Z W

Jamie: Have you done your estate plan? Will, health care directive, etc? If not, find a local general practitioner. He will advertise for estate planning, criminal defense, personal injury, etc. He will have at least one attorney in the office that does free consultations. Go get a free consultation for your estate plan, which you probably need anyways. Repeat the process till you find one you like, then pay him to set you up. Now you've got a relationship with a good local attorney. 201er: They get away with it because the only remedy, meaning the only consequence, is that the pilot can sue them for violating their rights. If they get consent, then forget about it, no consequence. And they are good at getting consent. Also, generally, whatever money you get is paid by the insurance company, not the officers out of pocket. Assuming the pilot is smart and does not consent, you are looking at suing the federal government. You have to find a lawyer who will take the case, probably on a contingency fee. I do, but we are a small group. They are tough cases, for various reasons. You also are about to file a "tort" and are headed for the dreaded "jury trial" we've all been conditioned to hate. Many people these days are just morally opposed to it and won't do it. I know from prior threads about products liability, some are on this board

I am a lawyer. I do both some criminal defense and some prosecuting of criminals, although honestly I'm mostly a civil lawyer. I do some aviation law. No government agency can search your aircraft without a warrant, generally speaking. There are exceptions to this rule. For example, they may search it if you give consent. They may search it if they have probable cause to believe it contains evidence of a crime, and there are exigent circumstances that would prevent them from being able to delay and get a warrant. They can search if there is contraband (e.g. drugs) in plain view from the exterior of the plane. Law enforcement always prefers to search by consent. When you consent, you waive your 4th amendment rights and any claims you may have. Anything they find can and will be used against you. Any civil claims you may have for violation of your rights are gone. They are actually trained to use intimidation and clever wording to get people to consent to search. Assuming you do not consent, if they detain you and search your aircraft anyways, there are two different areas of the law that come into play. First, if they find any evidence of criminal activity (i.e. drugs), they have to prove that the evidence was legally obtained, without violating your 4th amendment rights. If they can't do that, then under what's called the "exclusionary rule," the evidence they found cannot be used against you in court. Generally that means you walk, after you hire a good attorney and he or she does a good job. Second, if you were not breaking any laws, and nonetheless they detain and search you, you may file a civil suit against the agency and/or officers that did it for money damages. This is the "penalty" they have for violating your rights. There are no other consequences for them. Your plane is not generally under the "jurisdiction" of the FAA and it cannot be searched at will. That might be true for charter operations or commercial flights, but for your 4-seat Mooney on a personal Part 91 flight, you have a reasonable expectation of privacy in your plane. That's why the FAA can't search the interior during a ramp check. The FAA can ramp check you, but you are only required to produce the required documents (AROW, anyone?) along with your pilot's certificate, medical, and photo identification. It's an administrative inspection designed not to implicate your 4th amendment rights. Some lawyers, like myself, have questioned whether the CFRs that permit Part 91 ramp checks are constitutional, but I'm not aware of a court decision on point, so for now it stands. The Pilot's Bill of Rights gives you some additional rights in the event of an administrative action to restrict or terminate your pilot's license. It does not effect what happens out on the ramp. Everybody wants to know "Should I consent?" and "What do I do if...?". These are natural questions. Unfortunately, no lawyer or qualified person should give broad, sweeping, generalized advice like that. Some attorneys do. I think it is unwise. Malpractice insurance carriers hate it. There are so many exceptions and caveats to all these rules, it would literally take a book and three or more years of law school to explain them all. If you are ever stopped, by any government agency, you do have the right to an attorney, and I suggest you use it. Do not answer any questions, or consent to anything, until you have an attorney on the phone. If they won't let you call one, sit down, tell them you are exercising your right to remain silent, and then do it. I've made this offer before, but if anybody would like my personal cell phone number, send me a PM. I'll take your call, free of charge, and help you assert your constitutional rights in a respectful and accurate manner.

I prefer the LPV. The needles never bounce. No need to tune and identify, or risk having the wrong frequency . No need to remember to switch the radio. Just fly the needle and cross check the moving map. Watch for a RAIM warning is all. If you accidentally select the wrong LPV approach the worst thing that can happen is you land on the wrong runway. Select the wrong ILS frequency and you can fly into the side of a mountain.

Nice looking plane, and I think you've got it priced right. I'm not shopping, so that doesn't help you much, but for what it's worth... Some more pics in your ad might help it move, more so than new radios. Good luck with the sale.

It is a lot heavier. Compare the gross weights. Getting stopped takes longer, no way around it. You will use more runway. The other thing I noticed going from a C to a K is the higher approach speeds for IFR. The heavier planes do better at higher speeds - usually 120 or 140 KIAS until the FAF. The short bodies don't go that fast and are happier at 100 KIAS or so.

