aviatoreb

Quote: pmccand I bought my M20B (real cheap) from a guy who forgot to get the landing gear up. It was a 100% manual landing gear and manual (non-hydraulic) flap system, and still the guy failed to lower the gear, (or as he claims, it slipped out of the gear down lock block). However, it is important to note that before the ferry permit could be issued for us to take it home we had to also comply with a Lycoming prop strike AD that includes the replacement of the rear crank accessory gear bolt. Engine pull time... I really feel bad about the gear up, but I learned a really good mental trick from a commercial pilot instructor in my Bonanza to lower the chances of a gear up while handling the flaps after landing and taxi...that trick is to touch, but never operate levers or knobs until you say OUT LOUD the words, "FLAPS, Identified, FLAPS Verified... coming up" after landing. Or, "FLAPS, Identified, FLAPS Verified...coming down" before take off. Just one extra step turned into a very good habit. Phil McCand

Quote: txbyker Has anyone seen this video? Incredible.

Quote: Seth I realize we are still a few days from the end of 2011, but due to my schedule, I'm done for the year. This is my first down year since owning an airplane (2008, 2009, 2010, 2011), but I sill flew quite a lot of hours so I'm not complaining! 168. Feel free to wait until the 1st to chime in, and no, this isn't about bragging rights, I just am wondering what the other Mooney pilots are flying, what is average, what are the outliers. Also, do not limit this to just Mooney aircarft - any plane you flew where you were PIC - if it was solo, dual, CFI work, safety pilot, for work (airline, armed services, freight, rescue, etc . . .) - what did you log? Mine was Solo, Dual, and a little safety pilot in five aircraft: Mooney M20F, two separate Mooney M20J 300 Missiles (the one I purchased and the one I test flew), C172, PA-28R Arrow. Yes - I did make sure that the highest total for the poll was "201+" Gotta love the Mooney! Happy new year and safe flying! -Seth

Quote: Lionudakis Seems to be a failure of the downlock on the johnson bar itself, since it went back down fine. if it's worn or sloppy, it can/will fail. Pretty cool to see those folks pick that bird up !!

Quote: jlunseth Me too. Performance has been flawless. I had to actually give an IFR position report once over the Bahamas (despite what the texts teach, these have gone the way of the dinosaur). Some of the info. is displayed on the 430, but the Icarus button has most of it. Made it fairly painless, although fetching the syntax from my memory banks was a chore.

Quote: flyboy0681 I beg to differ on this opinion big time. Each time I fly with this unit I'm impressed more and more. I'm not sure which features I like best, the half dozen aural warnings it's capable of issuing (including target altitude alert, DA and GUMPS check), the dozen or so user configurable display options (such as next waypoint, ground speed or track error) or the silky smooth steering when the KAP 150 is engaged. I've previously written about the incredible job it does at entering and flying a holding pattern when coupled with the GTN-750, not to mention an approach. Unless the shop telling you this has a very good reason for not recommending ICARUS, you should definitely consider this unit.

Quote: co2bruce 5'10" 245lbs I have a long body Mooney (and a wide body ... body) and I fit fine. Its snug with 2 people my size but no problems with 3 - 4 hour flights.

Quote: Dale Does anyone know if there are any folding bicycles that will fit in the baggage compartment of an M20K? I have heard that the folding Dahon bicycles will fit. Also, if anyone has a model of a folding bike that will fit in the luggage compartment, can you fit more than one or do you need to put the rear seats down to get 2 folding bikes into your Mooney. Any information on this would be appreciated. My wife and I have been flying down to the Florida Keys more and more and having a couple of bikes we can take with us would be really great. Thanks.

Quote: jsimmons619 Although It's not a direct answer to your question, I can state that I had a DAC GDC31 installed with my KAP150. It's coupled to my Garmin 430W and I'm very happy with the results. I had mine installed by NexAir, located in Mansfield, MA.

