smccray

You’re probably right on that. Based on what I’ve seen on the GFC500 the G5 contains the brains for the GFC500. I hadn’t considered that.

I’ve never heard that smaller is an advantage... If we want to start counting boxes we can, but it doesn’t really matter. Both manufacturer’s systems can produce a very clean installation worthy of the aircraft we fly.

I’ll challenge you on this the GFC500, despite its flaws being locked into the Garmin ecosystem, is the best autopilot option for any Mooney assuming the STC comes through. Clean install you’re looking at $10k plus the G5’s. Clean install on the King, STEC, are $20k+. If you can reuse the existing servos the king and the STEC are cost comparable with Garmins new system. Even the Dynon autopilot isn’t as good. The last I heard Dynon does integrate with a trim servo installed in a certified airplane. Garmin does offer a 2 screen G500 TXI where the second screen backs up the primary, but it’s not cost competitive. The Aspen is a better choice, albeit with screens that should be bigger. If we’re intellectually honest, the glass systems doesn’t give us any more capability than the old 6 pack avionics that these systems are replacing. I installed glass to get nearly everything on one screen right in front of me. The screens are flexible and big which I like. Regarding the Garmin ecosystem and being locked in- I agree. It’s less than ideal. Garmin is IBM.

Truth be told, I’m not pro Garmin. They got me for the the cost of a GFC600 instead of a GFC500 using the STC process. The 500 is good for the 4 seat bonanza and the long body Mooneys, and good for a Cessna 210. Conclusion: it’s not speed nor is it seat capacity. I spent the cash but Garmin hasn’t bought any loyalty. In reality I’m anti Aspen. They have a great product, but the best I can tell the next generation is basically an upgraded screen and an upgraded processor. Okay... great. So what? They had the right idea with the Connected Panel system but they couldn’t get it done. I’ve heard that’s Garmin’s responsibility, but I don’t accept that. Which engine monitor interfaces and displays on the Aspen? if I still owned my Mooney I would be doing one of two things- 1) adding a G5 hsi and waiting. That gets rid of the unreliable King HSI. Then I wait and see what Garmin comes out with next. I believe something is cooking in a lower cost PFD that will require a Garmin navigator and will run the GFC500. Or 2) waiting for Dynon. Godot might arrive before Dynon is an option, but I’m hopeful that the System will bring lower cost glass to certified GA. The lack of news about Dynon systems is a little concerning, but I’m hopeful. Smart move by King and Aspen. I hope it works. However, if I currently owned an Aspen panel I would be looking for an interface between the Aspen as an HSI and the G5 as the backup using a GFC500. King hasn’t earned an additional $10k investment in a new autopilot- the new Garmin autopilot is the best option for most Mooneys assuming the STC comes through. King hasn’t paid attention to piston GA in years. STEC 3100 is 10k using old servos. Most Mooneys have King autopilots. I’m on the record saying that Aspen won’t survive long term. Avionics are moving towards integrated systems, and that’s finally moving to retrofit avionics. To be viable, Aspen needs to bring 1) a larger screen option and 2) better integration with other systems including autopilot annunciations (which needs a larger screen) and engine monitor. I hope Aspen is successful and I want them around, but for any Mid and Short body Mooney the Dynon system is a major problem for legacy certificed avionics companies. if Dynon and Garmin both release certified versions of experimental avionics... lights out for a number of legacy manufacturers.

Don’t these threads always turn into Aspen vs Garmin bashing threads? I’ll start us down that path. My problem with aspen is that the future is unclear. What happens with the avionics in your plane long term? There aren’t any promises in aviation, but there are indications. What do your do with your autopilot? You’re waiting for a digital King system if it ever materializes, but it’s unclear if the Aspen will provide an attitude reference for the new King autopilot. What we do know is that it’s a $10k Bill. The Aspen won’t work with the Garmin GFC500. They’re working on integration with one of the independent autopilots (trutrack, ????) but the future there isn’t clear with Mooney. If it we’re me, I would stick with your original plan, perhaps add a G5, and wait. If your avionics shop isn’t a Garmin dealer (the G5 doesn’t count), I would question the advice of the dealer as he/she can’t sell you Garmin certified equipment. The Aspen is a fantastic piece of equipment and it has more capability than the G5. I don’t think it matters for most installations where the Aspen is on the table. In 2008 it was awesome capability. Today- not so much.

Availability of air conditioning on an airplane operated in Texas: Priceless

I went to my wife 9 months ago and said I was buying an ovation. I had done the logbook review, talked to the broker, and was going to submit an offer the next day on a ‘97 (I think) ovation 3. I had been talking about upgrading for a while and my wife had always said no. This time she just said not another Mooney. She didn’t find it to be comfortable. I’ll always be a mooniac, but I subscribe to the theory that the best plane for any mission is the one your wife likes. Wife and two little girls (3 and 6 weeks)- I need more space in the plane than would be feasible in an ovation. The goal was family plus bags ~600 miles in 3 hours. Not feasible in an ovation, but not far off in a turbo normalized A36. The Bo won’t make it in 3 hours, but at least it will be a comfortable ride. I brought the plane home and took my wife to see it. I showed her the rear cabin- she sat down and smiled at the space. Then she looked at the panel and said, “no glass? You’re going to redo that right?” So that’s the story of how I bought a Bonanza in May and why the bird is in the avionics shop right now.

