slowflyin

+1 for the SIRS, removed the vertical card. I like the smaller profile. Does great in TB

I fly a 650 and I think if offers terrain and traffic (from 88) with the 500 foot call coming from the 796. I'm not sure about terrain..... There is no doubt the portables offer more. Fore-flight tells me when I'm approaching an active runway.

This works for me as well. I flew some more approaches after starting this thread and it seems like 15" is a set and forget number. Keeps me out of the red and I can live with a faster approach. My home field has 4600 feet usable and about 300 agl for the decision. Even with no wind I was able to chop the throttle at the MAP and land with plenty of room. Slower would be better for those lower IFR days but this is manageable.

Disclosure- I'm co-owner of an unmanned systems company. We have been in the business in some shape or form since 1988. Primarily DOD stuff with some pure commercial. No hobbyist product. Most of your hobbyist grade stuff is a challenge. It's inexpensive. Requires no flight training. The autopilot and flight control system is open source resulting in "fly-a-ways". Quite often, the end user is not invested in the hobby like the typical AMA member. It appears to be a different culture. Modelers have operated off of airports for years with few issues. My home field has RC jets flying tremendous speeds every Sunday that the weather allows. They monitor the unicom and are very respectful. It doesn't hurt that they have tons of time and money invested. All that being said, I don't consider the multi rotor consumer grade gear the press spends so much time talking about much of a threat. Typically they are very lightweight, operate visual line of sight only, and have very limited endurance. Quite frankly the buzzards stacked up off the end of every runway concern me more. There are exceptions, but if you held one in your hand you probably wouldn't be as fearful. This whole issue has the press spooled up and is a PITA for those of us doing this for a living. They are salivating for a big story. It's invaded tv shows, movies, and the press at every level and very little of it is based on facts. Even this discussion. The pilot said he couldn't tell if it was a balloon or a drone. We are not talking about balloons. One thing I believe is certain, you can't legislate common sense. The government will not save us from ourselves. People flying on the Whitehouse lawn, on approach ends of runways.......are already breaking the law. More laws probably will not help. The guy flying an unmanned aircraft off the end of a runway probably has a laser in his pocket. For the record, my company rarely operates in the NAS. When we do it's with FAA approval, class two medicals, visual observers, private pilot minimum, redundant command and control transceivers, redundant GPS, backup magnetometers, lost com failsafes, denied gps failsafes, mode C and/or ADSB...........the list goes on and on. The bird(s) we are flying this week, in Restricted Airspace, show up great via any ADSB solution. Next time you fly by a big block of Restricted just look for something flying around at 30-40 knots. It's probably a UAS. All commercial operations of UAS in the US outside of Restricted Airspace require an FAA certificate of authorization or a 333 exemption (very limited). The FAA is so restrictive we are rapidly loses our industry to other countries. The jobs will leave and they will sell us their stuff on Amazon. As I read my own post I realize the tone could be interpreted several ways. So let me be clear. I'm probably more irritated than most when someone does something irresponsible with an unmanned asset. It's a stain on my profession, propels uninformed legislation and just generally pisses me off. However, in my opinion, the media and Holywood are certainly painting an unrealistic picture. It reminds me of the attitude toward those dang ultralight pilots (I was one) that were going to ruin GA. Not so long ago the media had the target on the backs of GA aircraft. Remember what a huge terrorist threat we were? Are? Recently someone reported 400,000 hobbyist multi rotors were in use. I'm sure not seeing a catastrophic result. The AOPA usually reports GA at around 225,000. That's everything...single, multi, exp. Seems like just on this thread we discuss an accident every other week or so. Maybe not, feels like it though. As Pilots and aviation enthusiast maybe we should show some leadership. I've got guys coming back from the nasty parts of this world with 30K in training to fly small tactical UAS. They are Pilots. Ground School, Medicals...they just fly half million dollar birds from a FOB. What would that add to the AOPA membership? How could they help educate the hobbyist? Just a thought. Cheers!

