kortopates

I don't know, as it will will depend entirely on the trees at the approach and departure end and their required gradient to clear, since an unobstructed 2700' runway isn't really a short field for any Mooney. (*Even a longbody ground roll at max landing weight is 2000' upto 4000' msl DA)

Yes, all of the current JPI products offer it or include it standard.

Like Aerodon said, that's not true. It's common practice to wire the Shadin FF transducer in parallel with the EDM. You can contact JPI tech support for details too. But with all that said, IMO, there is no need to keep the Shadin, which only provides FF and Used, while the EDM also provides Used, Remaining, endurance time, fuel Gal remaining at your destination (or next waypoint depending on how you set it up), and nmpg.

Mine is "Mooney" sized. I don't really ever expect to use it in flight, just on the ground after a crash to evacuate with fire from breached tanks. Unless delayed exiting the aircraft, don't expect to need very much.

No, there is factory option for installing one side ways on that rear bulk head, but then it does seem like it could interfere with rear seat pax legs and the rear seat back adjustment handle access, so I went the route I did.

Thank you Clarence, that's very kind of you. I've been aware of the issue, but have been very lucky, my unit has held its weight within 1 oz for many years. Just re-weighed it at annual a couple of weeks ago. I've been thinking I should swap it out because I installed it in 2011 but its still holding its weight so I haven't.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Even in my 252, my fire extinguisher fits perfectly behind the emergency gear extension and between rear seat without interfering with rear seat pax feet nor front seat belts. And of course retrievable from either front seat occupant; even after the accident where something under or attached to the front seat bottom may no longer be immediately accessible. nothing will work in every scenario but haven’t been able to come up with a better location. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Something is wrong, wrong probe type? (J vs K and ungrounded vs grounded) or probe tip has been burnt off?

Something got miss communicated because Continental does Not call for using “dry” torques but the “wet” torques that Mike talks about. It’s much more complicated than wet vs dry. Some mechanics have been known to not even torque the cyl thru bolts on the opposite side, because a significant amount of dismantling must be done to get access to them. Yet other mechanics are very thorough in doing this and will also replace the cylinder fasteners to ensure proper torquing using a calibrated torque wrench as well as keep the thru bolts torqued with torque plates while multiple cylinders are off. But every once in awhile we’ll see an engine shed cylinders that weren’t properly torqued so Mike is doing his best to educate us on risks. When you consider that a good number of cylinders are replaced well before necessary, on the basis of a single compression test, the added risk of top overhauls is seldom warranted. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In addition to the points that Lance makes, the FAA will not allow a business to do both experimental aircraft work and certified aircraft work under the same roof. In their mind your business is either 100% in for operating under their approved production certificate; or certified repair station etc. This eliminated a number of repair stations years ago that tried to serve both certified aircraft and the experimental market. All the ones i know went entirely experimental. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

this just shows it didn’t leave the factory with a charlie weight. Few mechanics make any effort to keep the equipment list updated. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

See your Mooney service manual for very specific guidance on when and how much charlie weight should be added. You’ll find a graph that show when they’re required. The addition of a previous charlie weight would likely only be noted on the weight and balance sheet created for when it was added, if you have the older superseded weight and balance sheets you should be able to find it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, you can do exactly that as many Mooney owners have already done. Or you can also simply replace the Mooney tachometer with the EI R-1 digital Tachometer, it fits in the same footprint sized hole as the Mooney tach works off the ignition switch, I have both a EDM-900 and R1 for redundancy and had EI program my R-1 with the hours I had when I made the change.

?? Please re-read the highlighted text - all serial numbers later than 447, which includes all 252's including yours with SN 1057, "operate from the electric tachometer". Not the alternator. Only the early 231's, sn's 001-446, operated off the alternator and measured time when the alternator was producing current.

Yes, these details aren't in the POH but service manual. See this excerpt below from the M20K Service Manual. The complete electrical schematic by serial number is also included in the back of the the SM, but that is a huge drawing and you'd have to locate that portion of the schematic and trace between the Tach and Hour meter. But the included text explains it clearly.

Technically its not a Hobbs meter, hobbs are only on of off as you say. It just looks similar to one. If you review your documentation, its referred to as the "Hour Meter", if you look at your schematic it shows its wired directly to your tach. Perhaps the thing confusing is that tach hours are not contained on the tach meter but show in this separate "hour meter" on the right side of the pedestal. But its essentially a normal "tach" split into two different displays; probably due to the small size.

Nice clean F’n J. Curious about your mention of a STC for the J mods. there’s really no STC for that right, not unless it’s was by someone other than the factory, such as LASAR for things like cowling and windshield? Did it get any changes in V speeds such as gear? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Very true. Here in my SOCAL neighborhood we pick up the ground station on the ground. But i know it’s not universal. I wonder what percentage of planes don’t have dual band In since even most portable receivers have it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i agree, there is no latency between two ads/b equipped aircraft; even transmitting on separate bands when they have dual band receiver. That’s why i commented above that we would only have it with something other than air to air ads-b broadcast, such as ads-r, which is exactly what GeeBee described even though he didn’t call it by any specific technology - so i think we are mostly all on the same page. But with most of my pattern work being under a class B veil where all us of are ads/b equipped i don’t think I have ever seen latency in any form. Inspired to review this, i see Asd-R is only used by receivers that are NOT dual band receivers, since the ground station rebroadcast a 1090ES message out on 978 and vice versa only to aircraft that can’t receive both bands. Since it’s a re-broadcast at the ground station, there really isn’t any appreciable latency that i can find - it’s echo’d right back to the plane after a transmit. So that just leaves non-abs-b traffic which we can pick up via TIS-B, also being transmitted from ground station. TIS-B “may” include additional aircraft that aren’t broadcasting their position (none ads-b ) when being tracked by FAA SSR Radar - and with those not only do we have a latency issue but we have much less accuracy in position and their 3-D velocity vector. But Ads-b targets are broadcasting their position every second with a position accuracy of 0.05 nm and velocity vector accuracy of within 10meter/sec per the TSO’s - with no appreciable latency. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You have me wondering where that would be a factor. Not with air to air targets, but i imagine so with ADS-R targets but haven’t really noticed. I mostly operate under the class B veil where we are all required to be equipped and i don’t see any latency with close by targets that would allow discerning any latency such as in the pattern and on parallel runways. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The GI-275 would be my choice for a G1000 backup, but i can see the installation hours add up since it’s would get connected to the Pitot-static system, garmin GPS, garmin magnetometer and garmin ADC, and perhaps more. In exchange for all that it would come with more capability. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wonder when the metal cases started. My first generation one came in a carboard box. My newer semi-rigid VA-980 comes in a plastic box.

you can’t from any external markings, only in picture resolution. when they first improved the resolution the only way to ensure getting the higher resolution was buy buying it through the manufacturer. There was lots of old stock being sold by distributors with the original resolution. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have found also, that whenever i have missed an update from the plane being down in the shop, that i encounter issues wi-fi data via db concierge service on my FS-510. Once back on a regular schedule i really never, or very rarely, have problems. When it works, it works great! But a pain when it doesn’t. Glad to hear your GI-275 took the update now versus earlier i read about problems with not updating via the concierge service. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk