201er

Thank you.

New Jersey Mooney Pilots will be hosting a lunch fly-in from 12-2 at Chester County KMQS. Mooney pilots and GA pilots welcome.

Is someone willing to go prove that? Not I.

Friends, please learn from this and buy an angle of attack indicator. My plane has one and it has saved me on short takeoffs of this sort. When I was close to a departure stall (but at what seemed to be a good indicated airspeed) from a short field at high weight on a hot day, I saw the AOA indicated too slow and I put the nose down to improve climb performance (which is counter-intuitive) and that made her climb. Patrick was not experienced at flying heavy. He did virtually all his flying solo or at most one other person. And even though on paper his gross weight was higher than an older J, his plane was heavier and had no reason to climb any better. Book gross weight isn't enough. You need to evaluate your weight capabilities based on the conditions on a case by case basis. The elevation of that airport is 1729 but the DA was probably closer to 3000ft that day. Even the extra 200ft may not have made a difference. Yet on a cold winter day, he would have probably made it off from that intersection just fine.

I recently completed my first airplane pilot logbook. I've also on my second logbook for gliders as well. How many logbooks have you gone through? Do you still keep paper or just online?

YEAH! Or else I may put a dent in his bird

Hey guys, for those of you who've been following my parrot stuff, just wanted to let you know I've had enough and shot polly dead:

Even though we tend to pay a lot of attention to inadvertent flight into IMC (as intermediate to advanced pilots, this plays a greater role in our circle for non-instrument rated pilots), when compared to loss of control due to inadequate stick and rudder skills, it is a minor issue. Teaching guys how to safely make it around the pattern and telling them to stay away from clouds is far more practical for their first 100-500 hours of flying experience than overloading them with all of the instrument requirements when they haven't even mastered the basic flying. If you're talking about an instrument rating being a "graduation" requirement for getting a Private Pilot rating, that would mean at least 100 hours to get a rating at all!!!! Between the required time for private, required time for instrument, required xcountry time... And even then, at 100 hours the graduating pilot would be less experienced than a 100 hour VFR pilot who got the rating in 70 hours and got 30 hours of private flying in the system. I do agree that an instrument rating is very important for airplane pilots, particularly pilots of fast airplanes that can go far. However, I don't see how mandating thousands of VFR only weekend pilots who've barely ever flown further than a hundred dollar hamburger every other weekend to get instrument ratings would greatly improve safety. Virtually every (actually I'd say every) VFR flight into IMC that I've read about, the conditions were forecast as such, the pilot was flying cross country, and the pilot knowingly chose to violate FARs and proceed into actual instrument conditions. I don't recall any innocent cases where the pilot was doing everything by the book, got a briefing, flew in proper conditions, and unexpectedly they closed around him and that led to his demise. Every case I've read, the VFR pilot CHOSE to be there and CHOSE to continue! With that kind of attitude, an instrument rating is no savior. Just instead of the killer being IMC, it'll be icing or thunderstorms.

Thank you! Excellent advice! One that I learned like this was to check the emergency gear override is fully locked or it won't let the gear come up. I had a takeoff where the climb was unusually anemic and it took me a while before I realized the gear wasn't actually up. I also realized that on a short field obstacle takeoff, this could be fatal.

Fly in at Sky Manor went great! In attendance were Cris, John, Alan, Don, Al, Bill, Anthony, and myself. Unfortunately we did not have a dentist or Falcon captain as their birds were in for annual! Great to see everyone again and let's plan another Mooney fly in soon!

I don't think I've ever seen engine manufacturers endorsing 50 ROP. They usually suggest peak or 100ROP for best economy and best power. However, a bunch of instructors have taken it upon themselves to just average the two out and suggest 50ROP to students with no idea what they are talking about. Then the students treat it as the word of God cause that's how they learned.

No offense, but this does not sound like good advice to me. First off, you can slow down a Mooney when flying approaches (or in trouble) to give yourself more time to think. You can fly a stable approach at 90 knots if you prepare for it and slow down ahead of time! But when it comes to not having time to look at the chart and requiring extensive approach preparation ahead of time, I can see this getting someone in trouble when things don't go as planned. Wx is bad or airport is closed after accident, need to divert to an airport 5 miles away, only 1 minute enroute to prepare for new approach, gotta get on it, not much fuel left, etc. I don't think it's a bad idea to play with the sim when you are learning and before you actually start doing the real stuff. But by the time you're doing the real stuff, you should be able to pull out an approach chart you've never seen before in your life and fly that approach right there and then! When I practice approaches to stay current, I'll fly back to back approaches at nearby airports. Some of them I may look at in advance while others I pick as I'm doing another. This helps me prepare for the unexpected. You don't always get to fly the approach you briefed or practiced for. Just my four half pennies. And as for mr dentist, are you nuts!? There are already a ton of guys who can't manage stick and rudder and crash in the pattern.... and you want to burden them with instrument flying first? You want to make it 3x times longer and harder to get PPL? Why put the cart before the horse? There are plenty of people who've flown exclusively VFR for many years without any problems. I agree that a healthier fear of IMC must be instilled in VFR pilots (and sometimes IFR pilots too!), but that doesn't mean you can't fly VFR and stay out of the soup just fine. Back when I was flying skyhawks, inadvertent flight into IMC was virtually impossible. I'd pick clear days and my "long" cross countries were only like 100 miles so the weather doesn't change any in that sort of distance. Since I've been flying the Mooney though, distances have drastically increased and it's not uncommon for me to fly through two or three different weather systems enroute. Just because it is prudent to be instrument rated in a Mooney (cirrus and other fast/complex planes for that matter), doesn't mean every piper cub and skyhawk beginner needs to prioritize that! Hope to see you at Sky Manor around noon today for lunch and friendly chat

