayed after unit restart. Units configured as a Standby HSI cannot disable deviation indication display on the 'ADI' Page. Enabling/disabling deviation display on the 'ADI' Page: 1) From the 'ADI' Page, open the menu and select Options > NAV Options. 2) Select the CRS Devs Button to toggle displaying lateral and vertical deviation information. And if you have Synthetic Vision enabled on the ADI you get something even more powerful once your on final approach - the Flight Path Marker. The Flight Path Marker provides a 3D lateral and vertical deviation indication in the form a small green circle and is simple and intuitive to use. By just adjusting heading and pitch/descent rate such that the Flight Path marker is pointing to the threshold of the runway, it will keep you on center lines and GP before a deviation is even registered. Its a very powerful tool you'll want to master. Check it out on page 242 of the same manual

Isn’t the AP coming off the KI-275? In which case you use Nav with VOR-2 and not need the KI-209? With dual GI-275’s just don’t see a need to keep the KI-209 - but don’t entirely understand your AP setup but it seems that’s what should be driving the AP. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This often happens when the induction boot isn’t attached properly and the duct/boot causes an obstruction. Or the magnet is out of adjustment - but the later is rare. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks, I missed that for some reason but I did recall your post about the missing MC rods for the newer MC used for the Encore and should have realzed. No real cruise performance gains, the 10 HP is much like the Ovation3 upgrade and Acclaim upgrade, intended just for takeoff and climb performance. Of course a pilot could choose to operate cruise at little higher if they wanted too. But from a engine longevity standpoint that wouldn't be wise. The brakes don't stop any faster/shorter either but we don't have to replace the pad as frequently with twice as many per caliper now. Yes, the extra 230 lb useful load is everything in this conversion raising the useful to be better than most Bravo's and its the last in a line of fuel efficient Mooney.s.

This is very new online course and Rod is very good - hr doesn’t focus on memorizing question-answers but makes it easy to understand so you can apply it. https://rodmachado.com/products/rod-machados-instrument-pilot-eground-school Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You did the Encore conversion? I thought you bought a 252 - that was fast if you just did the conversion! Me too on the useful, over 1120! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Incorrect, But Ross @Shadrach was correct above. True it isn't applicable to @A64Pilot 's J model The smooth elevators discussion is only mentioned in background discussion which has nothing to do with the applicability section of the AD which states . (c) Applicability Mooney International Corporation Model M20C, M20D, M20E, M20F, and M20G airplanes, all serial numbers up to 680170 inclusive, certificated in any category. You have to comply with Step 1 to verify you don't have the composite weights.

No the owner was concerned enough after reading the SB to ask if his airplane was affected, he personally made the choice and took the SB words "before next flight" seriously. And now he's glad he did.

From the AD: (j) Material Incorporated by Reference (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise. (i) Mooney International Corporation Service Bulletin M20-345A, dated December 13, 2022. ...... (g) Required Action (2) If any hybrid elevator balance weight P/N 430018-1 is installed, before further flight after the effective date of this AD and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 100 hours time-in-service or 12 months, whichever occurs first, inspect each hybrid elevator balance weight P/N 430018-1 for any corrosion and cracks in accordance with STEP 2 of the Instructions section in Mooney International Corporation Service Bulletin M20-345A, dated December 13, 2022.

I know one owner that is glad he didn't wait till annual. He complied a couple of months ago and to his and his mechanics surprise saw one of his weights disintegrate while removing it,

After re-finishing and re-installing the weight, they call for rebalancing the elevator. SB here: https://www.mooney.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/sbm20-345A.pdf

Corrosion isn't always visible till the weight has been removed and the paint removed to look it over. We have one client whose weight had enough paint on it that it didn't look problematic. But when it was removed it too disintegrated where the solid bolt like material went through it - like the picture Don showed above. That was very surprising to the owner. So I get why Mooney requires removal and paint stripping to give it a detailed visual inspection. Then after refinishing them and re-installing them the SB echo's the MM to rebalance the elevator. Its really a ticking time bomb as some others have mentioned. And why I think just one visual inspection is enough to buy time to get the new weights when they're available and be done with the inspections.

