Which way to go?

[Marc_B]

First basics would be learning how to keep the Mooney perfectly trimmed, followed by learning basic power settings for 1) basic level flight around 120-130 kts, 2&3) ILS/3 deg decent w/wo gear at approach speed, and 4) level gear down approach speed.  You could easily just keep cowl flaps open for all of these.  I have a M20K that has automatic wastegate, but seems like the most engine attention would be take off and go around...  These first things should be accomplished before you even start doing approaches.

Once you learn power and configuration settings, you have a better set up for focusing on the horizontal and lateral navigation.

What navigation equipment are you using?  How are you reviewing approach plates?  ipad, yoke mount, paper?

If you're feeling a little over tasked that's a good thing and means your instructor is working you.  You just have to have a good instructor who won't let you get away with bad habits or start getting bad muscle memories.

Also realize that getting your instrument rating is really actually learning to fly accurately, learn how to constantly cross check and rely on your instruments...it's a great hoop to jump through that gives you great experience.  Perhaps realizing that it's more complicated in an aircraft that you intend to fly is a great way to say once you're comfortable, you may actually be proficient!

Good luck and keep at it!!

[dzeleski]

I paused my IR training after I got my IFD and GFC installed. Wasn’t nearly comfortable enough with it to start. I don’t see how changing planes in a fairly minor way helps in any reasonable way.

Train in the airplane you intend to fly IMC with. Anything else is silly as a private pilot, we don’t get nearly enough repetitions as a commercial pilot does.

You need to read the manuals for all the equipment in your airplane a few times beginning to end. Go out on VFR days and request practice approaches without a hood or anything. Just do repetitions of the whole flow, programming, airspeed management, power management, call outs, checklists, etc. Then when you finally get the hood on you only need to tackle one item which is keeping control of the airplane with no visual reference. If things do get overwhelming take the throttle and pull the power back to 172 speeds, learn to fly it with more time between items, then as that becomes second nature you can push the throttle forward.

Baby steps and slowly work up building the required muscle memory. No one goes to the gym for the first time ever and benches 300, start lower and work your way up.

[hais]

It will come together. You are adding a lot to your workload, but soon enough, you will settle in the routine. 

In my first few lessons I always whined why they wouldn't let me use the A/P. That's how I learned to appreciate one

[cliffy]

I have to restate what was said above- WHY did you do 4 approaches on your first hour of IFR training

I never put a new 121 qualified pilot in a sim through 4 approaches on the first trip in a new to him airplane

I have to ask why your instructor did that to you? That's not the way to learn for your IPC

You might want to consider a new instructor. 

How well is your airplane dialed in hands off? Does it fly good or does it roll off a wing as soon as you release the control wheel?

If it flies well then there is no reason why you can't  learn in your current airplane given that you find a good instructor!!!

How much total time do you have and how much Mooney time?  that helps us help you. 

As said above keep the power and speed down and things are a lot easier for learning. Less issues with engine concerns and 

the world goes by slower so you have time to think about what you are learning. 

You don't need the speed of heat to learn IFR!!!  SLOW IT DOWN. Life will be much easier then. Speed is not mandatory 

YOU can do this in your airplane with the right instructor

Once you learn you will be able to do an entire IFR flight without the A/P and YOU SHOULD be that good

because someday the autopilot will fail just when you least expect it. 

[Red Leader]

1 hour ago, KLRDMD said:

The question becomes, why did you do four instrument approaches on your first IFR training flight?

I had some instrument training in my private and I was familiar with both airports we were bouncing back and forth between so it was an efficient use of my flight time. We briefed plenty on the ground before taking to the sky but even with the preparation, it was still overwhelming.

[Red Leader]

9 minutes ago, cliffy said:

I have to restate what was said above- WHY did you do 4 approaches on your first hour of IFR training

I never put a new 121 qualified pilot in a sim through 4 approaches on the first trip in a new to him airplane

I have to ask why your instructor did that to you? That's not the way to learn for your IPC

You might want to consider a new instructor. 

How well is your airplane dialed in hands off? Does it fly good or does it roll off a wing as soon as you release the control wheel?

If it flies well then there is no reason why you can't  learn in your current airplane given that you find a good instructor!!!

How much total time do you have and how much Mooney time?  that helps us help you. 

As said above keep the power and speed down and things are a lot easier for learning. Less issues with engine concerns and 

the world goes by slower so you have time to think about what you are learning. 

You don't need the speed of heat to learn IFR!!!  SLOW IT DOWN. Life will be much easier then. Speed is not mandatory 

YOU can do this in your airplane with the right instructor

Once you learn you will be able to do an entire IFR flight without the A/P and YOU SHOULD be that good

because someday the autopilot will fail just when you least expect it. 

Okay, lets break this down a little - 

1) the flight was not one hour, it took longer than this to fly the routes.

2) after the first two, I felt ready to do it again (and was better at it for the practice)

3) he IS my new instructor

4) 232TT flies perfectly hands-off

5) I have almost 400 hours, 80 in this Mooney

6) my speed WAS down, no need to fly between two close airports at Mooney velocities

7) I only used my autopilot for approach #3 and that greatly assisted my setup the 530

8) my instructor was impressed with my ability to fly under these conditions (as was I) in spite of the fact that I was totally task saturated.

I hope those answers your questions. I have to go fly now, good night!

[Ragsf15e]

28 minutes ago, Red Leader said:

Okay, lets break this down a little - 

1) the flight was not one hour, it took longer than this to fly the routes.

2) after the first two, I felt ready to do it again (and was better at it for the practice)

3) he IS my new instructor

4) 232TT flies perfectly hands-off

5) I have almost 400 hours, 80 in this Mooney

6) my speed WAS down, no need to fly between two close airports at Mooney velocities

7) I only used my autopilot for approach #3 and that greatly assisted my setup the 530

8) my instructor was impressed with my ability to fly under these conditions (as was I) in spite of the fact that I was totally task saturated.

I hope those answers your questions. I have to go fly now, good night!

Kinda what the other guys are saying, but typically you want to start new instrument pilots under the hood with things like straight and level, turns to a heading, constant rate/speed climbs, timed turns, and the dreaded “vertical S”.  This first part is where you internalize the different power settings, pitch, and configuration to use for different phases.

Then you move to intercepts, tracking courses, holding, etc.  Introducing navigation systems while maintaining the perfect speed, heading, altitude from the first part.  On early flights you might just see/get one approach on the way back.  Halfway through your IR, you can really start learning from multiple approaches.  If you keep just doing approaches, You’re probably skipping some skills you either think you have or don’t know you’re missing.

That being said, we weren’t there.  Do whatever you and your CFII agreed on.  However, switching airplanes isn’t going to make it easier.  With respect to your 400 hours and your previous instrument work, Learning how to fly instruments is about starting back at the basics, only doing it much more precisely and without looking outside.

There are some free instrument syllabus online that will lead you through each flight/stage.  I’d be familiar with those and follow one in general.

[KLRDMD]

1 hour ago, cliffy said:

I have to restate what was said above- WHY did you do 4 approaches on your first hour of IFR training. I never put a new 121 qualified pilot in a sim through 4 approaches on the first trip in a new to him airplane. I have to ask why your instructor did that to you? That's not the way to learn for your IPC. You might want to consider a new instructor. YOU can do this in your airplane with the right instructor

These are exactly the things I was thinking but wanted someone else to say them first. I understand that many pilots put so much faith in their CFIIs and they're fiercely loyal to them, but we see many instances on MS where the real answer is - you need a different instructor. A CFII that puts you though four approaches on your first instrument lesson . . . let's just say he's well outside accepted practices.

[KLRDMD]

38 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said:

Kinda what the other guys are saying, but typically you want to start new instrument pilots under the hood with things like straight and level, turns to a heading, constant rate/speed climbs, timed turns, and the dreaded “vertical S”.  This first part is where you internalize the different power settings, pitch, and configuration to use for different phases. Then you move to intercepts, tracking courses, holding, etc.  Introducing navigation systems while maintaining the perfect speed, heading, altitude from the first part.  On early flights you might just see/get one approach on the way back.  Halfway through your IR, you can really start learning from multiple approaches.  If you keep just doing approaches, You’re probably skipping some skills you either think you have or don’t know you’re missing.

THIS!

[donkaye]

3 hours ago, KLRDMD said:

The question becomes, why did you do four instrument approaches on your first IFR training flight?

I think it is time for a new instructor.  

There is NO WAY you should be anywhere near doing instrument approaches on your first lesson.  The instrument rating is broken up into 4 major segments: 1 Attitude flying ((constant airspeed/rate climbs and descents with more complications (like adding turns to the climbs and descent) added as you become more proficient)).  This should take about 8-10 hours.  2. Add the building blocks to instrument flying ( flying a course, compass turns using the magnetic compass, Understanding and using VORs in navigation, DME Arcs, and finally Holding Patterns, both using VOR and then GPS without the benefit of your GPS telling and flying the hold).  This should take another 6+ hours.  3. Instrument Approaches. Approximately 15 hours.  4. Putting it all together by adding Communications to the workload.  You should not move on to a new phase until you have the current phase down cold.  If an instructor is experienced, they will keep the workload just on the edge of overload, but not go over it.  By the time you're ready to take the test, it will be a non event.  Flying actual alone after you have your rating, from a technical point of view, will be a lot easier than getting the rating because the work load will be so reduced.

A good instructor will also have had you fly at least 4 hours of actual during the training.

If you know the "Numbers" for each phase of flight (These should be determined at the very beginning of the training, as they differ slightly with each airplane), then it shouldn't make a difference which airplane you use.  I've done trainings successfully in the C through the R models.

[jlunseth]

Approach speeds and power settings in the 231 are really simple. One thing to understand is that there is an interlink between fuel flow and MP in the 231, so if you make a good power settings with a sound air-fuel ratio, you can put in or take out MP and leave the fuel alone, the interlink will try to maintain the same air/fuel ratio from your original setting by automatically increasing or decreasing the fuel flow as the MP is varied.

I use 24.5”/2450/8.8 GPH for holds, vectors to final, and and all approach speeds up to the FAF. This will give you an approach speed of 120 kts. This power setting may vary depending on day conditions anywhere from 24 to 25.5, but 24.5 works pretty well. Here in MN we have very cold dense air right now, so I might be down around 24, and on a hot summer day it might by 25.5. What I am targeting is the 120 kt speed.

You can fly around all day at 120 kts. There is no need, especially when you are learning, to go scorching around at 155 or the higher cruise speeds the 231 is capable of. If 120 is still a little fast for you, make the 24.5/2450/8.8 setting and then just pull the MP back to 22 without touching the fuel flow knob. The fuel flow will fall back with the MP. I don’t remember what the FF is at 22, somewhere in the low 8’s. 22 will give you 100 kts which is useful for things like steep turns.

At the FAF I pull the power back to 14.5 or so. At the FAF I do Time, Gear, Power, Tower, Lights (Gear), Lights (Landing), Lights (Runway). Drill that in so you do it every time. I make the 14.5 power setting at this point, when either I or the autopilot pitch the nose over for the approach descent. When the speed falls to under flap speed, I put in one notch of flaps. When the plane falls to 90 kts down the slope with half flaps I put in 19”. The 19” is, again, a setting that can vary with the day conditions. It should give you about 90 kts down the slope with half flaps. I always monitor the airspeed on the downslope to make sure I am keeping 85-90 kts. It is a relatively heavy plane that is starting to fall behind the curve at this point, so small changes in attitude will affect airspeed quite a bit. Note, in going from the 24.5” setting to the 14.5 setting and then the 19” setting I have not touched the fuel flow at all. The interlink reduces the fuel flow for me. So the mixture controls are working just as they would in a normally aspirated aircraft. I pull or push the MP to subtract or add power and I don’t have to mess with the mixture knob.

These are lean of peak settings. If you or your engine don’t like lean of peak you can do exactly the same thing with rich of peak settings. You will find the 24.5 MP is still a good setting that make about 120 kts, you will just have a higher fuel flow if ROP. You don’t have to worry too much about where you put the fuel flow at 24.5” of MP though, the engine is making 65% power or less and the GAMI people you won’t damage the engine at 65% or less regardless of what you do with the fuel setting. If you use my LOP settings you will want to make the mixture full rich when you power up to 36” for the missed, and once your are at the altitude you want you will have to reset the 24.5/2450/8.8 .

If you want to go to a higher cruise speed, say, to fly to a distant airport for a different approach, you can start with the 24.5/2450/8.8 setting and just push the MP knob in to 34”. You should be right at my favorite LOP cruise setting of 34”/2450/11.1 GPH. Your engine needs to be set up to fly LOP for this and you may have to tinker with the final setting a little, but you will be really close. Monitor the TIT and keep it at or under 1600. Reduce the fuel flow by a couple of tenths if it is going over. Go to a ROP setting if you can’t control TIT.

As I said, these power settings take the mixture knob out of it when you change MPs, which simplifies your engine management quite a bit.

Edited December 24, 2022 by jlunseth

[Pinecone]

Another voice for a new instructor.  MAYBE, if the attitude flying went well, might try an approach at the end, but if you are not wet and tired coming back to the field, you have not worked hard enough.   

Partially joking.

I do disagree that you need to train in the plane you will be flying.  With modern avionics, it does help to train in an aircraft with similar equipment.

Flying with CAP in addition to my Mooney (GTN-650Xi), I fly C-182 and C-172 with - GTN-650, G-1000, GNS-430, and even a Garmin 400.   Some with steam gauges, some with various glass panels.  They are similar enough, that switching is not a huge issue.

[LANCECASPER]

10 hours ago, Red Leader said:

1) the flight was not one hour, it took longer than this to fly the routes.

It looks like about an hour and six minutes - it probably felt like 2 hours though.          https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N232TT/history/20221210/2059Z/KEET/KEET

[Fly Boomer]

18 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

It looks like about an hour and six minutes https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N232TT/history/20221210/2059Z/KEET/KEET

You can run, but you can't hide.

[EricJ]

11 hours ago, Red Leader said:

Okay, lets break this down a little - 

1) the flight was not one hour, it took longer than this to fly the routes.

2) after the first two, I felt ready to do it again (and was better at it for the practice)

3) he IS my new instructor

4) 232TT flies perfectly hands-off

5) I have almost 400 hours, 80 in this Mooney

6) my speed WAS down, no need to fly between two close airports at Mooney velocities

7) I only used my autopilot for approach #3 and that greatly assisted my setup the 530

8) my instructor was impressed with my ability to fly under these conditions (as was I) in spite of the fact that I was totally task saturated.

I hope those answers your questions. I have to go fly now, good night!

First, if you're comfortable with the instructor, that's a good reason to stick with him, but if it continues to stay overwhelming you need to consider that perhaps the instructor is part of the problem.    He should be working to make sure you're learning, and you won't learn effectively if you're task saturated, i.e., he's not doing his job if that continues to be the case.

And now I'm really puzzled as to the initial question;  if you already have 80 hours in the airplane is it still tricky to keep it managed?   

[LANCECASPER]

11 hours ago, Red Leader said:

8) my instructor was impressed with my ability to fly under these conditions (as was I) in spite of the fact that I was totally task saturated.

Definitely not your fault, but rather than approaches he should have had you work on holding altitude and heading under the hood and not think yet about approaches.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N232TT/history/20221210/2059Z/KEET/KEET/tracklog

[Red Leader]

Excellent advice, thank you all. Yes, in reviewing my track logs, the time in the air was just over an hour - I was including my total time logged that day, which includes taxi and run-up, in my estimate of more than one hour. My instructor and I went through a half-hour ground brief of both approaches before departing and all turns and altitude changes were at his instruction. He had me do several maneuvers that don't show clearly in the track logs and was satisfied that I had good control of the aircraft under the hood. I have had much hood time (and some actual IFR) with previous instructors so, although this was my first official IFR lesson, I was not near as green as most first-timers. I felt I was ready to try an approach (or four) and believe I still am. 

One of the comments was why I found it tricky to manage if I already had 80 hours in my plane? Although a fair question, I was struggling to keep the plane straight and level while both monitoring the engine temps (which I do religiously) and understanding the Garmin approach setup. The GPS setup took more attention than I was expecting and as a result, it impacted my ability to keep perfectly straight and level. As a perfectionist, I a beat myself up over even a little bit off course or altitude.

But we got a little off topic. I am still wondering if I should purchase a non-turbocharged airplane (i.e. the Mooney Ovation) to simplify my lessons. One of you guys had mentioned that I need a better engine monitor, and you are very correct. I am having an EDM-930 installed (hopefully) in January which should simplify my monitoring methods. The plane I am considering has newer Garmin gear than mine, a KFC-150, as opposed to my KFC-200, a better engine monitor than what I have and an Aspen PFD. I just figured it might be simpler to learn on a newer and better equipped platform. Or should I just upgrade and keep mine? The pre-buy of the Ovation turned up lots of small items that will need attention, making the first annual likely to exceed $10-15k, but it is a newer plane with lower hours. 

[Will.iam]

I think you should try @jlunseth known pitch and power settings on your next sortie and see how much of a workload you have.  With known power setting the airplane will settle on your desired speed and will feel like it’s helping you. Without known pitch and power you are at best guessing and the lag of results due to mass and inertia from those random changes can feel like the airplane is fighting you. Increasing your workload and sucking away focus and concentration needed in other areas of flying IFR. 

[DCarlton]

42 minutes ago, Red Leader said:

But we got a little off topic. I am still wondering if I should purchase a non-turbocharged airplane (i.e. the Mooney Ovation) to simplify my lessons. 

I didn't read the whole thread carefully again, but this makes no sense to me at all.  Buy the plane you want to own and fly long term.  I can't imagine engine management on the K being such as burden that it's detracting from your training.  If you're struggling, figure it out and learn from it; consider it a challenge.  IFR training is hard; maintaining IFR currency is hard; four difficult approaches can be hard and very draining under a hood with an instructor nipping at your heels telling you what to do before you can think to do it yourself.  Keep in mind that if you change airplanes, even with a good pre-buy, you might find yourself working on the airplane for the first year or two just to get it in shape; training may fall by the wayside.  For the cost of sales taxes on a newer purchase, you could probably rent a 172 to finish your rating.  Folks have offered a lot of great suggestions.  I'm going to take the one regarding known power settings and work on that more myself.  

[LANCECASPER]

50 minutes ago, Red Leader said:

Excellent advice, thank you all. Yes, in reviewing my track logs, the time in the air was just over an hour - I was including my total time logged that day, which includes taxi and run-up, in my estimate of more than one hour. My instructor and I went through a half-hour ground brief of both approaches before departing and all turns and altitude changes were at his instruction. He had me do several maneuvers that don't show clearly in the track logs and was satisfied that I had good control of the aircraft under the hood. I have had much hood time (and some actual IFR) with previous instructors so, although this was my first official IFR lesson, I was not near as green as most first-timers. I felt I was ready to try an approach (or four) and believe I still am. 

One of the comments was why I found it tricky to manage if I already had 80 hours in my plane? Although a fair question, I was struggling to keep the plane straight and level while both monitoring the engine temps (which I do religiously) and understanding the Garmin approach setup. The GPS setup took more attention than I was expecting and as a result, it impacted my ability to keep perfectly straight and level. As a perfectionist, I a beat myself up over even a little bit off course or altitude.

But we got a little off topic. I am still wondering if I should purchase a non-turbocharged airplane (i.e. the Mooney Ovation) to simplify my lessons. One of you guys had mentioned that I need a better engine monitor, and you are very correct. I am having an EDM-930 installed (hopefully) in January which should simplify my monitoring methods. The plane I am considering has newer Garmin gear than mine, a KFC-150, as opposed to my KFC-200, a better engine monitor than what I have and an Aspen PFD. I just figured it might be simpler to learn on a newer and better equipped platform. Or should I just upgrade and keep mine? The pre-buy of the Ovation turned up lots of small items that will need attention, making the first annual likely to exceed $10-15k, but it is a newer plane with lower hours. 

It sounds like you are way further down the buying process that any of us understood. Doing a pre-buy means you have a purchase contract signed on the Ovation. The answers that you were asking for that have already been given still apply.

Either airplane will do just fine in your IFR training. A few of those who responded, including me, did their IFR training in the 231. I doubt that any of us are more capable than you. My biggest reason for you not listening to your heart and trading for the newer shinier Ovation is your reason for trading - you are going from a turbo-charged airplane to a normally aspirated. The Ovation is a fine airplane, but having owned both, you are giving up the number one advantage of the 231 - it being a turbo. I owned my Ovation a short time because I came from a Turbo and did not care for its climb capability in the Ovation past 10,000 - 12,000 to get over mid afternoon build ups in the South in the summer. You live in the South. In the 231 and other Mooney turbos I've owned it was a non-event once you put on the cannula. Also the KFC150 is nearly the same age technology as the KFC200 so that's not a valid reason to trade. You'll be swapping out autopilots one day on either airplane. 

All of that being said, If you want an Ovation go for it, but don't do it to make your IFR training easier - it won't be. In fact insurance rates tell us that when people go from a mid-body Mooney to a long body Mooney they are more challenging to land - the porpoising with a bit too much speed on final is accentuated in the long bodies. You see a lot more prop strikes in long body Mooneys. Transition training wil help with this - but that is one more thing to add to your training. Get your IFR and fly a few hundred Mooney hours and then decide.

 

[EricJ]

46 minutes ago, Red Leader said:

But we got a little off topic. I am still wondering if I should purchase a non-turbocharged airplane (i.e. the Mooney Ovation) to simplify my lessons. 

I think changing to a different airplane with different equipment is going to increase workload, not decrease it.   If you already have 80 hours in this airplane you're way ahead of the learning curve on how to manage it.    Switching horses in mid-stream isn't a good strategy, imho.  

[Red Leader]

Thanks guys! I am inclined to stick with my 231 which, although certainly not newer, is shiner and nicer than the Ovation I want. The Pre-buy received was from another interested party in that plane yielded several items of concern, however, none were deal breakers. At this time, I believe my best course of action, based primarily on your generous opinions, is to keep what I have. Although this decision is not set in stone, after reading all of this, I believe it to be the correct one.

Thanks again to you all!

[Schllc]

1 hour ago, Red Leader said:

I was struggling to keep the plane straight and level while both monitoring the engine temps

You may have missed this answer a few times in the thread. 
if you are at approach power settings, you do not need to monitor the temps.  
This alleviates this task.  
when I was flying to adjacent airports in training I would stay at or very close to approach speeds just to buy time. 
this is not only legal, it’s smart. 
The whole point of getting an IFR rating is to fly safe and if you need to slow down to catch up, that’s EXACTLY what you should do, in practice and real world!

[kortopates]

You don't need an Ovation, but you do need:

1) a modern engine analyzer like an EDM-900

2) MAPA PAC chart for your 231 - which you can get by attending a MAPA PPP or any of the us Mooney specific instructors

3) Your instructor needs to follow an accepted IFR syllabus, or one modelled after one, that  teaches the basics in aircraft control on instruments and the PAC charts numbers at the start, not approaches.

If you still wanted to upgrade, I'd go for a 252 or Encore, as I did decades ago coming from a 231.  The 262 is another good choice because it has the 252 engine. The 231 is handful because the Merlyn is not an automatic wastegate, but pneumatic Manual wastegate (despite what the marketing literature claims); a good improvement over the fixed bolt wastegate but far from automatic. An automatic wastegate isn't used till the 252's a And Encore which is why I upgraded. Still many many happy 231 pilots that learn to master their 231's - but 80 hrs is nothing as you'll come to realize after several hundred hours.   

[rickseeman]

IFR training is by far the most miserable/demanding thing you can do in aviation. I did my training after work in the wintertime. It was 30 something degrees during my lessons and I always came out sweating. So what can you do to make it easier? Of course, fly the simplest airplane that will work. AKA Cessna 172. But sometimes that's not practical because of location, availability, etc. It's hard to imagine an airplane with more to do on an approach/go around than a 231. (I had one, loved it.) You are correct in your line of thinking that an O is easier. No turbo, no cowl flaps, no prop adjustment, (as long as it doesn't have the 2700 RPM STC). Everyone is knocking your instructor for making you do approaches. Assuming you already have some hood time, what else do you do on an IFR lesson? There is one thing that you can chisel in granite. Anybody who does their IFR training in an airplane more complex than a 172 is a better man than me.