Leaderboard

For those of you who work on your own airplane but don't always have someone present to help you remove and reinstall the lower cowl, here is a YouTube video which shows how to do it without chipping paint or scratching the spinner. This jack makes it safe and efficient and it's easy/cheap to build.

George, I am certain it is very clear to you that there are many folks on this forum who fully support you and your products. It is equally clear that there are many who are respectfully cautious about G100UL. And there are some who are downright nasty, and question your integrity and motives. I suspect that this diversity among members/posters is probably typical of most forums. I would sincerely hope that you do not let the few who attack you, taint your view of the majority of us, and you will continue to participate in the exchange of ideas and information.

This morning, I took my wife to see her mother in central NC. The direct path is almost over ATL airport; ATL Approach guards the sacred Bravo airspace like nothing I've ever seen--in 17 years of flying past Atlanta (where my direct path lies inside the Bravo), I've never been allowed inside. First it was "remain clear of the Bravo," then it became "stay out of the Bravo." So with beautiful VFR conditions widespread across the Southeast, we loaded up and took off. My route was KALX-->KOPN-->KFAY, to stay out of the Bravo without being told. Well, about ten minutes after I got set up with flight following, ATL Center asked, "are you direct to your destination?" I said no, I was going via OPN to avoid the Bravo, since I'd not been allowed inside for 17 years. He came back with, "today may be your day, if any is." Sure enough, a minute later it was "cleared direct destination through the Bravo." So I turned from 092 to 073 and went with it. I changed freqs and confirmed clearance with that controller (VFR through the Bravo), and he said "you are cleared through the Bravo at 7500." My first ever penetration of the ATL Bravo! On Christmas morning!! It's a Christmas miracle!!!

Years ago I bought this really high end Italian oscillating belt sander. It worked really well for a few years and then the oscillating part stopped working. I took the machine apart and found this helical worm gear made of bronze. I hunted for the company only to find out they had gone out of business years ago and if I couldn’t get the gear the machine was scrap. Well, a new machine of this size and quality was over 20k so I started looking… I ended up finding a shop in Columbia (the country) that would to produce the part for $75. I ordered three of them and zip tied them into the machine near the gears… I’ve used one more set of them and apparently this was a part designed to wear to spare the more expensive parts. sorry for the tangent but my ocd required me to complete the story… point being, I’m not going to retire any machine I own for some part that I know I can figure out a way to replace. I understand there are some things on the plane like a turbo housing, or a crank that are far too complex and critical to produce yourself, but the FAA treats too many things as critical, that just are not so on our little planes. Good machinists all pride themselves on being able to do complicated things, and they are extremely knowledgeable about metal and its properties, those gears are not that hard to manufacture, and I’m willing to bet if you knocked on enough machine shop doors you would find somebody willing to make them.

Hi all. A quick update from my last post…the Camping trip was awesome. Then December happened and ive gon downhill rapidly since then, but I was able to spend Christmas and New Year at home. Im writing from my hospital bed in UCLH , london. I left home a week ago with a mild infection knowing I would not go back. Im At peace with it all, it doesnt scare me. I have had a hell of a life and done so many, many things. Im concerned about how Andrew will cope without his protector beside him, but know that our friends and family will look after him for me. ive got about a week to two weeks left. They are keeping me comfortable and im in very little pain. I have enjoyed immensely being part of this community and meeting some of you at the Mooney Summit. Its an amazing community with such strong bonds around an amazing machine. Andrew will post “The End” when it happens and live link to the service if you want to tune in..The only thing I ask is that you dont use the phrase “his passing” or similar. It makes me sound like a bowel movement. @Oldguy has all my contact details. Andrews email is andrew@andrewdunning.com. love and god bless. Andrew

I think it is rather inappropriate to state that I give "deflective" answers to your questions. What I have provided is hard data. Exposure data with controls. There is simply not enough information about the circumstances in California with the Mooney for us to be able to do any more than speculate. We are continuing to investigate the matter. That does require some time. If I recall, one of the U-Tube reports "dropped" one day before Christmas. This is New Year's Day. What I do find somewhat frustrating is that, when GAMI does provide relevant aircraft paint exposure data - - with experimental controls - - that data is dismissed by several of the participants here, as not being sufficient to further the discussion. Regardless, as stated above, we will, with all deliberate speed, continue to investigate the matter.

Speaking on behalf of every American GA pilot , we are not accustomed to it in the US and are enthusiastic about not becoming accustomed to it.

