201er

Note I did NOT start this thread as a continuation of the other one. Heck it wasn't even driven by that specific one but rather by the fact that this was like the 3rd uncivilized and eventually locked thread in the last few months. I did not want to figure out who was right and who was wrong or discuss that topic at all. I just want people to take the nonsense elsewhere. I love the debate and arguing over Mooney stuff. But things that have nothing to do with it catching personal insults on top of that is just annoying. And you can't help ignoring it because in order to find relevant discussions you inevitably have to sort past the junk.

Not to poop on your party or anything, but I hope you may pose a little thought as to why the insurance intends to charge you so much and whether or not you agree the risk is worthwhile...

^Why? Most of the fighting has been going on between people whose names are known.

I think it's more realistic to do an accelerated tailwheel program than an accelerated instrument... even taking your time to get instrument is fricken hard.

I've had some strange indications on the ASI lately (speed erroneously dropping off after takeoff, pull alternate air, stabilizes and ok) so I brought it to avionics shop to get Pitot/Static tests done early and diagnose. First he thought ASI was broken cause it was consistently reading 8-12 knots wrong on tests. But as he was about to remove it, he discovered a "mysterious box" connected off the pitot system that I suspect to be the gear retraction prevention device on the '78+ 201s. Now my question is this... how could that affect the ASI readings and is it possible that somehow the process of gear retraction creates feedback on this device? In retrospect the funky readings were always 5-20 seconds after gear retraction. Any ideas?

Fantom et al, I'm not talking about disagreeing. I love the openness of this forum where different opinions can be expressed even too much. But the name calling, personal attacks, and malice are at focus. It's not just on one thread either. It's becoming more and more frequent and I think it's time some members say enough is enough before this forum starts to look like others that we would not wish to frequent. I ask on behalf of myself and at least 24 others, take it outside guys. Disagree about Mooneys all you want but we don't want to have locked threads or to sift through the personal attacks.

It'll be great. Brett promised to organize the entertainment.

What, your Mooney isn't performing 100% these days?

Personally I think it's shameful for someone to read out board for the first time and see some of this going on. Not only is it a bad image for Mooneyspace but Mooneys in general. I don't want newcomers to get an impression like this http://mooneyspace.com/topic/9339-gulfstream-girl-how-many/page-3#entry111510

Lately there has been a lot of fighting and personal attacks going around here. More locked topics in the last few weeks than in all the time I've been on the board. Let's settle this in a democratic way. If the community votes enough, then be a man and take it off the board.

What magazine cover are those going on?

Nah. Just worry that the distracted Mooney watching him forgets to put it down

The whole point is that when it comes to EGT, you don't need to have an original EGT gauge to be legal! I had both for a while but when I needed panel space my factory EGT had to go. Several mechanics have seen my plane with it gone and never a problem. Using some of the arguments previously listed I've been getting by just fine. That said, if you're crazy enough to install one anyway, I have a factory EGT/OAT sitting around I can sell.

Sec. 91.211 Supplemental oxygen. (a) General. No person may operate a civil aircraft of U.S. registry-- (1) At cabin pressure altitudes above 12,500 feet (MSL) up to and including 14,000 feet (MSL) unless the required minimum flight crew is provided with and uses supplemental oxygen for that part of the flight at those altitudes that is of more than 30 minutes duration; (2) At cabin pressure altitudes above 14,000 feet (MSL) unless the required minimum flight crew is provided with and uses supplemental oxygen during the entire flight time at those altitudes; and

The really hot ones when the DA is really high. Not 8-10. But over 10, yeah.

Isn't it kind of a Mooney? I'm not saying I'm doing 75% cruise! But I am configuring the airplane for cruise even if it's momentary. That means leveling off, trimming for level flight, closing cowl flaps, setting mp, setting rpm, leaning mixture, checking that everything that needs to be off or retracted actually is. Isn't that what cruise is? I'm probably only doing 2100RPM/22" on 6gph so it doesn't go over gear extension speed and abeam I can drop em and go for approach config. I always thought pattern work was supposed to be a simulation of all phases of flight... not just working on repeated touch downs.