Quote: Ncbosshoss I totally agree with you, George. Some airports that have control towers don't need them. The federal contract tower program needs evaluating. As far as cost vs. safety, safety is certainly NOT the only factor for opening or closing a tower. The FAA has a gazillion page document for the cost vs. benefit of same. There are many factors involved. If want to read about it, you can find it here: (you'll have to copy and paste) https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:Bun8Ud6gJisJ:www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/policy_guidance/investment_criteria/media/establish_atct.pdf+cost+of+operating+an+air+traffic+control+tower&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShbYaJ36FB4MEJjOMXWToZU-qziFgr8jHcVRxEo-htG7bHezeki_R4czITcAmHeeag1MmqU4UUsMcwQuvsGQAZNlEjNosxGyF2mksE9oA2SiT13UyJ1L7MN1edHhuGw9BdjWIPs&sig=AHIEtbQF4hl8r3oiCstt1gKZTTDVsEGM3g On a seperate note but along the same lines, I am confident that in the future, the FAA will no longer be responsible for operating the ATC system. It will be a private company with the FAA providing safety oversight and regulation. This will save the government a bunch of money. We, as pilots and users of the NAS, will fund the new and improved system with user fees. It's coming. The dates are a bit old in the piece below but, the blueprints have not been thrown away. The unions are as mentioned above kicking and screaming about comprising safety by putting profits first. The private companies and airlines are kicking up their heels with excitement because they can run the system cheaper by cutting the fat and do more with less. It has been done all over the world. From www.downsizinggovernment.org: Commercializing Air Traffic Control The way to address all three of these organizational problems is to take the ATC system out of the federal budget process and make it a self-supporting entity, funded directly by its customers. Variants of this commercialization approach have been recommended by a series of federal studies and commissions over the past 15 years. As part of Vice President Al Gore's efforts at "reinventing government" in the 1990s, for example, the Clinton administration proposed turning the ATC system into a separate, self-funded, nonprofit government corporation within the Department of Transportation. The 1997 National Civil Aviation Review Commission, which was chaired by Norman Mineta, similarly proposed moving toward a self-supporting air traffic control organization.29 Commercialization would entail shifting from aviation-related taxes paid to the U.S. Treasury to fees for ATC services paid directly by customers to a new self-supporting Air Traffic Organization. This change would allow fees to grow in proportion to the growth of flight activity, rather than being tied to a less-stable variable, such as fuel prices or airline ticket prices. Moreover, a predictable revenue stream that was not subject to the federal budget process would provide the basis for the ATO to issue long-term bonds for funding capital investments.

Quote: Cruiser I wonder if the new control tower that will open in Frederick, MD. (homebase to AOPA) the first of the new year is going be contract operated?

Quote: moodychief Tools, track log,menu,delete all saved tracks

You had me worried for a minute Brett. I thought my J had slowed down ")"> Back when mine was new, I'd see 168 kts at 8,000 ft, WOT and 2,600 RPM sometimes. Now I'm happy with about 162-3 kts, at WOT, and 2550 RPM, 100 ROP. 20 or so LOP, and I save 1.5 GPH and give up 7 or 8 kts.

Hi Folks, I have a Garmin Aera 510. It draws a cookie crumb trail to remember EVERYwhere I have ever flown with it. I cannot find how to erase that. It is getting annoying since there are so many trails drawn over the map in my home local area that it is obscuring the actual maps there. Does anyone know how to reset that? I cannot find in the manuals. Erik

Quote: maropers I suggest a new forum - title it "train wreck" or "non aviation banter" or maybe "irritation zone" with the caveat that you enter with eyes wide open and to check your feelings at the door so they don't get hurt..... The admin can banish any thread that is starting to go south.

Quote: rbridges lol. they seemed pretty happy with themselves at the end. any landing you can walk away from...

Quote: borealone Here's some advice from the North on dealing with frost. I spend a lot of time every winter at remote, undeveloped airports, so have learned a few tricks: 1) get wing covers. Dealing with snow and frost what they were designed to do. It does take a few minutes to put them on, but this is quickly repaid by not having to deal with frost after the fact. 2) get a paint sprayer or similar device. Fill it with some REAL de-ice fluid (usually glycol based) and use that to deal with any residual de-icing. Your FBO might have a de-icing service, in which case you can usually purchase small quantities of de-ice fluid from them, or purchase some TKS from Spruce or another supplier. I wouldn't muck around with home-brew de-icers except in emergencies, as the last thing you want to have happen is a solution that seems fine on the ground in ambient temps turn into a problem at altitude when it gets colder. 3) and yes, a snowbrush or snowbroom is pretty much indispensible.