My Pop used to say "The key to a good landing is not letting it land for as long as possible". I can still hear him in my ear,"hold it off, hold it off". In my taildragger days it was essential. If I was fast, as soon as the tail went down the angle of attack increased and I was instantly ballooning down the runway. I still listen for the horn in my Mooney. When I get lazy my landings look exactly like your video and I retract the flaps to settle her down. Looks to me like you need to fly her a little longer. Alibi, I'm certainly not an expert. Just ask anyone who's seen me land.

To funny, sorry had a moment.

Thanks! These numbers are pretty close to mine. So I assume you too would get into the RPM restriction if you flew 13" while running down the rail? I'm just clarifying so I can rule out a prop governor problem.

That's how I've been managing the approach. Many advised no flaps but the only way I can keep the speed down with 14.5" MP is flaps to approach.

Thanks for the input, I'll track it down in the logs. I know the prop is around 400 hours since new but don't recall the gov.

Certainly nothing wrong with 8.5 per hour.

Thanks for all the input gents. As always, lots of knowlege.

I meant to say, 12" on the end of the approach. I'll post the numbers as I get them worked out. My F does have the 201 front end and most of the 201 mods.

No chart yet, that's what I'm working on. I'll try the 12" and see if it gets my RPM out of the red on the other end. Thanks

With the prop full forward RPM drops with MP when you get in the lower MP ranges. For my bird anything below approximately 14.5-15" MP and the RPM drops below 2350 into the red zone even with the prop full forward.

Yes, gear down, red zone below 14.5. I'm fine at 15" but I'd like a slower approach for some fields.

Yes

During an IFR approach while running down hill on the GS. 15 yields around 95-100 kts with flaps at approach. The MAPA manual and others have suggested 13 inches while on the glide slope.

I've been trying to refine my "flying by the numbers" and have found this forum and the MAP manual invaluable. However, I'm having trouble implementing all the great info regarding IFR approach settings while respecting my 2000-2350 rpm restriction. It seems anything below 14.5-14.75" of MP puts me in the red. Any advice? Thanks in advance. PS-M20F

+1.. The Concorde XC and Skytech solved my starting issues. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I flew my GDL 39 3D coupled to my 796 for the first time this week and experienced the same issues. Even in level flight, smooth air- I'm seeing pitch changes of + or - 5 degrees. I have it mounted on the hat rack so I think I'll try the floor between the seats to see if performance is improved. So far...disappointed.

+1 for filing IFR for cross country. If the weather is IMC I research the preferred routes and file accordingly. If not,I file to a local fix on both ends and direct in between. In addition, while VFR I'll sometimes cancel if the controller is slammed AND I'm no where near all the action.

I've had both the 430 and the 650. The 650 really shines any time your entering anything. Victor airways and the like. In hindsight, I'm glad I purchased the 650. The added cost over the 430 was worth it. I think a flightstream 210 would be a compromise as it would add a lot of data entry capability to the 430. As far as the 650 screen size. It's to small to view all the data so I paired it with a 796. Some pair with Ipads. The delta between the 650 and 750 was to much for me but I see the attraction. It's very, very nice. One bonus for me with the 650 over the 750 is it allowed me to place all of my stuff in a single stack leaving the right side of the panel free. Currently I have a 796 mounted on a plate on the right side. It has a nice angle toward the left seat. I also had the shop make up an extra plate with matching paint so I can remove the 796 as technology leaves it behind.

+1 for 796. I've owned both. Currently I fly a GTN and 796. The 796 acts as my poor mans MFD. The two units function the same. Seamless together. My avionics guy talked me into the 796. I was a die hard 696 user and was reluctant to change but I'm very glad I did.

How many hours of dual does your CFI or Insurance company require? Maybe that would help ease the pain of flying him home. 300 miles is a couple of hours each way.....

Here is one - left of the AS http://mooneyspace.com/gallery/image/35878-left-panel/