aviatoreb

Quote: jetdriven

Quote: WardHolbrook Single vs twin and piston vs turbine arguements are starting to get boring. It seems as though everyone has made up their minds on the subject and converting a devotee from one camp into the other is pretty much a futile exercise. ... "I've been doing it this way for umpteen hundreds or thousands of hours and it's never happened before, it won't happen this time either therefore it must be safe." But engines can and do quit or lose power - for many reasons - and if you allow yourself to operate "outside the box" sooner or later you run the risk of getting bit.

Quote: jetdriven here, the fatal accident rate in a twin is 4 times the rate of singles. A piston twin is 88 times or more likely to have a fatal accident than a turboprop single. Facts folks. Not feelings. http://www.avemco.com/information/blogs/twin-engine-temptation.aspx

Quote: DaV8or

Quote: GeorgePerry The question here isn't wether or not one is prepared, but rather is one is prepared to take the risk. Flying an aircraft with a single piston powerplant at night (over land or water) increases the risk for an unsucsessful forced landing exponentially. In fact the odds of a fatal forced landing at night are anywhere from 5-10 times higher than day time, depending which safety study you quote. As a navy pilot my job involves flying on and off the carrier, day, night, in bad weather etc...For the most part we do this safely largely because we have backups, redundant systems and our own full time SAR on call. I willingly accept the risks associated with carrier aviation because there are enough mitigators that reduce the risk to acceptable levels. I've been in the flying game for a long time and for me (others milage will vary), Flying a piston powered single engine aircraft at night is an unacceptible risk and one that I do not take. I mitigate my risk by flying in the day only and plan land times no later than 10 minutes prior to sunset.

Turboprops can have engine failures too. They are MUCH more reliable than pistons but nothing has a 100% impossible to fail. Whether it be engine reasons or fuel flow reasons, or what not. The twin versus single issue is still there for turbo props but perhaps less serious since single turbo props are just that much more reliable.

Quote: aviatoreb I am a twin pilot and MEI ...you got it absolutely right aviatoreb. Dispatch reliability is an economic factor, not a safety factor. ..

Quote: jetdriven What kind of work? Putting GAMIs on it?

Quote: allsmiles OK let's assume for argument's sake that the earth is indeed round. Why are runways flat? And why are all our charts and plates flat? And if we go out on a limb to further assume that it rotates around the sun then why are our times enroute the same to and from?

Quote: carusoam Updated check list: earth is round enough....check there will be no composite M20J in the near future either....check Turbine M20s will use more fuel than you are used to and take up more runway....check PK will enjoy the new Garmin radios in his M20J for a long time....check The Mooney company has always come back from its financial woes....check Keeping up the positive thoughts..... Best regards, -a-

Quote: allsmiles The earth is not round. Just like the earth doesn't really rotate on its axis. Really. I'm not kidding you!

Quote: Barry The routine I use is to run the 1st tank 1 hour and switch to the 2nd while noting the time. Fly the other tank till it's out of gas ( I don't wait for the engine to die, you can see the fuel pressure bouncing around when it gets close). Switch back to the 1st tank and note the time. Time left on the last tank is 2nd tanks time minus 1 hour. I also have a fuel totalize that is within 0.9 gal of actual (in my favor) which really keeps peace of mind.

I am a twin pilot and MEI ...you got it absolutely right aviatoreb. Dispatch reliability is an economic factor, not a safety factor. ..

Quote: Cruiser who's there? tap tap tap...

... I should add. As I understand the issue after lots of research - but I am not a twin pilot.

Quote: Piloto Ever wonder why the Caravan twin engine conversion by Soloy http://www.soloy.com/files/Products/Documents/Dual%20Pac.pdf was never popular. It decreased the dispatchability rate by half, you need now two engines instead of one to dispatch. Fuel and maintenance is twice of that of the single Caravan. There was no added commercial benefit adding a second engine. Why do you think Piper is betting on the Piper Jet? José

Quote: fantom Lots of lessons can be taken away from this video. In the cold waters off CA, these folks wouldn't have been so lucky. http://flash.aopa.org/asf/pilotstories/ditchinginthedark/ditchinginthedark.cfm

This is getting too heavy for me. I signed the petition. I hear ya guys. My head hurts. I am heading back the thread "Mooney's are awesome."

Quote: Seth FINALLY! I'm heading to MN on Sunday afternoon, training Monday, and flying 1165N back to Maryland on Tuesday. It has been a long saga, but the engine is overhauled and should be installed today or tomorrow. Thanks to everyone for the suggestios in the break in thread. I'll post some pictures of the updated panel and more information about the flight back and break in process next week. Question: The company that overhauled the engine gave a 5 week timeframe, and then ended up delivering it after 9 weeks with no information as to why it was late, and no extra work was needed. Since it was late, I flew commerical back and forth to Minnesota for a meeting after the 5 week period, and rented the Arrow for a wedding two weeks ago, I'm planning to ask for a discount due to the late delivery (the A&P suggesetd this as it made him look bad that they gave him a timeframe that he gave me and then it was month late). Has anyone had any success with this? Is it even worth pursuing? I do not wish any bad blood, as I want to ensure I'll get proper service should I need assistance with any warrenty issues, but they did overpromise and underdeliever time wise. I've always been taught UPOD - Under Promise - Over Deliver. Take care, -Seth

Quote: aerobat95 Hey guys I am having my cowl area touched up and was wondering...can I replace the fasteners that hold the cowl sides in place with stainless? what about the battery compartment? If so where would I get them?

Quote: Shadrach

Quote: borealone I've done 26kts x-wind component using the crab-kick method in my Ovation. Cross-controlled inputs just don't 'feel right' in the long-body. Rudder authority is certainly a limitation (the Mooney is ridiculous compared to the seaplane I also fly) but a getting lined up properly to establish the centrelineline wasn't a problem. Of course, I accomplished this on a 150' wide runway, which certainly boosts the confidence...I don't know if I'd attempt the same winds on a 40' wide strip.

Quote: aerobat95 Hey guys, just a quick question for ya'll who fly with young children. I have a 4 year old who likes to sleep on the plane but doesnt like having the headset on. I cant seem to find much on hearing protection for young ones. Do they make smaller ear plugs for kids or do you just cut the adult size ones down? What do you guys do when flying with children. Also I have a youth headset that is not stereo but I have a stereo intercom. Do they make better headsets for kids? I wish Lightspeed made a youth version. Thanks Ray

One thing that bothers me about the ipad in the cockpit is it is just too big - its size is nice for a book reader and for email and browsing the web, etc - but for cockpit - I like the size of the new 796 - just a "sminch" smaller. Well - I starting researching and there is hint that there will be a smaller ipad coming out at christmas time. I know - apple pre-release speculation is rampant - but nonetheless - I am going to guess that they will eventually release a smaller ipad 3. So on size grounds alone I would not get a 796. There are other good reasons of course that we could discuss - but for the moment I see myself using my ipad 1 as an efb running FF - FF seems to be the best ipad software for EFB use, and if I get the itch for a 796 to mount on my yoke - then I will get the "ipad 3" which will be released ...eventually. Then I will put wingx on my ipad 3 and project synthetic vision and terrain warnings which is what I think wingx does a lot better than FF. Then both ipads could share the single blue tooth waas gps for accurate position. Compared to the price of anything garmin, a couple of ipads and a few subscriptions for ipad software is a lot less. In any case I already have an ipad 1. Now I just need the ipad 3. The ipad 4 by the way has a built in expresso maker -to perk you up after a long flight. That's what I really want in the cockpit. Who wouldn't?Erik

Quote: maropers pretty much anywhere you want....