First of all I think it's a good idea to get a bunch of VFR and VFR cross country experience before even attempting the instrument rating. It's hard enough flying the plane as it is, that's gotta be second nature when you're in the soup. Next, if I remember correctly, you're required to have 50 hours of cross country to even qualify for an instrument rating (and in reality I think 100-200 is a better amount). Lastly, this stuff is so hard, it just takes time to sink in. Sometimes you need a little time off and a break from it. To do it in a single week, or even month for that matter, is practically suicide. Really. Either you blow up from the pressure/difficulty doing it. Or you pass the rating but don't have the long term practice to really know what you're doing. Doesn't seem like a good idea to me. You need time to learn weather and flying first and then when you do attempt the instrument training, you need time to let it sink in. What's the point of rushing it?

NJMP will be meeting this Saturday for lunch at Sky Manor (N40) from Noon till 2PM. Bring your Mooney, bring your friends!

What's the big fricken deal? Encompassed in the term "small knives" are nail clippers, files, corkscrews, and a ton of other harmless little gadgets that people carry around with them. Let's not forget that they are already handing out knives to every passenger even in economy class with their meals now. It's ridiculous to prohibit people from taking small scissors or nail clippers and then be handing out knives onboard.

Sometimes towers are pretty useless. Common example at the less busy towered airports: Tower: "Mooney 123 report on downwind" Mooney: "Mooney 123 on downwind" Tower: "Cessna 345 you have a mooney on downwind report in sight" Cessna: "Cessna 345 has the mooney" Tower: "Mooney you have a cessna on final" Mooney: "Cessna in sight" Tower: "Mooney follow the cessna cleared to land #2" And at an uncontrolled field goes like this: Cessna: "Cessna turning final 36" Mooney: "Mooney left downwind 36, got the cessna on final will be landing #2" End of story. I have to laugh sometimes at the insane and unnecessary level of repetitiveness and frequency congestion that gets created at tower airports. And as for safety, I've had as many close calls with traffic in towered airspace (mainly class D) as at uncontrolled fields! So while I hate to see the govt meddle in aviation, I have yet to be convinced that towers are beneficial or make things safer at small GA fields that aren't that busy. Those kinds of tower convos make me think of this: I do admit that it terrifies me to fly in/out of an uncontrolled field with crossing runways on a calm weekend day!

Usually when you see a K and a J equally priced, that is because it is a pretty nice J and a terribly run down bottom end K that needs an engine and avionics. You get what you pay for...

Millville??? It's an uncontrolled field. They just have a weather briefer. I don't see your point?

Actually I like the idea BUT IF and ONLY IF that means I get to opt out of paying for everyone else's stuff that I have absolutely no use for or interest in. If I get substantial tax break, I'll support user fees. But as long as the govt wants to stick its nose in every avenue of public life, they can pay the tab for our atc system.

Because if you're past 12 years and not a high time engine, then the plane isn't really being flown that regularly.

Yeah but you can't measure that. POH has power settings of the same MP/RPM listed with same speed. Yet because the mixture is best economy vs best power, actual power will be different. Example from POH: 4000ft, 23.2", 2700RPM, 75% Power, 12.5GPH at best power yields 161KTAS 4000ft, 23.2", 2700RPM, 75% Power, 10.8GPH at best economy yields 161KTAS This is why I said the POH isn't credible. In reality one of these is more than 75% (or one is less) but the POH doesn't account for this.

So IFR in class G is allowed but it's considered careless and reckless??? That's just great. So like the pilot said, why bother allowing IFR in class G then? Why have uncontrolled airspace at all? Perhaps VFR flight in class G is careless and reckless despite being legal cause no one is controlling it? What if above mentioned pilot had TCAS onboard? Or even just TIS-B? Would that still be careless for flying IFR in class G? How about flying VFR in class G with 1 mile vis and clear of clouds in a fast airplane? At Mooney cruising speeds, that's 25 seconds to "see and avoid." In a TBM, that might be closer to 10 seconds. What about flying through an arrivals corridor VFR unaware of it? Is that going to be careless and reckless too? This is a bit scary that law abiding pilots can still be charged for breaking rules they don't know about...

Doc, no one ever suggested taking off LOP! It's only in question in the climb once comfortable. Byron, how do you know what your peak EGT is at full power? I'm too chicken to do a proper "mixture leaning" above 75% to find peak because of detonation threat. When you pull quickly, EGTs never fully reach peak.

POH is known to be wickedly wrong when it comes to speed or power figures. For example, the POH would suggest that flying at economy cruise vs best power yields the exact same cruise speed. This is obviously preposterous or why would anyone ever want to fly at best power?

Ok, well what's more efficient and/or faster? 6000ft 2500RPM 75% power 8000ft 2700RPM 75% power Those are ballpark numbers but sound about right to me. Throttle is always WOT obviously. Above example is most likely ROP. What about an LOP example, what's going to be better? 4000ft 2500RPM 75% power 6000ft 2700ROM 75% power