kortopates

What we really need is recognition by ICAO of a Basic Med certificate; then it would be universal.

I see very few Basic Meds compared to Class 3 as an instructor. Besides everyone has to start with a Class 3. But my plane knows no borders (till recently you needed a Class three for Mexico) and its till required further south of Mexico and as well as required to fly in Class A airspace.

Maybe the phrase only has meaning to Disney Land in SOCAL and its all about geography, but I can't imagine it not having meaning to anyone out west unless we're talking Millenniums and GenZ etc!!

Except for the lines getting longer! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe they are accepting Basic Med now. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with your observations. Unfortunately there is no part no for tanks in the wings, nothing in the IPC to give you exact dimensions of wetted fuel areas that I know of. We'd need access to Mooney drawings.

I am sure there is more to it than the "main differences" you listed. Regardless though, I used the M75-6R1 to update the data tag on mine when I converted it from a MB-SB - no problem. But Continental provides a parts list, in the form of a kit part # years ago. It gives the detailed list of parts to convert the MB to SB. But to my knowledge they never did that for the LB to MB. The LB has a lot differences from the MB that aren't limited to bolt on accessories - I am not at all sure it possible without a full overhaul. But you'll still need approved data or an STC to put the MB or SB in a 231 since the old Mod works STC is no longer available. You could perhaps hire a DER willing to develop you a one time STC but it will probably be cheaper and faster to sell the 231 and upgrade to a 252 or Encore airframe.

The factory says "Full" is to to the base of the flapper valve, but not everyone can get the rate capacity stopping there. I am pretty sure that the only thing that changed through the different K's was the amount of non-usable fuel with each update - not tank dimensions.

Yes, a flap switch with a detent position for take off flaps, unlike the rest of the fleet till prior to G1000's.

All the G1000 long bodies also have a flap detent position for takeoff position but Mooney did not certify them for a higher partial flap speed. So although a switch with a detent position is a prerequisite for a higher partial flap extension the manufacturer must also document it in the TCDS, like they did for the very limited number of late J’s. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wouldn’t replace the rear white wingtip lights. If you do, and have LED’s for Nav lights, you’ll find that the gear down light becomes always dimmed (without Nav lights on) and will have to correct that or not be able to see you gear down light in daytime. I have only had to change one rear wing tip bulb in well over 20 years of ownership. Frankly IMO it’s not worth replacing them with LEDs and then needing to install a relay to correct the always dimmed gear down light. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Icing a great reason to not deploy any flaps. IFR landings at minimums aren't all created at equal. If visibility is at minimums, I won't deploy flaps but continue to follow the GS to a landing at the IFR landing zone a 1000' down the runway to maintain that stable approach. But even at 200', if I have unlimited visibility, I have no issue pulling the power and putting in full flaps and slowing down from my approach speed of 100-110 kts (max Flap speed) down to Vref and landing well before the the IFR landing zone. It just depends on visibility. The reason not to necessarily use full flaps is that in a very strong x-winds with the lots of aileron and rudder, with the plane so uncoordinated you can develop excessive vertical descent speeds as you reduce the power; especially with x-winds over 20 kts. Its doable if one is prepared for it, isn't high and doesn't just pull the power back to idle to early, but compensates by caring some power into the flare. There are other ways to do really strong cross wind landing, such even 30 kts direct crosswind, by just rolling the plane onto the runway at a higher airspeed to provide further rudder control to maintain center line; assuming you have a longer runway to accommodate. A gusty x-wind though is far more hazardous than and a merely a strong but stable cross wind.

Lots of experience in C172's simply because its a makes for a much cheaper 2-axis auto-pilot install. But I haven't experienced that in a Mooney yet. But, yes, if your changing speed, or speed and altitude, you'll get messages to trim manually and if not done fairly quickly, the autopilot will simply disconnect. The messages are quite obvious and I shouldn't imply you have little time to correct trim, just don't ignore the messages. Adding the electric trim isn't trivial, but not hard, but every servo is considerable work yet this is tied to switch on the yoke. Certainly takes away from the experience of seeing the AP control the plane entirely, including a procedure turn or course reversal and VNAV descents without any help from you other than loading approaches and perhaps adding altitude constraints for VNAV. There is certainly no con's in completing the install beyond time and money.

its easier to learn to land a Mooney initially with partial flaps because it helps reduce the need to fully trim for Vref so that flaring the plane is easy. But one should continue to master trimming the aircraft for landing for Vref as well a proper speed control. Porpoising is only possible with lack of speed control and not trimming the aircraft properly. Landing as slow as possible will reduce your roll out length and reduce risk to landing mishaps. About the only time to prefer 1/2 flaps over full flaps is with a strong crosswind.

