M20F

The discussion was a need for a turbo to avoid icing which at 2000' a beefy NA Ovation is going to be a better bet. I don't dispute anything what you are saying but my response was in the context of the need for a turbo to fly effectively in ice.

I stand to be corrected and by no means advise breaking rules but inadvertent TKS as far as I am aware only differs from FIKI TKS in terms of redundancy, not performance.

They will land way above max rudder input but at that point you are putting a lot of side load on the gear.

Not to start a huge debate over the 1% but for the most part icing you encounter in GA is going to be limited by a couple of thousand feet to where you get up/down to get through it and it tends to not go on for 100's of miles. All things being equal I want a 747, but don't think a turbo is necessary for ice avoidance and generally the only time I have picked up ice in the FL's is the summer where descending fixes the problem quickly. Likewise in the winter once you get a couple of degrees below 0 the icing stops (again minus the 1% who want to fly through freezing rain or other such things).

Usually you can get up high enough to where you can see the cells and navigate around them safely which is a good advantage of a turbo versus NA. Even in what I would call tame IMC I still like to climb on top so I can see what's ahead and limit my workload by not being forced onto instruments for long periods of time.

If managed properly there really isn't that much cost difference between a NA and a turbo airplane when it comes to maintainence. I would just look for the 252, Ovation, etc. that had the most of what you want for the price. While there are deals out there the ones with TKS, great radios, etc. don't seem to be as common for sale anymore so what you can find might be the main decider.

Numbers never lie, liars figure ;-)

They seem to delay departure or slow way down enroute versus holding. It has happened but I wouldn't say it is common.

I said the same thing just in simpler terms.

I spend about two weeks a month doing the Shanghai, Ningbo, Shenzhen, and Hong Kong circuit plus a smattering of other "exciting" places. Always delayed on the domestic flights for flow control which has been explained to me as military sequencing. In and out never had any issue, but domestic sucks especially if you head out west. I have been to Urmqui about a dozen times and coming back out always an issue. I work on the freight side of the business (non-pilot) and in general China is a nightmare which is why everything out of Guandong for the most part flows to Hong Kong versus flying out of SZX or CAN. Just my experience

To me unless you are doing a lot of high level per year the turbo Mooney's are overkill. You can do a lot with a TN F for a ton less money and trick it completely out for the cost of a decent K. More useful load, less maintainence, etc. I generally only go high coming back from Wyoming in the fall, otherwise the winds rarely work to make it worth climbing to FL's and unless it is a long trip the time you lose in climb isn't worth it. Even a rocket is going to take 20+ mins to get to medium FL's. With long range tanks a TN F will eat most planes at the truly long haul stuff as well. Just a lot more versatility that suits GA. They are awesome machines but have such a narrow profile to really make their full use. It is like buying a Lear jet for a 150nm commute, but that is just my opinion :-)

The biggest difference you will notice is in the control surfaces once you start getting above FL210 or at least is the case in my M20F, very sluggish as the air gets thin. The biggest thing to be concerned IMHO is watching cylinder temps both up and down.

Chinese airspace is predominately militarily controlled to the point that a majority of commercial flights are delayed as a result of their activities. I can't imagine how GA would function in the short term.

Every spring is Dawn, mineral spirits, two hand washes, clay, and then Collonite 485 to everything. Takes about 24 hrs but so worth it.

LPV approaches are much more precise but the main difference between an ILS and an LPV is lighting and runway markings. Both will impact the decision height of a LPV but even with no markings and lousy lights you can get really low on a LPV. The sight picture breaking out at 200' on a ILS at night with low RVR versus breaking out at say 300' with just REIL lights on a LPV can be a bit jarring. Love LPV's but keep in mind that when you break out it isn't going to look like breaking out on an ILS (unless obviously it is a LPV and ILS supported runway).

Better contract

Depends on your budget but I would definitely go with S-Tec whatever that maybe. Long term support is going to be a lot better and cheaper and it will help if you ever resell. Nothing against Brittain but it is a dead product with limits to support and upgrades.

Second this a lot of speed variances are caused by the engine just not making the right power versus drag. We always tend to focus solely on drag items. Have to look at both.

What is the difference versus stock in terms of performance numbers?

The main reason I am aware of for three bladed and larger props (like those turned by some of the older geared engine set ups like a GO-480) is high altitude performance. The bigger prop or the additional blades take more of a bite so you can get higher than you would with a smaller prop or two blades. For most modern set ups I really don't think there is a lot of advantage or you would see people flying around with 10 bladed props as opposed to majority flying with two bladed.

Hi you need to use calibrated gauges if using a test stand which they reccomend but don't require. Thus if you stick it on the airframe and fire it up far as I can see engine gauges and that methodology works. I don't have access to the complete document though nor am I an A&P, just commenting on the page you listed.

The best feature of a decent GPS is you don't have to fly VOR approaches ;-)

I don't do retreads but buy the cheapest tires I can. They dry rot before they wear and if they aren't odds are you need to not land with your feet on the brakes or land so fast you need to even really use the brakes. I have lost pretty much everything from cylinders to engines to whatever while flying over the years, have yet to ever blow a tire out. They are easy to visually inspect prior to flight to where you shouldn't ever have the issue. My opinion only though which doesn't make it right :-) I just don't see the point in the big dollar tires.

I used glue and clamped it over night, still good after two years. One day a new interior :-)

The old clock is c I just find my Wakmann to be just oh so cool. While I love technology just something so great about that clock.