We are very happy to have passed 11N on to you, Joe. I don't think anybody ever starts out looking for a C model, but they're a great value, and a lot of bang for your buck in GA. If you ever decide to sell, look me up, I might want it back someday .

You have six months until the end of the year. At the dollar numbers you are talking about spending, you can afford to buy a plane ticket back to the U.S. to personally inspect your purchase. Most purchases involve a plane ticket to look at it anyways; yours will just be from farther away. Choose the basic features your plane will or will not have: Short / mid / long body, turbo, IFR GPS, 2-axis autopilot, quality of paint and interior, etc. At a budget of 70-80k you will be looking at a very nice F, a cheaper J, or a nice K model 231. Find the best deal on the market for the model of your choice. Call and negotiate a price. Have the seller email you the logs in PDF form. Sign a contract contingent upon inspection. Have the plane flown to your A&P for inspection. Buy a ticket to come look at the plane, after the inspection has passed. If you like it, buy it, and fly it to your new hangar, or have somebody else do it for you. One caution - you seem to be justifying this financially because of the tax implications. That is not wise. Your accountant must not be familiar with the costs of airplane ownership. You will spend a large chunk of your tax "savings" just on the pre-buy, first annual, and the cost of the plane ticket involved with the purchase. This plane will cost you a lot of money, more than it saves you. There are much better ways to reduce your taxable income (IRAs, employee health insurance, moving from W-2 income to 1099 income if you own the business, purchase your facility and lease it back to your business, etc). A consult with a business / tax attorney or CPA can fill you in on the rest. I don't mean to discourage you from buying a plane, but just want to make sure you understand the financial consequences. You buy planes because flying is the most amazing thing you can do on any given day, and for the lifestyle change they bring. Any other rationale is just a fiction that helps you sleep at night.

My 262 gets 165 kts at 11.5 GPH all day long, or better at higher altitudes. With 105 gallon capacity, that is 9.2 hours of endurance, which produces about 1518 NM, no wind, no reserve. With a 1 hour reserve (which is my personal minimum) it's a range of 1353 NM, plus or minus the wind. I seriously hope I never spend 8.2 hours in the plane non-stop. I've done some 5.5 hour flights and found them miserable, even with a relief bottle. But, if I want to, I can do it I will say, when you're taking off against a headwind, with questionable weather (low IFR) beneath you, and you're solo, it's a comforting feeling to have 9.2 hours of fuel on board. If you don't like the weather below you, or have to deviate, or hit an extra 30 kts of unforecasted headwinds, you can just suck it up and keep flying until things look better. That's the best use I've found for the long range tanks.

Comparing planes for sale can be difficult. There is always a reason a given plane is so cheap. Engine time, missing logs, damage history, non-waas. You have to really know what you are looking at, which is difficult for a student pilot, no offense intended. If you post and identify individual planes for sale the experts here are always happy to help spend your money, or warn you not to. Sometimes the cheapest list price for a model is the most expensive one, if you include the hidden costs.

I have them, 105 gallons, with speed brakes. I did not do the install, so I cannot comment on that. The ability to choose to put that much fuel on board is nice. I once flew from mid-Missouri to Key West without buying any fuel. I did stop on the way. On mine the tanks are set up so the outboard tanks are connected to the inboard tanks. They will drain into each other. The one thing I do not like is it becomes very difficult to tell how much fuel is on board. If you fill just the main tanks that is 75 gallons. 5 minutes later, about 10-15 gallons of that has flowed out into the outboard tanks. Makes it difficult or impossible to visually verify the line guy got your order right. Over time I have come to recognize what that looks like but it is not as easy as verifying "tanks full". They have been great on a few occasions. It is pretty rare though that I need more than the 75 gallon mains on any flight. It causes useful load problems pretty quick unless you are solo.

Parker: I'm curious, how far LOP are you at that setting, and do you measure it by TIT or by the last EGT to peak? That's better performance than I get at the same fuel flow, I think, by 5 or 10 knots. You have the -SB engine instead of my -MB but I think in cruise they are essentially the same engine.

I have stalled a Mooney. It was a non-event. Had a very obvious buffet. Makes me feel much better knowing that.

I think you are looking for this thread; http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.php?/topic/9231-Anyone-seen-this-yet?

Very cool. Cabo just got added to my "someday" destination list. I didn't realize it was so close to El Paso.