Yay!!!

Quote: Shadrach I read your acknowledgment, I was not attacking you or your post, just confirming the difference. Sorry I wasn't clear, my question is - are you priming at full rich, then going to idle cutoff, then back to full rich for start? That's how I read your post... Or, do you just leave it full rich for prime and start?

Quote: Shadrach You have a completely different injection system. With the Continental system you can "purge" a lot of the system with the mixture closed as you have a return line. The lyc is not the same. My question is - if you are priming at full rich, whay does the mixture need to go back to full rich???

I have a completely different engine, and I have no idea of this applies to the other engines. I have a TSIO520 that goes with the rocket. In any case, I full throttle and full rich and then prime for anywhere from 0 to 8 seconds depending on if the engine was shut down from 0 seconds ago to more than 4 hours ago, and depending on OAT. Then throttle to just cracked and rich to full. Then I crank to motor. It seems to always kick a few catches with this procedure. When I first got the airplane, I couldn't get it to take after that. And once I missed it, then it was a bear to start and I finally learned to start it from there with the flood procedure, which is a pain. But, I have learned that if upon the first sign of catching, I give it a kick of boost, like a half a second, then it goes from just catching to running. Once in a while it might sputter even a second time, and I just give it an immediate second kick of boost pump. Since I have been doing that since early last summer, I have not had a single difficult hot start. It is just a matter of being quick with the boost pump. I have my left hand on the key. ANd my right hand on the black throttle knob and my right thumb covers the boost switch. It all happens so quickly that I bet my passengers hear nothing other than a smooth and easy start every time.

Quote: jlunseth There was a thread on the Red Board in Oct. that made me look at the Nall report statistics during the landing phase on stall/spin accidents v. engine failures. Here is what I posted over there: "According to the Nall Report (2010) there were 20 stall/spin accidents during approach and landing, 9 of those fatal. There were 3 loss of power accidents during approach and landing, none fatal. In addition to that, if you look at the statistics on mechanical failures in the "GA" fleet, there were 89 (all phases of flight), 16 fatal. Of those mechanical failure accidents in the "GA" fleet, 56 were amateur built, or about 62%, and 13 of the 16 fatals were in amateur built aircraft. Although it is not in the Nall Report, if you apply the "mechanical failure" percentage attributable to home builts, to the number of power failures during landing (3), there was only 1 mechanical failure accident in 2010 during approach and landing in type certificated aircraft, and that accident was not fatal. The number of stall/spin accidents on approach and landing does not merely outnumber mechanical failure accidents in professionally maintained, type certificated aircraft, it absolutely overwhelms them. It also fits with the general statistic that most accidents are pilot caused accidents, not mechanical. Frankly, this is one area where traditional teaching techniques ("tight pattern") are completely out of step with reality (unless you fly a homebuilt). And this, regretably, results in fatalities." The 20:1 accident ratio convinced me. There are obviously times when a tight pattern is needed. Circle to land is one, some approaches at reliever airports require a close pattern to stay out of the Bravo airspace (KSGS here in St. Paul), but for everyday flying, I went to a wide pattern this summer and it works alot better. As far as the risk of engine failure goes, I have a 13:1 glide ratio, I can be two miles out on downwind and still make it to the airport. The risk is alot less in my estimation, than the chance that I will be momentarily distracted trying to fly a Skyhawk pattern.

Quote: allsmiles This is an EXCELLENT point. It has been my observation as well. There are many CFI's out there who have very minimal if any Mooney time who instruct exactly this! It has been my impression that they assume the Mooney can't be that much different than a Cherokee or a 150 in this regard. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but the Mooney, in view of its wing, is indeed different! I too fly wider patterns in order to keep banks and AS away from stalls. This illustrates the critical importance of Mooney specific training. Programs like the Mooney Safety Foundation are invaluable. They are worth their weight in gold! It would be interesting to do a study to determine how many of these unfortunate individuals actually had Mooney specific training beyond a check-out.

Quote: takair