Background - it came up in another thread last year that new factory-style Mooney baggage door seals were hard to source. The Knots 2 U ones sold on Spruce and other places are made of cheap weatherstripping foam, are not factory style, and instead of attaching to the door, they go on the airframe, and therefore get scraped/damaged easily as you load and unload baggage from the plane. I'd been through several of those, with the last one not even lasting two years, when I complained here. @Gee Bee Aeroproducts stepped up, I believe bought a salvage baggage door, and manufactured a new factory-style seal out of modern high-quality silicone. I think I bought the first one. Shame on me, it took me a few months to get around to getting it on the plane, and a couple more months to post this, but it's there now. Report: The seal is great. Arrived with enough seal material to make a little more than two of them and a nice clear 2-part epoxy to glue it on. It makes a much tighter fit than the foam seal did, such that I had to lubricate the lock pins to get it to close. At first I was worried it was too tight, but after a little grease on the pins, it closes smoothly and is very snug. Before, the latch felt like it could pop open in flight if not locked. Now, I still lock it, but there's no way it's coming open unintentionally if I were to forget. I've never had a factory style seal, so I'm not sure, but suspect it's working as intended now. I also never had problems with water intrusion before, but I'm certain it seals better and tighter now. It's been on for a couple of months and has not compressed or loosened much, which is perfect. It's safe and out of the way on the door and I don't expect it to get damaged or need replacing any time soon. Thanks Guy for making a great new product for our Mooneys. A few pics below.

Meanwhile Alan’s outside blowing the pitot

@redbaron1982 have you met and spoken with George Braly? Have you taken the Advanced Pilot Training Course? If not, then my recommendation is to cut down on the disparaging rhetoric. Talk like you have been rendering has lost this forum many valuable contributors. I would like to see things remain civil and continue to have experts like George remain here.

Airports are infrastructure. If we are all paying for things we use, and only that, why I look forward to the generous net inflow to me of funds from all the crap I subsidize but don't currently use as an upper middle class American taxpayer (without a lot of shelter schemes). Vector are a bunch of parasites. **** them and the horse they rode in on. It's a clever-seeming internet scheme, and those little hyenas are probably making a few bucks, instead of doing something useful like launching rockets, building houses, defending the country, or curing cancer. All these people think they're smart, maybe even think it's Schumpeteresque creative destruction. Occasionally some of these profiteers (and they go back to some of the LBO days) get shamed publicly. There are other outcomes as have been in the news recently. Fight these asshats. Throw caltrops in their path. Bankrupt this crappy little company. If they're listening, I say "Get a job". Ask me how I feel.

Not my video. But second video release on YouTube.

This thread is a minefield and I have been avoiding posting here because of that but I believe I have relevant data to share. I am one of the Mooney owners based on KRHV that has the STC and have been using G100UL since its inception there on 11/2/24. I am just a normal guy with a Mooney so I don't fly it every day but rather on most weekends or nights if weather/wife allows. Since getting the STC I have flown 24.1 hrs according to my logbook. Out of those I'd estimate at least 2~3 full tanks on G100UL. So far, I haven't had any issues with paint or sips in the aircraft but I am very dilligent about cleaning spills after refueling and also after sipping tanks on pre-flight. I have seen more of the black powder in the exhaust, as expected, but those are easily wiped away. For context, I only have this plane for the past 2 years so I don't know all the details from previous work other than what has been documented in the logbooks. My paint looks fairly new as the plane was completely repainted in 2017 and it also had O&N fuel bladder cells installed in 2011, so I don't expect to be subject to wet wing issues. If fuel leaks on my plane it'd have been from corroding or leakage of the cells. I'll continue to use the fuel whenever I can as I have seen the other expected benefits in performance and wear. My latest oil sample for example came cleaner than usual and the only variable that has changed since my previous one was the fuel. One more interesting statistic: on the latest KRHV news letter the airport Director, Eric Peterson, mentioned that they have sold over 3K gallons in the previous month. [First paragraph of page 2 of link above.]

Hello everyone, I don’t fly a Money myself, unfortunately. However, I 3D-scanned the alternator cover for a friend and reconstructed it as an improved version. Since this seems to be a common issue and no replacement parts are available, I’d like to share the STL files with you for free. Simply print the parts in ABS plastic, glue the two parts together with ABS adhesive, and they’ll fit perfectly. Take a look at the pictures. Unfortunately, I can’t upload the STL files directly, but if you send me an email at bastianjedwill@icloud.com, I’ll send you the files free of charge right away. Have fun! Greetings from Germany, Bastian

Merry Xmas in 2024 Merry Christmas to all and to all a good flight

First, I would file an ASRS report. Second, I’ve never heard “Line up and hold”. I don’t find that instruction in the Pilot/Controller Glossary.

From a post on BT…not my video.

Went up for some therapy after work yesterday.

Hello all, I wanted to let you know about upcoming dates for Right Seat Ready! our companion seminar and Pilot Plus One which has a left-seat pilot track as well as Right Seat Ready! Just so you know each participant will receive a double-sided laminated emergency checklist. We do have a Mooney-specific checklist for those who attend. Space is limited in class, so if you are interested get registered for send me a message. YouTube: https://youtu.be/RwledM422oY?si=I765NjGtl62wv4sA Right Seat Ready!© [RSR] Pilot companion safety seminar helps non-pilots step outside their comfort zone in the airplane, expanding their world of excitement and enjoyment of flying. RSR is a comprehensive hands-on safety course that provides personalized education on aircraft systems, dynamics of flight, emergency procedures, emotional response, and much more. Utilizing Redbird simulators, students learn to safely take control of a single engine airplane. Left seat pilots are welcome to attend Friday morning Coffee and Pastries and Right Seat Ready Nights [Social] A partnering flight school will offer various add-on packages. Our event FBO will provide complimentary concierge services. Schedule for 2025: Right Seat Ready! will be offered quarterly in locations around the country. Space is limited due to our commitment to making the course personalized and comprehensive. February 14-15: ACI Jet, San Luis Obispo CA [KSBP] REGISTRATION OPEN March 14-15: EAA Pilot Proficiency Center, Oshkosh Wisconsin** REGISTRATION OPEN May 2-3: Redbird Headquarters, Kyle,Texas REGISTRATION OPEN July 2025- EAA AirVenture, Pilot Proficiency Center, Oshkosh Wisconsin August 22-23- Avemco Headquarters, Frederick Maryland September 2025: Lakeland Florida, ACE Center ** December 2025-TBD **=Pilot Plus One offering Pricing: 2-Day Course with Redbird Simulator session: $249.00 includes course materials. Also Included: · 10% Avemco Insurance Discount · 10% Lightspeed Discount · Concierge FBO Services · Right Seat Ready! Nights Social · Door Prize: Lightspeed Zulu 3 Headset · Flight School Add-On Services Available Register: https://jolielucas.com/right-seat-ready.html

We've got a strategy that has worked for many pilots. Since no one can perfectly predict the future, we also design our strategy around a couple "bail out" options that should be available around age 74/75. But we need a policy in force with an effective date at the pilots' age of 69 or earlier. Sometimes we can make 70-72 work on the 4 cylinder Mooneys.

The reason this debate is so emotionally charged is not because G100UL is good or bad, but because it appears that this is going to be forced on the consumer by government fiat. The fact that some have a serious concern with the fuel certainly exacerbates the issue, but if no one felt they would be forced into it, most of the heat would dissipate. People would not be fuming on Mooneyspace, they just wouldn’t buy the fuel. @GeeBee mentioned that it is probably time to field test this new fuel, and I agree. The FAA has anointed it and so let the market forces test it. Let the FBO’s decide what they want to sell. They don’t have to offer two choices. If they only have one tank or simply just want to deal with one fuel, their choice. If they think G100UL is their path to better profitability than so be it. If the next FBO at a neighboring airport feels different and sticks with 100LL, that’s their business choice. Let the market decide. Much heat has been leveled against GAMI which I think is misdirected. The real culprit is a weak government that bowed to a special interest using junk science. I utterly reject the notion that we must bow and genuflect to the inevitable “Tsunami” coming our way. Especially with the coming change of administration, there may be a real window of opportunity to roll back some of this government overreach. Even if nothing changes, there is yet 5 years (if I correctly understand the mandate) to field test this fuel. If it proves to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, we will all race to buy our STC. But if the only place it sells is where state governments have prematurely banned 100LL, is that not in itself a pretty good indicator of where the field testing is going? And if the fuel proves to be a disaster that would certainly spark a further movement to delay the mandate. Per chance by that time there would be a real drop-in fuel or even some adult leadership at the EPA. I do understand there is a real sense of urgency on the part of California owners as it certainly appears the steamroller is gearing up. I am very sorry for that and I can only encourage you to enlist the help of any sympathetic voices that may remain in your government.