Posting this from my Verizon 4g connection. I think you have it fixed. Thank you very much. Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

An interesting turn of events - putting 198.74.57.200 into the address bar on the browser on my phone also leads to the "Apache is functioning normally" page. I had thought it must be a DNS issue but the failure of the hard IP to get here suggests its something else. Any ideas? Jared - All URLs involving Mooneyspace in any way, shape or form fail. Also can't get it loaded from a search result link. I can't seem to run a cmd window on my phone. It's actually the first phone I've had in 4 or 5 years that I have not rooted yet, so I have limited access to those types of things. When I get home tonight I'll connect my PC to the phone's WiFi and do a ping / tracert and post it.

I have had a consistent error trying to access this site from my Verizon mobile connection ever since the new site went online. I get a message of "404 file not found" if I try to go to a specific page. If I try to load the Mooneyspace main page, I get a page that simply says "Apache is functioning normally." This has persisted for a long time now. It also persists through Tapatalk, Chrome, and the standard Android browser on my phone. I know it is the connection because if I connect my phone to WiFi, it accesses the page no problem. Likewise, if I connect my iPad or my PC to my phone's connection through its WiFi, the iPad and PC cannot access this page. I have no other pages I have difficulty accessing. I have tried manually changing the DNS server to Google's OpenDNS but it makes no difference. It seems likely that for some reason my Verizon connection keeps finding the old server instead of the new server. From my networking experience, the easiest solution would probably be to "Forward" all incoming traffic on the old server to the new server. I would lurk and post here a lot more often if my phone could access the site. Whether that's a good thing or not might be debatable, but there could be a significant portion of the internet that cannot access Mooneyspace.

I'm an attorney familiar with these issues. If anybody wants my cell phone number to put in their phone, send me a PM. I don't want to post it in the public search-able forum, but I'm happy to give it out to fellow pilots. If you ever find yourself accosted by Homeland Security, the FBI, Border Patrol, or anybody else, ask to call an attorney, and call me. No charge. Attorneys, including me and those hired by the AOPA, cannot post general guidance for what to do. It's not smart or even legal to give generalized legal advice like that. But if you get me on the phone, I can advise you for your current situation, and I would be happy to. If it results in a few more pilots exercising their constitutional rights in a smart, respectful manner, it will be time well spent.

I have no experience with an AOA indicator. I like the idea of having one and may add one in sometime when the plane is in for panel work. That being said, I find it easy enough to keep my airspeed up and my bank angles shallow in the pattern, like I was taught. I know of no similar training that can keep me out of convective activity when I'm in IMC, short of not flying into IMC. I fly from a 4,000 ft paved runway usually to a longer paved runway, then back home. A lot of the time I am flying into towered airports where I get a straight-in final just like the big boys, so there is no pattern to be flown. AOA I imagine would be extremely useful for short field and high altitude ops. Not intending to bash the AOA, and not saying you're wrong about which should be chosen. Just my perspective.

Pretty sure this is just the next great business idea from these guys: That link may not be safe for work, depending on who you work for...

I really like my Stormscope. When you're in IMC and about to fly into some yellow or yellow/orange on the XM, it's nice to get confirmation from the scope that there are no strikes, in real time, and it's actually just moderate precipitation.

I sent you an email with contact info for a couple CFI's not too far away.

From Wikipedia: Trolling is a game about identity deception, albeit one that is played without the consent of most of the players. The troll attempts to pass as a legitimate participant, sharing the group's common interests and concerns; the newsgroups members, if they are cognizant of trolls and other identity deceptions, attempt to both distinguish real from trolling postings, and upon judging a poster a troll, make the offending poster leave the group. Their success at the former depends on how well they – and the troll – understand identity cues; their success at the latter depends on whether the troll's enjoyment is sufficiently diminished or outweighed by the costs imposed by the group. Trolls can be costly in several ways. A troll can disrupt the discussion on a newsgroup, disseminate bad advice, and damage the feeling of trust in the newsgroup community. Furthermore, in a group that has become sensitized to trolling – where the rate of deception is high – many honestly naïve questions may be quickly rejected as trollings. This can be quite off-putting to the new user who upon venturing a first posting is immediately bombarded with angry accusations. Even if the accusation is unfounded, being branded a troll is quite damaging to one's online reputation

I have landed with a 20G30 direct crosswind in the Mooney. I would not recommend it. I now will not dispatch if it is forecast to be that high. It almost always dies down if you wait a few hours. 15G25 is standard operating procedure for me. I have landed at Amarillo, TX in 45-knot winds, but only about 20 degrees off runway heading. It was a non-event.

201er - way too harsh, in my opinion. His attitude appears to be that he's scared himself so badly he may not fly again. No need to kick the man while he's down after he came here to confess. He's seeking additional training and trying to learn from his mistakes.