exM20K

You’re hired. I’ll pm you after the new year. -Dan

In my TN, the G1000 goes yellow with 8-10 gallons remaining in level flight. The ship’s annunciation and G1000 red are at 6. This is in level flight. In the descent, it’s a couple gallons higher. ive never run a talk dry. Maybe I should try this, and maybe I should do it in a descent pitch attitude. Anyone want to come along for a test flight? -de

Lol. I tried to delete my post after finding another thread on this topic, but you’re too fast! That’s a pity that Bendix/King is such a mess. My Silver Crown KFC 200 panel, complete with KNS80 Rnav always performed. Viable competition for Garmin would make flying cheaper. -Dan

I can see pitch issues with the fuel tank, but how could a coordinated turn cause any mischief? -dan

More recently, Mooney ran an ad with the Headline: “Lose the Training Wheels.” I thought it was a clever and effective dig on Cirrus. Couldn’t find an image on the intertubes. -dan

Invoice from air power was $86,000 when I saw one last Spring. To be fair, though, CMI ships a complete package with exhaust and all accessories new or rebuilt. Field overhaul quote may not be so comprehensive. -dan

For CMI power plants, the goal is, I believe, trying to extend cylinder life rather than preventing a “kaboom!” There are two sets of lean operating guidance that are in conflict sometimes: APS’s focus on internal cylinder pressure with degrees LOP as a proxy, and Mike Busch’s focus on CHT and metallurgy. so which is more likely to lead to more cylinder or valve wear requiring expensive work: High ICP, or CHT’s out of the ideal range? Because if I don’t care about high ICP, I can baffle or cowl flap or cold weather my way to desired CHT. I appreciate all the effort Mike has put into his books and Savvy, but I’m more convinced by the data and history as gathered by APS, and choose to operate targeting 50 LOP, accepting whatever CHT results from that, so long as it’s in the green. I also am making a sincere effort to fly at least weekly, which will probably be much more influential than ICP or CHT in making TBO and beyond on these jugs. -dan

The protected surfaces look pretty clean to me and typical of how the system has worked for me. Moderate The rate of accumulation is such that even short encounters become potentially hazardous and use of deicing/anti-icing equipment or diversion is necessary. Severe The rate of accumulation is such that deicing/anti-icing equipment fails to reduce or control the hazard. Immediate diversion is necessary. These definitions are "official," and I think they are not great. "Severe" in a piston single or twin may be "Trace" on a turbojet with hot wings, ram air rise, and tons of climb. Icing becomes severe if my system poops the bed. It's all subjective. -dan

The landing distance guidance is puzzling. There is no partial-flap landing performance published for the TN, but this makes no sense to me. rule of thumb is 100' per excess knot of airspeed, but i'm not landing on a short runway with or with the possibility of ice on the plane. -dan

2020: flew 100 hours with which I'm satisfied given there was nowhere to fly for 2/3 of the year and precious little business travel. 2021: Sell the motorhome so I can fit a pressurized plane in the hangar -dan

Dustin, Among all the Mooney models, the Acclaim has the least plane-to-plane variability. Off the top of my head, for the FIKI plane you want, the only variables are: exterior and interior colors and design WAAS or not Option 3 (the VNAV button on the GFC controls Type S or not 310 HP or not Ultra or not There are some minor avionics options like storm scope, active traffic, what transponder, that sort of stuff, but as compared to the rest of the fleet, they are pretty uniform. Dan

121 and 135 operators in certain circumstances. Not 91 operations..... -dan

USPS has been sending out notices to shippers and online merchants saying that the volume of packages this holiday season has badly backed up their system. My sample went into the mail last week, and I’m not expecting a report any time soon -dan

TIO540A1A Turbo Navajo 540# dry 310 HP TIO540 J2B chieftain 548# dry 350 HP TIO540AF1B Bravo 493# Might need a third battery in the tail for balance . Suspect the J2B is a lot bigger, too. It sure looked huge on the test stand at GAMI Also, Mooney has long been leery of too much HP overwhelming the tail. The 310 HP Ovation and acclaim were an STC, and Mooney waved off on buying the Acclaim STC. -dan