Make sure you're not creating unnecessary workload with last minute changes as well. If this is a precision approach, I'll maintain that in the vast majority of times you don't need to update the flight plan because the controller caught you off guard and said "direct to XYZ IF (if it was direct to the IAF you're not on Vectors to final) as well as cleared for the approach, maintain 2000' until established. Given its a precision approach, just maintain an intercept angle onto Final and you know that soon as you are established, wait for the GS to come down to you before descending and you have nothing to worry about. About the only I could imagine taking the time to reprogram the approach leg is if the controller said" Direct to XYZ IF, cleared for the approach, maintain 2000' until crossing XYZ". Now I do need XYZ because we can't rely on the map to tell when we've crossed XYZ. But still I have never gotten such an approach clearance on a PA in all my instrument years.

Somebody likely leaned against it and the vane gets stuck in the up position, sometimes it even gets bent. Check there first. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yep, direct to an approach fix is only safe when the controller tell you that which only be for an IAF or IF, never the FAF. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BTW, I don't advocate relying on setting the option to automatically switch to LOC from GPS with the Garmin Navigators for two reasons: 1) the switch doesn't occur until you're final close to intercepting final. But I want to start monitoring where I am on the GS as soon as I am on what I would refer to as the base leg vector for the approach; essentially perpendicular to final. At this stage its very helpful to know if I still have time to capture the GS or if its going to be a race to get established and then descend. 2) Because the change in Mode (Loc vs GPS) causes the GNC-500 AP to disconnect, I want to be the one to switch so I can immediately re-enable the AP in approach mode - rather than be surprised by it!

The guidance from the AIM makes no distinction from PA vs NPA. On any NPA, VTF should always be discouraged because step down fixes are critical. But the PA is a safe exception that except for a very rate gotcha is safe to use VTF; especially with the GTNs that don't omit waypoints on the final approach outside of the FAF. I used to teach no VTF with out exception like the AIM suggest, but learned there is seldom any reason not to use VTF for a PA. So as an example, when your being vectored outside of the FAF, on a PA and the controller says something like" 2 miles from XXXX (FAF), Maintain 3000 until established" the proper thing to do is to maintain 3000 not only till i) established and ii) till the GS comes down to you and then follow it to the MAWP. The only real gotcha is possible maximum altitudes on outside of FAF step downs on very long finals that are very uncommon. Some get concerned though when the controller is vectoring you to final and says direct to one of the IF fixed outside of the final. But in this case, just intercepting final as you have it already set up works just as well. Although with the GTN, you still have the waypoint in the flight plan and could hit direct to it, but when that happens to me despite the capability to do I won't bother as there isn't a significant difference.

Exactly, you don't necessarily have to click on "Activate Approach" or "Activate VTF". You can just as easily go into the flight plan, scroll down to the approach portion and either do a Direct To approach waypoint, or make any leg there the active leg. This is actually the most common way to activate the approach because it allow activating it on a leg your being vectored on to (which is the way every NPA should be flown) or activating with a waypoint other than the IAF or first waypoint in the approach (which could be an IAF or Feeder route VOR). I would only advocate using VTF on a PA because with a glide slope you no longer care about step down fixes; only verifying you crossed the FAF at the charted altitude. PA- precision Approach, NPA- Non-precision Approach

I am afraid what your trying to do with a C model really isn’t possible. if you set aside the monitor and just do slow, very slow, mixture sweeps, download the data and look at it on Savvy you’ll see you are only going to be able to get first and maybe a second cyl to peak, but highly unlikely you’ll see more than that before it’s so rough you’ll think the engine will quit. The “optimal rate” to lean is slowly for accuracy such that you’re seeing a 1/10 GPH change about every second (data point). there is too much hysteresis to go fast and going too quick is just garbage in and garbage out with unrepeatable results. when you see what’s going on in the data, then start experimenting with reduced throttle but still WOT MAP, and carb heat - but you need carb temp to be repeatable; you’ll see you can make some improvements to how far lean you can get before needing to change your underwear

Next time i go I’ll remember to invite you if i can - we don’t usually fill it up when we get a group together. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The old parker hannifin MC are no longer available and haven’t been for years. These were proprietary to Mooney. Mooney now uses a different manufacturer and part # for the larger capacity which are the ones used on long bodies. They’re not in the K IPC but going to them requires an additional bell crank so pedal orientation is maintained. If a older J of early K MC is worn out such that replacing seals doesn’t fix it, I believe the only choice is to go the bigger capacity new ones which are $$. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i’ve ridden in their chamber and it was manned with no less than a staff of 5 or 6 people. Multiple people outside observing and manning the controls and multiple people inside observing and making sure anyone needing O2 got it. Heck, i wanted to go longer after being one of the last remaining ones without putting the O2 mask on but they would not stand for it - i was of course hypoxic! plus i believe there was a emergency button inside to allow a quick release- but I am not sure about that. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

in all of three seconds i found the next on Nov 16 in Smithfield, NC https://www.faasafety.gov/SPANS/event_details.aspx?eid=116640&caller=/SPANS/events/EventList.aspx just search events for “PROTE” won’t show more than a month or two out though. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk