Z W

178 seconds to live makes no sense to me. What part of "straight and level" is so hard to accomplish with an attitude indicator staring at you from the center of your panel? If you can find that video on Youtube, you can understand that your sense of balance is completely destroyed by the motions and G-forces in an aircraft, and so you must trust your instruments. VFR into IMC is a very serious situation and should be avoided, but it should not cause panic.

Traffic stops or "checkpoints" are presumed unconstitutional violations of the 4th amendment. The State (or in this case the Feds) would have the burden to prove that they 1) Had a valid, safety-oriented reason to conduct the stop at this particular location, 2) took all possible measures to minimize the burden or inconvenience of the motorists (they can't search every car), and 3) stopped every single car, as opposed to randomly selecting a few that passed by. These are just a few requirements, and the law is always changing. There are probably more. The health department inspections are another matter. You have no reasonable expectation of privacy in a restaurant where you invite in the public to eat your food. The same is true for part 135 flight operations. The argument could very easily be made we have a reasonable expectation of privacy in our privately-owned part 91 aircraft, just like we do in our motor vehicles. This is why the FAA does not claim to have the right to enter your aircraft during a ramp check, and why their policy states they have to let you go if you claim to have an "appointment." It's all geared so someday they can argue you weren't stopped, and were free to go, and so it's not a search or seizure. Therefore you don't get 4th amendment protections and they don't need any reason to ramp check you. Someday, some unfortunate pilot will get caught without his documents and face a sanction. He'll appeal it up, and we'll get the answer.

FAA ramp checks are quite possibly unconstitutional. It's been held that drivers on the roads cannot be stopped randomly just to check and see if their license and registration are current. The LEOs on the roads must have some safety reason to be performing the checkpoint at that particular location - they usually use a history of recent DUI arrests on that street. If somebody has challenged a FAA ramp check on 4th amendment grounds I would very much like to see the opinion, whichever way it was decided. Nothing is more un-American than the government stopping you for no reason and saying, "Show me your papers." Allowing it just because driving is a "privilege" has failed the constitutional test. If it's ever challenged for an airplane the result might be the same. I'm talking here about just an FAA ramp check where they have no authority to enter your plane and just check your required documentation. DHS ripping it apart and searching the inside without probable cause or a warrant is a blatant 4th amendment violation.

I would think DHS would have trouble establishing it was a border search when your flight did not cross any international borders.

The 4th amendment protects you, even from DHS or the FAA. You can always refuse to consent to a search of your person or property. It is their burden to prove they can do it without your consent if they proceed.

Haze can reduce visibility below 3 miles. Legally that is IMC. I have seen it before where haze removed the horizon and I was using instruments. You can usually see the ground straight down but forward is a big light and dark blur.

The TAFs shown to you on Foreflight are different from the Area Forecast I'm describing. You can find them here: http://www.aviationweather.gov/products/fa/ Foreflight will not show them to you anywhere except in your DUATS briefing if you opt to "Brief" or "File and Brief" the flight. TAFs are great for predicting the weather at your departure, destination, and alternate. For everything in between, you need to use the Area Forecast. For example, it may have contained a warning for haze in eastern Missouri / western Tennessee at your cruise altitude. The TAFs will only warn you if haze is expected on the ground at the field. All VFR pilots should be very cautious flying into haze. You can be in IMC in haze without going anywhere near a cloud. It sounds like that may have happened to you, and if so, you did a good job dealing with the situation.

You are not alone, and you are brave for posting this here. Most pilots scare themselves once or twice while learning. You are being too hard on yourself. Great job, and keep at it. I suggest you call your CFI and run through some realistic flight planning scenarios, or post some here for feedback. The information you needed to see before your departure should have been in the Area Forecast. That is your best source of information for cloud bases and tops and items like widespread haze on a cross country. It sounds like you relied on the TAFs (terminal aerodome forecasts). Those are only good for a 5 mile radius around their field. They can easily give the wrong impression like they did for you here. There is a lot about weather they do not teach as part of the PPL. It is your license to learn.

