201er

Cant say it makes much difference either way but it saves me the panel space. Perhaps when I upgrade to a mfd someday it will pay off.

All of my deviations were based on a VOR fix that I found to most conveniently represent the course change I had in mind. This is also a good idea in case of IFR coomunications failure. I think the "deviations off course approved" are more for short term going around a specific cloud, not for dipping 100 miles south like I did.

Hey folks, I had some interesting flights in my Mooney to and from Springfield Illinois that I wanted to share with you. The trip down to Springfield was pretty uneventful. Just an IFR departure off 9 at Linden (across EWR departures). Ceilings were about 800 overcast, tops 5,000ft. Once on top, stayed on top the whole way there and got vectored down for a visual into Springfield. We saw a B-17 flying around the field and inquired about it to find out that EAA was doing rides in it. We signed up for a flight on Saturday right before our departure since we'd be at the airport anyway. Springfield is a nice city with more to see than you might expect. A lot of Abraham Lincoln history obviously. The B-17 rides were running a bit behind schedule and thunderstorms were already developing on the route with convective watches across the entire northeast! I went ahead and taxieed my Mooney from the distant FBO where I parked to Landmark which was hosting the B17 so we could depart immediately after the ride. The B-17 flight was unbelievable and everything you'd expect from a Flying Fortress! I'll let the video do the talking because I can't even begin to convey how awesome it was. Now onto the topic of the day, thunderstorms. This was a particularly interesting flight because there were a lot of thunderstorms, they were detectable and visible, and with a few deviations, we were able to make it through just fine. Originally I filed direct but I figured deviations would be necessary in the span of the 5 hour non-stop flight. Luckily I've had my ipad and ads-b weather a few months now and would be able to track the progress of thunderstorms as we moved on. Shortly after takeoff from Springfield, departure advised me of a convective sigmet south of Fort Wayne and basically on my direct route. I waited a minute to get picture on the ipad do download from ads-b and determined that a deviation via Cincinnati would keep me clear of that storm and put me back on route to Linden. For a while it seemed like I planned a deviation too far south of the storm and could cut back in. But along with the massive tailwind that was driving me south, the thunderstorms were moving that direction as well. It turned out prudent that I continued the deviation because it had me pass at a modest but visible distance from the thunderstorm. At the same time as passing the massive thunderstorm to the north, I was also passing a thunderstorm further south that I was less concerned with as it wasn't on the way. However, looking both left and right I could see thunderstorms on either side as I passed through the comfortably wide 70+ mile gap. A few hours later I noted the weather radar and saw that the gap had closed and was unpassable so we made it through in time. Left thunderstorm to the north, middle adsb ipad view, right thunderstorm to the south We continued on to Pittsburgh without any run ins with major weather but then passed a trio of thunderstorms about 50 miles away. These did not play a role in my flight but it was a very clear illustration of what a thunderstorm looks like on radar, stormscope, and out the window! Check out this photo of the three distinct thunderstorms, adsb radar, and wx500 stormscope view of the convection activity. Finally the last thunderstorm of the day required yet another deviation as it was right on course. I was monitoring it on radar for a while but not changing course. While we were hours out, there was no point in changing course as the storm could move or dissipate by then. But it only grew stronger while remaining mostly stagnant. So one more time I amended my IFR and added SEG as a waypoint to take me around the storm. This one was pretty small but very distinct. The adsb weather radar picture and visual concurred on location, shape, and strength. Interestingly, the stormscope did not distinguish this thunderstorm. This is probably because it was already in the mature stage with severe precipitation but not convection. The stormscope as littered with loads of other activity far away that I was already familiar with. Flight ended with a GPS approach and visual landing into Linden. Because of good tailwinds, even with deviations I ended up arriving ahead of time. A nice conclusion to a very nice trip. I am definitely liking this combination of adsb radar + stormscope. But nothing beats having a visual on the storms and using the technology only for awareness and planning. Still not comfortable flying in IMC with embedded thunderstorms but this was a great comparison and educational experience. And that's why I want to share it with you and open this for further discussion of thunderstorm avoidance.