Downwind = level = cruise

If you avoid closing cowl flaps, don't reduce RPM, don't lean mixture, don't push them back in, don't extend flaps, don't set trim in order to make touch and go safer/easier... then you're not practicing real landings.

Do you realize that the amount of fuel you'd save by bringing back throttle, rpm, and mixture on downwind would probably more than cover the fuel used to taxi back?? You know the biggest reason I close cowl flaps when I level off on downwind? Not as much a practical consideration (although to an extent) but as practice for "real flying." It builds good habits of setting up for cruise, setting up for landing, setting up for takeoff, etc. It sets up SOP and muscle memory of what to do. So on the rare occasion I practice patterns, I'm practicing all phases of flight condensed into 2 minutes. And it's a workout because by the time you're set up for cruise you're already preparing for landing. I may be wrong but to me it sounds like you're trying to fly Skyhawk Touch and Goes in a Mooney by avoiding as many of the "complex" bits as possible. I'm not experienced enough to be telling you what to do, but just from my own experience I have found that practicing the full takeoff, climb, cruise, approach, landing procedure in full stop landings with no shortcuts is both a challenge and practice for real landings and phases of flight.

Then what value do you get out of this? Practicing touch and goes for the sake of getting good at touch and goes. But this is not how you normally/properly fly a Mooney. I rarely do pattern work in the Mooney (between flying enough to stay proficient and pitying the gear/engine) but if I do, I always takeoff with flaps and cowl flaps open. Retract gear. Retract flaps. Boost pump off. Throttle back. RPM back. Mixture back. Cowl flaps closed. Abeam numbers gear down. Trim. Flaps t/o. Trim. GUMPS check. Prop/mixture full forward on base. GUMPS check. Flaps full on final. Trim. Check gear down. Land. Get off the runway and start again. Nothing against you. I just think that by taking all those short cuts in order to make a touch and go work entirely negates the value of practicing going around the pattern! When you own the plane and by gas/engine by tach time, the taxi back costs very little (as opposed to student in a hobbs meter wet rate). You just get to spend more time flying your plane and practice doing things the way you need to do them for real trip takeoffs and landings. I still don't see "the point" of doing touch and goes in a Mooney?

Then you're not practicing good landing technique. Oh and what needs to change from the touch to the go? -Flaps -Trim -Cowl flaps -Prop in (check) -Mixture in (check) -Rudder (introduce left turning tendencies when applying power) Yes, prop and mixture should have been in from landing approach. But if they weren't, on a stop-checklist-takeoff they'd be caught but on a touch and go, that can be catastrophic (on those engine stalled while trying to takeoff from touch and go type accidents I wonder if this played a role). I don't really see any point of touch-n-goes for a licensed and/or experienced pilot. I don't think it's the best idea for student pilots but I realize that the idea is to get landings under their belt cheaply. But for an experienced pilot, who already knows WHAT to do, it's best to practice on getting one great landing rather than practicing mediocre ones over and over again. For the student, they want to do a lot of them (in a skyhawk granted) so they could learn to figure out WHAT to do. Once you know it, what's the value of quantity anymore? If not lowering flaps or not trimming are shortcuts used to make touch-n-goes easier, then you're practicing doing touch and goes and not practicing making proper landings. What's the value at all?

To be doing touch and go's in a Mooney on a shorter than 3000ft runway is completely nuts to me. Not that I believe in touch and gos in a Mooney on any length runway but something that short and you're asking for trouble. However, I nonetheless commend the instructor's decision to abort the takeoff because other than a bent Mooney/Ego, nothing has been damaged (whereas if they continued, who knows?) and for taking responsibility. Overall, a positive outcome and a positive lesson. I prefer we learn from things like this than from fatal lessons.

I wanna hear from the guys who said they start the retraction in ground effect and how that's been working out? The few times I've experimented with that were not pretty!

Yeah. But there are days when it would be illegal to fly at those altitudes without oxygen.