90% of my flights could probably be completed in a $25k Cessna 150 with a VOR/GS radio and a few extra days off work. It is all relative. Pick your price point and have fun. If your price point could include a turbo, do it. You only live once, and I will bet you never regret it. My best flying memories are up over 12k. Ground speeds, weather avoidance, mountain flying. But then, if you like your J, by all means, keep it. It probably can make 100% of the same trips as a K. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I stay at FL180 or below. I would go to about FL220 to top weather or possibly terrain (Aspen?), but otherwise I do not like being that high for long. This is your useful time of consciousness at those altitudes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_of_useful_consciousness At FL180, you have 20-30 minutes. At FL220, you only have 5-10 minutes. Not worth it to me for just a tailwind. So far I've never needed to go that high. If I did, I would be watching my pulse ox closely and being very careful not to crimp or pull on my oxygen hose. Also, most cannulas are only certified to FL180. To be legal higher means a mask. My mask is uncomfortable. Another reason to stay under FL180. I use 65% power a lot of the time. It is a whole lot more economy for only a 10-15 knot speed loss. Sometimes I will go 75% if I am in a hurry or need to use the restroom

At 10,000 feet: 160 KTAS @ 11 GPH, about 65% power 175 KTAS @ 13 GPH, about 75% power To sell you on it, you first must understand, the turbo is not about increasing your TAS at the cost of wearing oxygen. It's about increasing your groundspeed by gaining a 50 knot tailwind in the high teens, turning a 4-hour flight into a 3-hour flight. It's about cruising in comfort in the teens when there's moderate turbulence to at 12k or below. It's about taking off out of Jackson Hole, Sante Fe, Telluride, or other high altitude airports at gross weight on a hot day and climbing at 750-1000 FPM until those 16,000-foot mountains no longer block your horizon. It's about flying in clear air at 17,000 feet, visually avoiding thunderstorm buildups, instead of being down at 10,000 feet, in the soup, hoping your Nexrad display or Stormscope is giving you accurate information about where those buildups are. It's about when, at 10,000 feet, you start to pick up unforecasted ice, and you push in the throttle and have 100% engine power to either climb or maintain altitude while you perform a 180 degree turn. Capability, not speed. The downsides? Some additional maintenance. Probably largely avoided if you watch your temperatures. There will be an additional cost at overhaul time. You have to watch more carefully for shock cooling coming down from the teens, and stay ahead of the plane, or you end up too fast and too high. Not really a problem once you're used to it. Just beware. Once you've gone turbo, it's hard to go back.

I've done the same thing, Lood. The Mooney is perfect except about twice per year when I am trying to fit 4 adults or 3 adults and ski gear in it, and I have to run with minimum fuel to make the useful load work. I hate running with minimum fuel. I spend the whole time staring at the gauges and wondering, "Am I sure there's 30 gallons in there?" I am always sure, by the way, but somehow it still bugs me the whole flight. But, to make those two trips per year easier, would I rather have a 182 that's 30 knots slower, or a Bonanza that burns 3 more GPH, for all the rest of my trips? So far my answer is no.

You turn the boost pump on for take-off and landing in a C model. That's proper procedure in the POH. But I always did turn mine off at the same time I leaned for taxi after start-up. It seems to help avoid getting too rich on the ground. Mine would foul a plug pretty quick if I failed to lean for taxi and turn off the boost. I also left my boost pump off and left it leaned for the run-up. I don't recall my POH stating boost pump on for the run-up. Every time I rolled onto the runway I did a GUMPS check, and in the S for switches, I included fuel pump on, landing light on. Also this is the time to check M for mixture - set as appropriate. That should be partially leaned, at a high density altitude, which is what you get on a very hot day or at a high elevation. If you've properly leaned for taxi and you forget to put the mixture knob back in, your engine will start to die as you advance the throttle. You can't forget that way - the plane won't fly. As stated before, that pump has a very short lifespan and a high rebuild cost. You will want to leave it off as much as possible.