You really need to read step 2 of the SB if you do believe you have the composite weights. Especially everyone that keeps claiming this is a non-event "visual inspection" because they obviously haven't read it and are just assuming. A big clue is the 6 hrs the FAA allows for step 2 "visual inspection". My prediction is that anyone with composite weights, once they get to know the facts will do the 6 hr visual inspection one time to get their Mooney flying again and promptly get on the factories list for the new weights and install the new weights before or when the next "visual inspection" is due! Or find a pair of salvage weight now if able and be done with it one time Nobody is going to want to comply with the "visual inspection" every annual - its not so trivial at all at 6hrs. The AD quotes 10 hrs to replace the weights and then no more 6 hr inspections every year. see SIM20-145 for the paperwork to get on Mooney's list (and see your added pre-flight responsibilities) https://www.mooney.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/sim20-145.pdf

Great story, I was the only boy and grew up with 3 older sisters- but they were great to me. I hope “mellowed” means no more broken bones, but trust me, you haven’t started to “age” at 35! I am almost twice your age and also still hit the gym every other day plus mountain bike and climb for cardio. It helps with my useful load Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Personally, the R1 is easier to install, which means cheaper labor, than getting a factory one working that is missing the sensor on the mag. Its only $550. The JPI sensor for the pressurized mags in $360. I have both RPM indications - R1 and EDM-900.

You must at least have the TCM precision tunes injectors. Not as good as Gami's but often good enough. But without at least those virtually any IO-550 will have a spread of at least 0.8 GPH.

No, nor did students get any say. But hint. Very small school district and the student parking garage had a few Corvettes, Porsches and other exotic cars you wouldn't expect to see driven by HS students. Not me though, I rode a bike to school and didn't get a car till I left town for college.

The high school i went to had two oil wells - not disguised then. Paid for several enhancements most high schools didn’t have like a planetarium and a gymnasium with a moving floor that uncovered a swimming pool or covered it for a basket ball court and more… Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In addition to what Eric says above, also check for any chaffing in the wire harness between the probe junction and the firewall. Any found chaffing needs to be repaired with shrink sleeving since it can lead to grounding of the thermocouple wire.

JPI uses grounded Type K probes (Red and Yellow) ever since '85. If the Alcor # is also a grounded Type K, then the JPI is compatible - but if not keep looking. JPI started using grounded probes since '85, before that they used ungrounded. Grounded probes are in theory faster acting probes which is why JPI made the switch. The thermocouple junction is grounded at the tip of the probe to improve heat transfer and make them more responsive. You can test a probe to tell if its grounded by disconnecting the probe from the instrument and measure the resistance between the probe body and the red wire. Also measure between probe body and yellow wire. ‘Ungrounded’ probes will show open circuit. ‘Grounded’ will show 5 – 10 ohms. Getting off the subject, but the EI MVP-50/CGR-30 system can be interfaced with either grounded or un-grounded probes and can be type K or type J. But I believe that's a configuration change and requires the full set of probes to be of the same type. Their legacy units required un-grounded type K thermocouple.

First check your trim indicator, when you go from full nose up to full nose down is the trim indicator going to near both edge limits?

I understand you now, with emphasis on "mythical".

Yep, It works extremely well, especially when your using it before minimums. Why? It tells you immediately when your ground track is deviating from DTK so you can make corrections before you ever see the CDI deviating off center. Much easier than scanning DTK and TRK when you don't have it. But it's not just for lateral guidance, it also adds the vertical rate dimension in as well so its very helpful and exactly what you want if forced to land in very poor visibility yet super useful flying every straight in approach!

First off I totally agree that slowest landings are by far the best landings. But I don't understand the suggestion of "unforgiving stall characteristics" unless perhaps you are referring to an unfounded fear some pilots have about stalling period and feel they must add more speed! Having stalled what must be over a 100 Mooney's from short bodies to Acclaim Ultras this fear is pure myth. The only time I've seen any issue is in the very rare Mooney that had previous wing repair from an accident and drops a wing faster than normal. But more often excessive wing drops are from the pilot trying to use aileron to hold up the stalling wing - a big no-no! If a pilot has a deep rooted fear of Mooney stalls, installation of Vortex Generators should really help them get over it. The Mooney wing just mushes with vortex generators. Its quite amazing. Personally the Only time I don't land with full flaps is if I am doing a simulated emergency power off landing and need to keep the flaps up to make the runway or I am practicing a flapless landing. Or if I landing IFR at minimum visibility w/o flaps in which case I won't alter configuration at minimums for landing. But normally I am doing an approach at 100-110 kts and will use full flaps to get help get slowed down and trimmed to Vref for landing.