It’s not derated. It is what it is, a fine, reliable, and breathtakingly expensive power plant, with very little in common with the Navajo or Mirage engine. Closer relative is in the TB series of Socata planes -Dan

Fortunately, ILS runways are long. Even breaking out at mins, you have 30ish seconds to slow down, and that's actually a long time. LPV - served runways can be as short as 3200' IIRC, which doesn't leave a lot of excess for floating. Problems: 1) limited to approach flaps if you have been in icing conditions. I don't have the POH wording in front of me, but that's the gist. 2) ambiguity about whether or not approach flaps may be deployed above the white arc. I've heard both ways from authorities I respect. 3) speed brakes are, IMHO, a really bad idea to pop near the runway. So... what I try to do for a low IMC Icing approach is: Fly the ILS down to VMC (or mins, obviously) at 120KIAS or greater no flaps/gear down Once visual, power to idle and approach flaps keep the nose coming up until 86 KIAS over the runway. This may consume a lot of runway, but that's ok (usually). hope there's cold beer in the hangar or home I've done this only a handful of times in icing conditions, which is why I need to practice it more. Non-precision approaches get a lot more sporty, but the VPATH is helpful in not having to make massive power changes at a stepdown or level off. Things I need to practice: landing after carrying 120 KIAS and gear down no flaps to 200AGL doing same at night... -dan

Two different issues here. As @Cruiserpoints out, the 120 KIAS min is to keep the bottom of the wing and tail clean. The accumulation from failing to do as we vote in Chicago (early and often) when using TKS is something I think every TKS user will discover. Holding off until in icing is a false economy as you’ll use much more fluid to deice than you would have with an early application to coat the surfaces. your ice buildup photos are really beautiful and different. Very impressive buildup, especially on that wingtip light baffle. I found that to be the first place ice would accumulate on my 231, and it looked really cool at night, glowing with the nav lights.

presumably one is out of icing conditions when transitioning to visual flight on the ILS.

Yikes! Did you keep your speed up on final? One thing I need to do more is to fly an ILS at >120 KIAS, which is the minimum icing speed. I'm typically 105 for the final segment... -dan

Amen to that. But beware the moral hazard of a more reliable powerplant (or CAPS) impelling riskier decision making.... -dan

and yet.... the Vitatoe turbo-normalized IO550 conversion cruises nearly as fast, has a lot more range, and is a ton cheaper to purchase (and presumably to operate). Pistons work well in this class of planes. -dan

The cost of operating a factory turbine is shockingly high. C&D pegs the M20TN and Bravo at $205/hour w/ $5 gas. Meridian/TBM are $900-1200 per hour. Yes, you are going faster, but not that much. Then there is the cost of money and higher insurance.... Even the Jetprop comes in at something like $800/hr. I spend $25-$35,000 per year operating the M20TN 150ish hours every year with no interest or hangar charges. I'm simply not in a place that I can rationalize spending 5x that for the much more capable SETP. For all the hate directed at the CMI engines, I think it's wrong. These engines are very efficient, light weight and reliable. Consider the Cirrus experience: 100 cases where the pilot elected to pull the 'chute over 10 years/10,000,000 hours of flying? If all 100 of those chute pulls were catastrophic engine failure, then engine failure is so unlikely as compared to stupid pilot tricks that it fades into irrelevance. 1/100th% likelihood of a chute pull event every 100 hour year. And Cirrus pilots are pulling the chute for a variety of reasons, not just a rod or cylinder departing the cowling. The cirrus owners group keeps very good data, and i'm using approximate recollections here.... WRT the big continental diesel... I have a hundreds of hours in DA42's and am very fond of those installations. I would, however, be more comfortable with a couple hundred thousand hours in service for a new diesel in a single. Stuff breaks no matter what engine you're running. -dan

That would be doubly awesome... a flatter pitch angle for climbing in and sufficient useful load to use the back seats regularly! -dan

They’re not if you steal them out of a soft-serve machine ;-)

That plane would have the pitch angle of a DC3 sitting on the ground. Acclaim sits something like 5* nose up, which makes rear seat access a lot harder than in the 231: front seat back won’t stay forward. It wants to flop back...