You can over-rich the C model's engine pretty easily on the ground. On very hot (100+ dF) days you may even need to leave your mixture leaned by 1 inch to have full power. If mine was full rich and I had the carb heat on, on a hot day, it would sputter at full throttle for a go-around. I always left the mixture leaned just a little bit on short final after I discovered that.

When I'm rocking a tailwind and/or a 175 KIAS descent, I get turbine arrivals. I've not yet been slowed down for a jet though.

Maintenance is similar to any complex airplane. Probably less, if your F model has manual gear and flaps. Some like those, some don't. I prefer electric, having flown both. Parts aren't bad to get. Most mechanics I've talked to are familiar with them, and like them. They aren't as common as a Cessna or Piper, but they aren't rare either. The F makes a decent 4-adult plane, actually. Maybe not as good as the 182, but since it's more efficient you can take less gas and "use" more of your useful load. The legroom for your passengers is not any worse than flying coach on an airline. I've done 4 adult males in my K model for a 2-hour hop and nobody had any complaints. Other pros: Spending more on your hotel and rental car than AVGas for any given trip Respect from other pilots ("Isn't that thing hard to land?") Hearing ATC say, "Reduce speed, there's a 182 on a 5 mile final in front of you" Sports-car-like handling 40-knot headwinds are an inconvenience, but not a deal breaker Biggest cons: Not the best load haulers Rough field capability is limited Short fields require very precise airspeed control and a practiced pilot The single door and baggage access make loading somewhat difficult You can find other planes that go as fast, or planes that burn less fuel, but none will do both. In the budget range of an F, I don't think you'll even find another 4-place single that will go as fast. If you're flying from one paved strip to another, with 4 or fewer people, the Mooney really can't be beat. The fuel savings will leave you more room for your maintenance / hangar fund anyways.

You can often cruise in a C model in the yellow, below about 7k feet. I always kept mine in the green in anything other than totally smooth air. If it's bumpy and I'm in the yellow, I climb until WOT cruise produces speeds in the green, around 8-10k. Usually gets you out of the bumps anyways. It is actually fairly challenging to keep it out of the yellow while descending in a C without dropping the gear. Slow down before you go down.

I try to keep my O2 above 90 on the pulse ox. At 10-12k I can do that just by focusing on deep breathing techniques, as long as I'm not talking too much to passengers. Over that I need the cannula, which works up to FL180 for me. My O2 levels sit around 92-93 even at sea level, so I shoot for that. Not sure why. I don't smoke. I was amazed the first time I tried deep breathing after reading it on a forum. Took me from the 80's to the 90's in no time, like Ellioth says. And, if you continue breathing deep with the oxysaver cannula, you can leave it on a lower flow level. At least, I can, according to my PulseOx. I don't worry about that usually unless the tank is running low and I'm trying to finish the flight with "reserves." I don't notice fatigue and headaches as long as I keep my O2 level above 90.

You can find plenty of fine examples of a M20C for under $40k, but you will find that you probably cannot get everything you would otherwise want. The biggest items: 1. An IFR GPS (if you plan to fly IFR) 2. A functioning autopilot 3. A 4-cylinder engine monitor 4. A standard 6-pack panel for your instruments 5. Nice paint and interior Those are the biggest ticket items. At $40k if you find one with a mid time engine and all of that, it will be a steal. You probably need to set your priorities from that list, and then look for a plane offering the most for the buck. Operating expenses, you should budget $10k/year for hangar, insurance, annual, and basic maintenance. Gas and oil changes is extra. If you have any major repairs that will be too low; If you don't, it will be a little high.

Very true, although in our case, it was "If we cant get X lets just keep it and fly it." Two years and lots of repair/maintenance bills later, we changed our approach to "get it sold at whatever the market says its worth." Turns out that was about $7k less than X. After cutting out the brokers $5k commission we actually did not pocket much less than we originally wanted. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

One other note - the cost of ownership on both planes was almost identical. Same hangar rent, same annual base cost, same insurance, even fairly similar random maintenance. There are more systems on the modern plane, but the age of the vintage plane results in a lot of random hoses, wires, accessories, etc wearing out. Aside from the eventual engine rebuild, it is not any cheaper to own a vintage Mooney, in my experience. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

We had both the C and the 262 for a couple of years. My father and I both fly so it was not completely crazy. We made a half-hearted attempt to sell the C after we got the 262, but had a bad experience that probably resulted from using a broker and coming to the market with a price in mind. You cannot do that, by the way - the plane is only worth what the buyer will pay. We eventually came to realize trying to own two makes no sense. We are also in business together, so we cannot easily both be out of the office at the same time. Somebody has to stay in town and keep things running. The 262 is a great plane. The paint and interior are bad but it is likely getting a makeover soon. Our airplane budget just got a little looser. From the left seat, though, it is great. It climbs 500-1000 ft a minute, at gross, to at least FL180. It is very happy burning 11.5 gph at peak TIT, and that gives you 170-185 knots between 9000ft and FL180. I dont go higher than that but it will go faster up there. It is actually better mpg and lower fuel cost than driving an SUV. It is the king of economy. The 252 cowl flaps keep the engine very cool. The speed brakes, on board oxygen, 3-axis autopilot, and fully functional back seat made it the choice to keep over the C. The speed difference between it and the C was actually pretty negligible on most trips, unless you count the tailwinds the 262 can sometimes reach. I like to snowboard, so the turbo was also a big deal to reach the mountain airports. I will post updates on the 262 work. Probably starting with the panel. Stay tuned. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I see a lot of threads about the market, and the best strategy to sell or buy a plane. I just finished selling our 1968 M20C, at $1k less than list price, and thought I would share my experience. It was a well-equipped, beautiful plane, but it had damage history (multiple gear-ups and prop strikes, along with a forced landing on a road in 1994 where the wings struck sign posts). It also had a 1300-hour, just past mid-time, engine. I did not use a broker. I took the time to put ads on Barnstormers, Controller, and Trade-A-Plane, along with Mooneyspace. I was concerned about the amount of my time it would consume; however, almost all the inquiries came through email, rather than telephone. I found that to be very manageable. I priced the plane aggressively. I made it stand out as the best deal on the market, by listing it well below the list price of the next comparable short-body Mooney with an IFR GPS, 4-cylinder engine monitor, standard 6-pack panel, a functioning autopilot, and nice paint and interior. It got a lot of attention. I probably received 2 or 3 inquiries per week. I saved a lot of time and effort by compiling all the photographs, specs, logs, etc and putting them into my Dropbox account (www.dropbox.com). I then had a standard email with links to download all the information. When I got an inquiry, I just pointed them at the info and said, "Let me know what your offer is." I had two very serious buyers who were told by multiple lenders that they could not get financing on a plane over 30 years old, or one with damage history, or one with a mid-time engine. They eventually walked away. The third serious buyer got it done. I don't think he's flown the plane yet, since the plane is still in the shop getting a fresh annual and having some minor issues fixed. I hope he enjoys the plane as much as I did. I hear he has joined the site, but I'll leave it up to him to introduce himself. One interesting fact - he was not concerned about the "damage history", because the aircraft he's been flying usually have multiple bullet holes in them. Any airplane that has not been shot up seems like an improvement. It took about 30 days to get the final signed contract, and another 30 days for inspection and closing the deal. Part of that delay was me finding a weekend to take it to his mechanic for the pre-purchase inspection. My take away? The market is still alive. You can sell your plane. Lots of people are out there looking at Mooneys. I watched the market for a long time before listing, and the ones that sit for years are sitting for a reason. I'm sad to see the plane go. I learned to fly instruments in it, and took my family a lot of places. But I think the new owner will take care of it.

Go see Dave Green in Venice. www.mooneyservice.com. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I have not installed it, but I've looked into it. You can install it as your primary AI, but a 337 and/or field approval may be required. You can find an extensive discussion here: http://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=75676&hilit=RCA+2600 Supposedly a great little unit if you can get it legal.