201/231/252 for family/commute

[M016576]

28 minutes ago, Mcstealth said:

I'm late to this thread, but it seems to me an Early year Ovation is within grasp of the budget. Yes I get it that a nice J is a great choice, budget and all, but we all have seen some low side O's there also. 

The problem with a low-side O, though, is that they aren’t really low side... after you budget for ADSB and the run out motor, it’s not quite as good a deal as it looks.  I looked at some Bravo’s like that, too... they need love where a High end J or K would be turnkey

Edited July 8, 2018 by M016576

[M016576]

On 6/28/2018 at 10:46 AM, jackn said:

I’ve read a lot of how a NA can accomplish ‘almost ‘ as much as a turbo In mountainous reagions. This is a good video of a flight that could be accomplished in a 231 in about 1 1/2 hours that an IO550 took 6 plus fuel stop. 

 

Their only issue that precluded them from going over the top was that they weren’t carrying O-2.  That IO-550 bonanza can still get up to 16500/17500, which would have put them safely over the top of the clouds...

really- what they NEEDED to make that trip *smartly*  in either a 231 or that IO-550 BO, was O-2 and an IFR ticket. 

Those “kids” are doing something right, though- that’s a very nice bonanza.....

Edited July 8, 2018 by M016576

[kmyfm20s]

On 6/28/2018 at 10:46 AM, jackn said:

I’ve read a lot of how a NA can accomplish ‘almost ‘ as much as a turbo In mountainous reagions. This is a good video of a flight that could be accomplished in a 231 in about 1 1/2 hours that an IO550 took 6 plus fuel stop. 

 

So in a non FIKI 231 without O2 your flight plan would have been diferent?

[EricJ]

27 minutes ago, M016576 said:

Those “kids” are doing something right, though- that’s a very nice bonanza.....

The "kid" flying is the youngest person to have ever circumnavigated the globe solo.  Did it in that A36.  His vids are usually quite good.

[Mcstealth]

1 hour ago, M016576 said:

The problem with a low-side O, though, is that they aren’t really low side... after you budget for ADSB and the run out motor, it’s not quite as good a deal as it looks.  I looked at some Bravo’s like that, too... they need love where a High end J or K would be turnkey

 Aw, okay. Where is the fun in that? :-)

 

It's only his money. Hehe

Edited July 8, 2018 by Mcstealth

[M016576]

5 hours ago, EricJ said:

The "kid" flying is the youngest person to have ever circumnavigated the globe solo.  Did it in that A36.  His vids are usually quite good.

Then he has no excuse for launching into the mountains in sketchy weather with a barely private pilot in the right seat and without O-2.  

The video *is* good- it shows a conservative approach to dealing with changing conditions once airborne.  It also *gives the impression* of what I call “reactive flight planning”- something that I think I’ve been guilty of at times, but is a terribly dangerous method if the weather is not severe clear.  A better approach would be traditional, proactive flight planning, and to be prepared for the situation you’re launching into, particularly if you’re taking off VfR  in between cells of thunderstorms.  You could argue that he was prepared, as he turned around airborne and took a more clear southerly route.  Curious why he didn’t bring O-2 though.  And what led the “looksee” approach rather than just starting with the clear southerly route.  Now we’re deep down the rabbit trail.

I don’t know what this “kid’s” planning process actually was- but what I refer to as reactive flight planning is this:  “well.. my EFB shows a couple holes in these cells moving through, and I see clear skies over there... let’s just launch and find out.” vs. getting an actual weather briefing, and thinking more objectively about courses of action.  In the video, the “kid” was narrarating his thought process... and it was essentially what I wrote above,  but he may very well have had a more robust process... it just didn’t appear that way.  Also at about minute 8:20, he mentions how he would be forced to look for blue sky and try to fly that direction while over the ocean due to lack of tools, the be forced to retrace his steps.  perhaps necessary there in a small plane (although I didn’t really have to do that while I was flying over the ocean regularly), maintaining that attitude is, IMO, complacent at best when better tools are available stateside.  Again- all I know is what’s in the video though.

oh, and yes, he’s still a “kid” with a nice, expensive bonanza (not sure who’s footing the bill- would love to be furnished with one of those..  guess I’ll just have to stick to Fighter jets and a Mooney).  The Bo is not a bad choice for circumnavigating the globe.  The bonanza as the kid’s choice also somewhat proves the initial point that with some O-2 and an IFR clearance, would have been able to get over those clouds, even without the turbocharger.   I think I’d rather do it in a Mooney though.

all this from my “throne” at zero knots and 1G, 18 inches from a computer monitor.  Hah!

 

Edited July 8, 2018 by M016576

[gsxrpilot]

Ok, give me a second while I put the fire suit on...

I'm going to respectfully disagree. I'm definitely a "go look and see" type of flight planner. There is so much data available in the cockpit and with ATC today that didn't exist 20 years ago. I like to be prepared in that I have an Instrument rating, O2, and usually full tanks. The combination of the speed and range of my Mooney along with the altitude capability, gives me lots of options if things don't work out. Add to that ADSB Weather, Nexrad Weather, and just looking out the window lets me know what I can do. Finally virtually anywhere you go in this country, ATC has radar on you and has excellent weather radar as well. I've had ATC help thread me between cells numerous times without any problems. 

I think even just 10 years ago, but certainly 20 years ago, once you launched, you were "on your own" with nothing but your eyeballs out the window to solve weather problems. But today while the weather is the same, the technology is completely different. 

On this little July trip we're on right now, there is a perfect example. We landed in Dryden Ontario so we could call US Customs (still in the dark ages) and let them know an exact landing time in International Falls. There was a Citation on the ramp also going to International Falls. But it was unloading it's passengers and loading into rental cars. I talked to the pilot. He didn't like the line of wether between Dryden and IF. We took on some extra fuel and took off. Following the rule that if the weather's bad go IFR but if the weather's worse, go VFR. So we launched VFR. Between ATC, and weather in the cockpit, we picked our way around and through the weather and after a 30 minute flight (3 hours of fuel on board) we landed under clear blue skies in International Falls. I realize the Citation pilot didn't have the low altitude options I had in the Mooney. 

It was a completely safe and uneventful flight. I had good up to the minute intel on the weather, I had plenty of fuel, a fast airplane and so no reason to scrub the flight.

And by the way, the kid, Matt Guthmiller, started a company at age 12, earned the money himself and bought a very nice Bo. He's a self made entrepreneur and an MIT student.

[M016576]

2 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

Ok, give me a second while I put the fire suit on...

I'm going to respectfully disagree. I'm definitely a "go look and see" type of flight planner. There is so much data available in the cockpit and with ATC today that didn't exist 20 years ago. I like to be prepared in that I have an Instrument rating, O2, and usually full tanks. The combination of the speed and range of my Mooney along with the altitude capability, gives me lots of options if things don't work out. Add to that ADSB Weather, Nexrad Weather, and just looking out the window lets me know what I can do. Finally virtually anywhere you go in this country, ATC has radar on you and has excellent weather radar as well. I've had ATC help thread me between cells numerous times without any problems. 

I think even just 10 years ago, but certainly 20 years ago, once you launched, you were "on your own" with nothing but your eyeballs out the window to solve weather problems. But today while the weather is the same, the technology is completely different. 

On this little July trip we're on right now, there is a perfect example. We landed in Dryden Ontario so we could call US Customs (still in the dark ages) and let them know an exact landing time in International Falls. There was a Citation on the ramp also going to International Falls. But it was unloading it's passengers and loading into rental cars. I talked to the pilot. He didn't like the line of wether between Dryden and IF. We took on some extra fuel and took off. Following the rule that if the weather's bad go IFR but if the weather's worse, go VFR. So we launched VFR. Between ATC, and weather in the cockpit, we picked our way around and through the weather and after a 30 minute flight (3 hours of fuel on board) we landed under clear blue skies in International Falls. I realize the Citation pilot didn't have the low altitude options I had in the Mooney. 

It was a completely safe and uneventful flight. I had good up to the minute intel on the weather, I had plenty of fuel, a fast airplane and so no reason to scrub the flight.

And by the way, the kid, Matt Guthmiller, started a company at age 12, earned the money himself and bought a very nice Bo. He's a self made entrepreneur and an MIT student.

The earth is littered with the previous rides and bodies of fighter pilots, doctors, lawyers and yes, even self-made entrepreneurs, that thought they knew better....

ok, ok, so THAT’s melodramatic!  Kind of true though....

The issue is, as I see it, that taking a glance at the EFB and firing up the plane based on the nexrad picture and the old Mark one, mod zero eyeball may work, until it doesn’t.  The regulations require knowing the weather prior to launching, and they do differ between IFR and vfr flight.  And certainly VFR is more flexible, especially in a light GA airplane.  But doing proper preflight planning fills in so many holes that the EFB’s just don’t touch.  Things like icing products, cloud tops, pireps and weather fronts, interpreted by a professional into a single telling, flowing picture.  Maybe the “Kid” knows how to read a skew T (but who knows what they teach out at that Mass. trade school  )... if he did/does, he’d have known the tops before he launched and could have saved himself the trouble of even attempting the shortcut.  I’m all for using all the tools available to a pilot, I’m SO thankful to have ADSB on an iPad while flying- it’s night and day difference vs calling up radio for inflight updates like in the “olden days” as I was transiting VOR to VOR... but why *not* properly pre-flight plan, speak to a briefer, check the flight path tools, check the notams, etc...to get the full picture prior to launching?  It can only enhace the safety of the flight- and if you’re carrying passengers, you kind of owe them that level of responsibility.  If the 15-20 extra minutes are really that much of an inconvenience, then should the flight even be made?  That 15-20 minutes of extra flight planning can save an hours fuel... or the lives of the passengers in the plane (there I go with the melodrama again!)

I’m as guilty as anyone like I mentioned before.  I’ve found myself under prepared at times, both during my day job and in the Mooney.  And I’m also not saying that the “Kid” didn’t do the proper planning- it just appears so in the video.  maybe he spent all his money on that second 750 and forgot to buy a $300 oxygen rig, I don’t know.

So with that, we can agree to disagree- I’ll continue to “over-prepare,” I guess that’s just how I roll these days in my older age

 

Edited July 9, 2018 by M016576

[gsxrpilot]

I did talk to a briefer in Canada last week. A couple of them actually. It seems that's the only way to file IFR up there.

I haven't spoken to a briefer here in the US since 2009. 

[McMooney]

hey just thought about something, isn't the "big pull"  the same way we're taught to lean an engine in primary training ?

lean till rough then a turn or 3 until smooth?

Edited July 9, 2018 by McMooney

[gsxrpilot]

8 hours ago, McMooney said:

hey just thought about something, isn't the "big pull"  the same way we're taught to lean an engine in primary training ?

lean till rough then a turn or 3 until smooth?

Yep and that puts me right at Peak. Which is actually a terrible place to run the engine unless on very reduced power. 

Modern instrumentation, better knowledge about how these engines work, and better training... hopefully lead to better performance over a much longer period of time. 

[M016576]

11 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

Yep and that puts me right at Peak. Which is actually a terrible place to run the engine unless on very reduced power. 

Modern instrumentation, better knowledge about how these engines work, and better training... hopefully lead to better performance over a much longer period of time. 

The perfect mixture setting.... at 10,000’ in a NA plane! Hah!

[M016576]

21 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

I did talk to a briefer in Canada last week. A couple of them actually. It seems that's the only way to file IFR up there.

I haven't spoken to a briefer here in the US since 2009. 

I don’t think you’re the only one- just based on the reduction and reshuffling of the L-M flight weather briefers and the decommissioning of DUATS.  Leidos now has the contract, I guess?

This is another FAA catch-all...

Ҥ 91.103 Preflight action.

Each  pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. This information must include ...”

there is pretty much NO WAY that is possible... unless one is judging the flight in hindsight, right? Kind of like icing being “known icing” if you see it adhering to your airplane!  

[Jeev]

Lord Helmet (i always laugh when I type that)

You should seriously take a look at this J:

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/25388541/1980-mooney-m20j-201

it has a ton of upgrades and a almost new engine.  It looks like it will need interior and paint plus maybe a fuel tank reseal but all the expensive things seem to be done.  If it is as advertised and passes a real thourogh pre buy it looks like a good value.  I have no affiliation with the plane or seller just saw it while browsing.  I love plane shopping 

[Marcopolo]

On 7/8/2018 at 8:14 PM, gsxrpilot said:

And by the way, the kid, Matt Guthmiller, started a company at age 12, earned the money himself and bought a very nice Bo. He's a self made entrepreneur and an MIT student.

Last I heard, "The Kid" was leasing the Bo from the owner who is located in southern California.  He does do some public speaking appearances about his aviation globe trotting experiences and produces some very good videos.  I was not aware that he had purchased the airframe, but it wouldn't surprise me.

 

  I think the "plot" of the attached video is the "what do we do if" scenario.  I've watch almost all of Matt's videos and I think he has the ability to relate the what if's even though he has the big picture worked out already.

 

Ron

[EricJ]

23 minutes ago, Marcopolo said:

Last I heard, "The Kid" was leasing the Bo from the owner who is located in southern California.  He does do some public speaking appearances about his aviation globe trotting experiences and produces some very good videos.  I was not aware that he had purchased the airframe, but it wouldn't surprise me.

  I think the "plot" of the attached video is the "what do we do if" scenario.  I've watch almost all of Matt's videos and I think he has the ability to relate the what if's even though he has the big picture worked out already.

I've watched most of his vids, too.   He's usually very up-front and straightforward about things, like about how he finances the trips, plans flights, deals with regulations, etc., etc.   I find them very interesting and entertaining.   The videography is also very good and they get a lot of good shots with the drone.    There are a few aviation video blogs like his that I find good, including FlightChops.

He's very competent.   I'd fly with him any day.

[steingar]

Me, I'd get an RV3, Midget Mustang or some other overpowered single seat experimental to do the commute, and borrow the Bo or Toga when I wanted to schlep the family.  

[LordHelmet]

On 6/28/2018 at 2:01 PM, Jeev said:

Lord Helmet- I saw that you had an IAR-823!! I have about 15 hrs in them and loved that thing!! My buddy uses them for contract work with the Airforce!  Such a cool plane with lots of room and fully aerobatic!  It also has a "Mooney" tail and wet wings so if you get a J you will have some things in common!! The IAR did have more of a problem with leaky tanks then the Mooney though.  I attached a pic of my J (me) in a 3 ship with two IAR's.

I know who you're talking about... guess who now owns my IAR?  :)

[Jeev]

1 hour ago, LordHelmet said:

I know who you're talking about... guess who now owns my IAR? 

Haha nice!

[carusoam]

If the question ‘what is an IAR’ comes to mind...

This may help.... it’s 70’s Romania

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAR_823

Best regards,

-a-

[Mcstealth]

On 7/15/2018 at 11:36 PM, carusoam said:

If the question ‘what is an IAR’ comes to mind...

This may help.... it’s 70’s Romania

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAR_823

Best regards,

-a-

Yup. That was me.  Thanks C.