My own take is that these planes are going to end up orphaned pretty quickly. The Garmin autopilot STCs are excluding G1000 airplanes which will make converting the avionics to new Garmin avionics. Hopefully there's a path to convert these planes to an NXI system with a GFC700 autopilot for a price-tag that makes sense. Converting the 55x to an Stec 3100 has been discussed here, but it doesn't make any sense to me. They're great airplanes and have great capability but I would expect a big discount to a similarly equipped G1000 airplane with a GFC700. I also wouldn't buy a non-WAAS equipped airplane, or even anything less than a full VNAV equipped (option 3) G1000 airplane.

Buy-in of an O1 or an O3 would end up the same by the time you convert the panel, Hartzell prop and 310 HP STC. I would stay away from the Bravo and the Eagle. The Bravo is an incredibly capable airplane, but the operating cost is high. By the time you account for the panel conversion you're better off owning an Acclaim at a lower operating cost. The Eagle has a better useful load primarily by stripping down options. G500TXI and EIS, G5, GFC500, GTN750, GNC255, GTX345, and your choice of audio panel. A lot of capability and clean. I'm familiar with this conversion with a different autopilot.

What's going on? There are a ton of long bodies on the market right now. My my count there are 32 US based ovations on the market compared to only 13 US based J models. I'm looking at Controller so I"m sure there are other planes advertised on other sites, but wow- looks like a fantastic time to upgrade a J to an R. J model prices are up, and competition should push some pricing on ovations down, particularly if an owner wants to get something done by the end of the year.

The STC is available for download on the FAA website. I believe you need permission from the STC holder to use that STC on your plane.

I saw a stack of them at Tandy Leather last week. Not sure if they have a retail store near you but they will mail order. Not an inexpensive source, so I would keep looking.

I have what I imagine is an unpopular opinion, but I wouldn’t buy anything older than a J, assuming you can find a plane to buy. Operating cost is unlikely to be materially different, desirability of the plane is higher, and when it comes to the next rounds of avionics upgrades the J will be included, earlier planes might be. See the GFC 500 upgrades in process. Yeah- Garmin has promised to extend the STC, but there are many examples of upgrades promised in aviation that never occur.

Tease! no mini 5... New Ipad Pros but no new mini, althouth rumor is that one is in the works.

Even if the lender understands that's not the issue. No doubt you were dealing with a lender that wasn't doing his homework on the GNS430w, but honestly that doesn't matter. Even if you find a lender at a bank who understands aviation, even a senior lender that happens to love vintage Mooneys, you will still run into these problems. It's a paperwork issue for the bank to prove to the regulators that the loan is secure. The only solution here is to provide some other sort of independent value estimate. In addition, it may be as simple as the lender believes that the value of GNS navigators is going to tank over some timeframe and he isn't willing to give the collateral much value even if the market values the navigator higher than the lender. Its an investment for the bank and that difference of opinion. There's a real truth here that is tough to talk about- very few lenders actually want a $50K loan on an airplane. There just isn't enough margin in the loan after accounting for origination costs and the risk associated with the deal. It's the same work to underwrite a new cirrus as it is to underwrite a C model Mooney. In reality, the Cirrus is easier because there's a liquid market for Cirrus aircraft. A few thoughts on finding a lender: One lender who is open to lending on aircraft anywhere in the country is going to be difficult. You want a lender who is interested in building a portfolio of aircraft loans and is willing to lend on lower value aircraft. C models are probably out, but the if you start looking 252s or higher you're more likely to have some luck. That's the nice part of non-bank lenders- they're not required to prove the value to a federal regulator. If you're looking at a highly modified airplane with poorly understood valuable upgrades, be prepared for a cash buyer. The lender may not understand the collateral, but in reality the lender may not want to go into a loan committee meeting and try to explain the wide variance of the value to a loan committee. I understand Mooneys, and we used to own the bank- and I wouldn't do it. It's not worth the trouble on a $50-$75K loan @ 5%. Instead of lenders, connect with the relationship managers at regional banks. National banks want large loans- anything less than $1M is a waste of their time. The regionals can profitably make lower $ amount loans. The relationship manager rather than the lender because, and this is key, the value to the bank has to be understood as more than the aircraft loan. The airplane loan opens the door to building a relationship with a likely high income borrower. Many airplane buyers could easily qualify for the loan based solely on their signature independent of the collateral. The relationship managers are more likely to understand the value of the customer, rather than the lenders focus on the value of the loan. Lenders make stupid decisions all the time. They underwrite loans that they shouldn't, and the say, "no" to very high quality credit risks due to some misunderstanding. There are structural problems with lending at low levels that will eventually be addressed at some point if there's enough profit there; perhaps that's the real issue. 60% Loan to Value @ 10%- you can get that deal done. 80%+ LTV at 5% on a $75K airplane? And you want a 15-20 year term? Nope.

