All Activity

Yep all true- PIC is PIC...Check lists are a must. We all can get complacent at times, and that is when you get bit. Even after 1010 times the door was closed and latch correctly, one distraction is all it takes. The reality is during warm summer days the cabin door can be opened and closed several times during ground operations. Good communication is important. In my line of work, the captain is the captain, however when the other member says "check" then the captain most likely trusts it. My story was reality - detailing there was no way my M20C door can be closed in flight without maybe sever slips at low airspeed. Even then, I don't think 'my door' would close. If the door opens, just fly the pattern and land. Your Mooney will fly just fine around the patch. And if you do have an open door, sunny days would be preferred over dark rainy nights....

Waiting for a picture of the W&B sheet. Was supposed to get it here. Not sure how an all glass Rocket could weigh even close to 2400 pounds.

I don't want to join what is often a quasi-religious argument about which is better , but that's not necessarily the case. If it were, we would be talking about full-flaps for short field takeoffs. Problem is that in many aircraft, final flaps add more drag than lift. After all, that's kind of what they are for - to allow a steeper descent without increasing airspeed.

These things are pretty easy to “mis-weigh”. Or simply to mess up the math while doing updates to the WB. It happens all the time. There is a very specific procedure in the maintenance manual on how to weigh it and do the math… it’s a little complicated/confusing and people mess it up. I would look at the original factory WB and compare that to the one after conversion to a Rocket. Obviously it will be different, but try to account for anything significant and see if it looks possible. It might need re weighed.

91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command. (a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

@donkaye, MCFISomething is off here based on talking with now three other Rocket owners: All of them have reported back with their own sheets and have no issue staying in the envelope with 72 gallons of fuel with even more weight than the scenarios I described. The original Rocket Engineering document says: The takeoff weight is 3,200 lbs. The conversion adds 208 lbs. to the empty weight, moving the CG forward .3". How can the 252 envelope change that dramatically given those changes (someone posted the stock 252 one above)? Just throwing it out there. The sheet also states the constant data is from an M20F but I assume it has been updated accordingly for 252/Rocket numbers? @Ragsf15e Based on Don's sheet, that seems to be the big difference. MGW is supposed to be near 3200 with an empty around 2068 (2046 is definitely inline with that). https://data.ntsb.gov/Docket/Document/docBLOB?ID=40368222&FileExtension=.PDF&FileName=Mooney rocket conversion specs-Master.PDF And that wasn't even with a glass panel which should reduce the empty substantially.

It's really a basic aerodynamic principle.. on a go around you already have the additional lift of the flaps so what is it that's holding you back...the drag of the gear...so I really am perplexed as to the point of the original question...by reducing flaps first, you are reducing an element of lift and thereby increasing drag....

I have that. On the WB I posted, mgw is 3130. Empty is 2046. I also have Monroys. I bet our airplanes are within a few lbs of each other.

You're talking apples and oranges. There's no Encore upgrade for a Rocket. The "Rocket" was the upgrade.

I make use of GOES imagery when I'm checking weather on the ground. Admittedly, it's more useful for VFR flight planning, but it does assist in visualizing the big picture for weather that doesn't paint on NEXRAD, such as fog/smoke/growing cumulus. I've had a couple times on long cross country trips it would've been useful to get an updated image along my route. GOES Imagery Viewer - NOAA / NESDIS / STAR

I was very lucky to find a nice clean doghouse that matched my C on Ebay, and I installed it when I overhauled my engine. The favorable impact on cooling even after having previously done everything I could to patch up my decrepit old one was dramatic. Sadly folks are unlikely to find any help from LASAR (which effectively IS the Mooney factory now) or anyone else with their doghouses. Owners without sheetmetal working skills / resources are likely out of luck. And these doghouses were still intrinsically terrible cooling designs even in perfect condition and degrade pretty quickly from vibration. Still hoping for the @Sabremech as a more durable solution....

You need to do the Encore upgrade. 230 pounds additional GW. For no change in empty weight (well maybe a couple of pounds). I also have Monroy tanks, but can do two people, full fuel, and still have UL for 50 pounds of baggage.

Steel is much easier and cheaper to manufacture than aluminum. Steel is also less likely to be damaged than aluminum. As an IA myself, and doing these torque checks, the steel tool works as I’d expect it to by the book. Thanks, David

This image brought to you compliments of Starlink.

Yep. Considering that those mods aren't available any more and it's got all of them, I'd consider it at that price after a thorough airframe inspection. It could be a really cool E.

There are apps with less latency for the radar image. Radar Scope is one on the iPhone

This one looks like a great blank slate to modernize, assuming no gotchas hidden in airframe. I would seriously consider if buying a short body now

Yep. I don't even ask passengers to push on the center top of the door to check and see if it's latched. It breaks the plastic where it bumps out in the center. I push on each side of the bump.

I never let a passenger touch the door latch since they'll try to slam it every time. That's my job and part of my pre-flight since I'm the one with the license. This placard is on my door: https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/cspages/warningonlythepilotplacard.php?clickkey=6452

This is not your airplane, since I don't have the empty weight and moment arm, but it is another Rocket in which I have trained people. This spreadsheet is the best I have known designed by a student of mine who was an engineer. I did "what if" and found for your requirements this is the best you are going to get for your wife and child. The configuration with your friend will not work. It may be possible if you were to have your mechanic put Charlie weights in the back. wb Version 3.8 231 Rocket Family.xls wb Version 3.8 231 Rocket Friend.xls

My to cents....M20C, my passenger who was familiar in the door operations, did not latch it correctly 'this' flight. At 50' or so they notice (with an excited voice and demeanor) the door top was about 1'to 2" open. I raised the gear and told TWR I was returning - open cabin door. I didn't work the door inflight, I flew the plane normally except a bit slower than normal. I had my passenger fully release (open) it to stop the bending moment of the door frame. They then tried to re-close the door on downwind about 90mph (cabin vents open). No way...that door was going to stay open. Landed normally. I then gave my passenger a grumpy/WTF look and said " when you told me that you checked the door I believed you..." "Pay attention and stop looking at the damn phone. People have died with open doors in flight. This serious sh t. Pay attention!". I created a small passenger checklist (dash Placard) for them to complete: 1. Door latch - push top and bottom 2. Seat belts latch and secure - pull on the belt strap near latch 3. Seat pins lock in a hole - push-pull-rock seat back and forth. 4. PUT your PHONE AWAY for Take-Off and Landings >great forum< T

And YES I did fly an A-N Range approach (in my IR training) using the last Radio Range system in the continental US going into Burbank CA- dee-dah dee-dah -solid tone on course- dah-dee dah-dee :-) BUT point well taken :-) :-) Probably the best zinger yet on this forum!!!

Don’t do it because it can’t be justified and will be just another piece of discarded kit in the hangar. It can’t be rationally justified to be an absolute necessity. On the other hand, anyone that ever flys with you will think it’s cool AF that they can take pictures and share them instantly and even make phone calls to rub it in to all of their FB friends that they’re flying in a Mooney.

Thanks, these tools are lighter, cheaper and easy to mail. Users do have to understand torque. As long as the torque wrench is measuring in the plane of the link movement it is applied torque. In fact, this could be one tool but I thought that might be a step too far... I thought there must be another use for the overbuild design of the original tools, but my IA of 45yrs experience said nope, didn't know of it. Maybe you know?

https://www.weepnomorellc.com/