I agree. Though expensive, I'm curious what airbag seat belts would have done to help with injuries.

These friends don't happen to fly 777s do they?

^ I'm curious what major issues you find most common? I feel I may well have forgotten some book stuff that was required for the test, but on the other hand have become much more adept at real world IFR flying that they don't teach you for the test.

I know, I know. Limitations of polling. I put ATP as higher cause you can get instructor with a few hundred hours but not ATP. Is it even possible to test for ATP in a Mooney?

I remember a topic a long while back about instructors in Mooneys. I wonder what our demographic in general is though. How many ATPs, Commercial, etc pilots our community holds? Did you prepare for or test for any of your ratings in a Mooney?

So the older Mooneys need it cause they have a shorter rudder but since they made the rudder higher on newer ones they don't?

I have an LED landing light so it comes on when I start to roll out of the ramp and stays on until I come to a stop at the other end. Barely draws anything and don't have to replace bulbs so the extra visibility is worth it (esp cause there's no beacon). I treat it as a running light as well as the LED nav lights. Actually the only time I may end up turning my landing light off in flight is at night when it's reflecting off my prop too much and ruining my night vision.

Up there http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N4361H

Fiddle with the radio volume, headset volume, and audio panel volume until you get a good balance between all systems and then dont touch anything nut e headset volume in the future and everything else is balanced. In your case try turning up the headset and down on audio panel/radio to hear yourself better. I think that's how it works out for me.

Jim, I agree. But the fact that liberty is being threatened by unconstitutional govt intervention is indeed getting out of hand. It cant be allowed to get any worse.

Well there's an immediate trip time/cost savings for you right there... fly GPS direct and skip the VORs. Probably worth more than drag reduction of the VOR antennas

Brett, you're welcome to fly near my any time

I may just have to fly down there from NYC for a tank of gas. Cuts the trip cost nearly in half and without headwind I can make it there nonstop. When the program begins, can some of you folks from down there report back to let us know if it's really true.

I have it panel mounted with external antenna. Now that he has the coupling I should really get around to doing it. Maybe on the display it will be more accurate than the standard use. I'll let you know when I get around to it. He promised to do it for me for free when it came out (and I had been waiting over a year for that) but since I got the ADS-B Ipad traffic which shows like 50 targets in a 20 mile vicinity, I lost my motivation to update the Monroy. If it wasn't so much labor to take it out and worth something on resale I'd be getting rid of it. Hey Seth, it's an EXCELLENT system and I can give you a deal on one!

Haven't had mine coupled yet but let me tell you the traffic system itself SUCKS. It misses a lot of traffic I spot and often doesn't call it till after it has passed. I'm disappointed with it and seeing where ADS-B is going, I think it's a waste of money to be installing at this point. In the metro areas ADS-B traffic works 70% of the time and improving as more get ADSB out.

Have you tried slowing down? The rigging is only optimal at a certain power setting. Cruising too fast or too slow can cause it to have a turning tendency.

Bennett, could you please talk about the value of each mod you've tried and the cost to speed payoffs? Can you make a list in order of preference that you would add those to a factory stock 201?

They're not a speed mod. In fact they make you go slower than faster. However, it's the time and/or cost to destination that is reduced and absolutely worth it.

^Airbus was trying not to stall, you were trying not to exceed VNE

Jim, which antennas did you remove?

Is 75% cruise based on 200HP restriction or 210 max rated? Even if it is based on 210HP, that's only 7.5HP more. That's what? About 3 knots for .5gph more? Too bad you can't get a missile conversion anymore... for a firewall-forward wreck I bet that would be the best way to go.

What he's saying is the price of an overhaul is the same (or close) whether it's a C or a J. But putting $35k into a $30k airplane doesn't make it works $65. So the resale ROI of a factory overhauled engine is least cost effective in airplanes that aren't at least twice the value of the overhaul. It's all about the price point of the plane rather than model but since certain models don't sell for more than a certain amount, that's why he was judging by model.