Van Bortel finances aircraft using an in house finance department. I don’t know how low they go in terms of loan size, but they may be a source for financing. A non-bank lender is probably the best bet to get a deal done, and their rates (at least 2 years ago when I asked) were bank/like. They were willing to finance a plane they didn’t sell, but I asked about a Meridian for a friend, not a Mooney.

It won't work. The appraisal has to be independent, and a broker in the deal isn't an independent party. The bank's assessment of the collateral is irrelevant- the bank regulators will be looking for an independent assessment of the value of the collateral.

I agree with your assessment on the pricing tools. The tail wagging the dog, or the dog wagging the tail, it's a problem and it certainly affects transaction prices. I want to challenge you a bit Jimmy on the definition of the problem. You're stating that the problem is that banks/buyers don't understand the values of various upgrades to certain aircraft. You have two different groups there that you have to think about differently. Buyers: Pilots are cheap. Mooney pilots are extra cheap. I believe your current business is capturing your knowledge. Banks: The solution already exists, but your definition of the problem isn't correct. If your number is good, all it takes is ordering a full appraisal on the plane. The bank just needs something to stick in a file that proves that the loan is secure. The desktop appraisals tools are a way to avoid the cost of a full appraisal. If the Bank is willing, all it takes is to have the Bank order an appraisal of the plane. It doesn't make much sense on a low value loan, and that's the real rub. I suspect Coy realized he had to educate the market on the value of his modifications in order to sell them. You have the knowledge and expertise on values, but I suspect you're going to have a difficult time monetizing that value directly. Bad news bears... so I'll take the down votes. Anyone who is going to spend $150K on an E model is going to be a cash buyer, or a buyer that is financed on the strength of his/her balance sheet irrespective of the collateral. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's the reality of underwriting a loan of the nicest examples of any plane.

If fine in the air means that you took off and the plane ran okay- then okay. It sounds like you lost the left mag on the ground and then flew home on one mag. I’ve lost mags twice in an IO360 A3B6 J. Both times I didn’t find it until the runup on the next flight. First time it was coming back to home base. Second time I was stranded away from home. Wasn’t fun, but I caught a ride home from a transient plane headed to Dallas. Looking at engine monitor data for the previous flight, it was clear in the data where I lost the mag. In both cases I had pulled power back, and the mag failed when I pushed the power back in.

100% agree. For a couple grand, as long as pilots can get database updates, the 480 is probably the best deal in aviation. That said- still wouldn’t spend the $ on a backup. If a navigator dies then try to source an inexpensive unit or make the upgrade expenditure at that point. Me? I’m pulling a 530w/430 and upgrading to a 750/255. Harvest the value of those boxes now.

Now your question makes more sense. New plane right? Better to underprime vs overprime, but you have to protect the starter. Over time you'll get comfortable with how the plane runs. Starting my old J was a little odd. The first time engaging the starter would almost always fail on a cold start. The second time it would fire right up. It sounded like BS when I bought the plane, but it was absolutely true. Hot starts weren't any big deal- she fired right up. Since we're going into fall/winter... I've read that when it's cold it's good to wait a little longer between prime / starter engagement to give the fuel a little more time to mix in the cylinder and to be ready to fire up. I never noticed any difference, but it makes sense to me.

Look at the engine monitor and check the CHTs and oil temps. If it's hot then hot start. After 3 hours of sitting it's a cold start in TX.

Keeping a spare around doesn't make a lot of sense to me. They're still worth what $5K used? More? So you you have $5K in your panel and $5K on the shelf. They're going to depreciate further, and owners won't get value out of the navigators installed in the airplanes. GTN650 or an IFD440 would make more sense to me, or just run the 480 until it dies then upgrade to a new GPS. Buying a spare is throwing good money after bad. I'm sorry to see the 480 gone. My old J had one and it was a fanatic navigator.

Rumor has been that it will be an option, but it will be from the OEMs not through Garmin. The same way the King Air can be upgraded, legacy aircraft could be upgraded from a technical perspective. Time will tell if they decide to offer it. Garmin has a history of saying No and then changing their tune later. If nothing else, wait for Mooney to get into financial trouble next time and they start shaking trees for cash.

There are rumors that Mooney, like the rest of the OEMs, has the paperwork to offer NXI upgrades to G1000 aircraft. It might be worth a call to Mooney expressing some interest in the NXI. Your plane is probably the only bravo with the GFC 700 autopilot, and the bet is the autopilot would be required for the upgrade. It’s speculation on my part, but if the NXI is coming it would be good to get your Bravo included in the paperwork.