The only time I ever open the ram air on my J is when I’m flying with a terrible headwind and I want to make myself feel like I’ve tried everything.

We have been in touch with literally hundreds of airports around the country. It is, indeed, very rare that anybody has a spare tank that is not presently used for 100LL or, in a hand full of instances, for 94UL. The 94UL tanks can, of course, be repurposed for G100UL Avgas, but, again, that is a very small number compared to the number of 100LL fuel FBOs around the country. Keep in mind, our model year 2007 TN SR22 Cirrus has all original O-rings, seals, tank sealant, etc etc. That airplane has been operating on G100UL Avgas for 14 years. If you were to ask an FAA certification engineer if that is "good enough" - they would rather uniformly tell you that is a "vastly" over any certification requirement. The C-172 at Embry riddle had a 1400 hour TIS engine. That airplane then operated for ~ 200 hours over 9 months with G100UL Avgas. All original OEM seals, O-rings, etc. No leaks. No drips. No paint stains. No paint damage. We specially asked the FAA to allow us to use a high time engine for that testing, rather than a newly overhauled engine to be used for durability testing - - for the specific reason that we anticipated a lot of "... yeah butwhatabout" type questions from pilots with used / higher time engines. The FAA worked in a collaborative way with GAMI to develop that test plan. We ended up getting the "best of both" worlds. We removed two of the four cylinders and measured all of the internal parts that we were able to access, and then measured up all of the parts for two new cylinders and installed those. Then ran the airplane and engine through a full certification program over the next 180+ plus hours. The engine passed the test with very generous wear margins, and the 1400 hour cylinders remained full serviceable and eligible to go on to TBO+. Unless one is just philosophically opposed to any change - - that kind of real world experience would normally be received by most observers as rather convincing. George

@MikeOH we get your point: You want 100LL and G100UL in place simultaneously everywhere you buy fuel until 100LL ceases production and G100UL has been proven to cause no harm. That's not going to happen. There is no infrastructure to support it. And no business person is going to put in a second tank (or truck) at great cost for a situation that will only last a few years. This continued harping on this point is distracting from the very real concerns that have been raised and need to be addressed regarding o-rings, tank sealant, and paint. I understand that GAMI has done years of testing. Some testing may have included third parties; I don't know. The FAA reviewed it all and approved the STCs. But, that was only testing in a limited number of circumstances. The test matrix of all possible combinations in the field is immense. I spent my career in tech product development and I saw many instances where well tested products had unexpected problems when released to the field. Those of us that frequent this forum (or Beechtalk) need only recall Garmin's pains with the GFC 500. If I were GAMI, I would avoid trying to explain everything with "we tested that and found no problem" or "100LL should be worse" and aggressively investigate every report of issues while G100UL distribution is still small and manageable. It doesn't take many issues in this day of the internet to get a population down on a product. Some of those pilot/owners will have their elected representatives on their speed dial. Just my $.02.

It’s hard to track all the various G100UL threads but it seems like they’re all full of complaining that we need 100LL to remain available until we get a perfect replacement and then for quite a long while after that. Some of these are even seemingly directed at George Braly for reasons I can’t fathom… they’re probably better directed at your congressman, or maybe members of the incoming administration. GAMI isn’t taking away anyone’s 100LL, but it seems crystal clear to me that it’s only a matter of time before we (the GA community) lose the battle and governments (local, state, and federal) force the issue. Whether it ought to be that way isn’t terribly important, because that’s how it is. We can’t even keep our airports open and financially solvent, let alone simultaneously fight a never ending battle against the environmental authorities. It also seems likely now there’s not any silver bullet forthcoming… G100UL has the big STC paperwork hurdle and these possible paint/elastomer issues, and reportedly the (only remaining) EAGLE candidate from VP/etc isn’t able to meet the full octane requirements. So what do we do now? Give up and hope something else emerges? 100LL extinction is coming whether we like it or not. I have my own concerns about G100UL based on the o-ring test and reports of leaks. But I think it would be useful to have a sober and objective look at how serious these problems are and whether they can be overcome. It’s highly relevant to me whether, for example, G100UL attacks and compromises even freshly sealed tanks using the sealants in wide use today, versus only older tanks with various patches, etc. Does it affect bladders similarly? Is the o-ring issue causing actual problems in the field and can Viton o-rings be sourced if needed? Does it affect all types of aircraft paint, including new paint, or does it primarily affect older oxidized paint? Yes, it would suck have to do a full tank strip/reseal just to use G100UL, but as a Mooney owner I know that’s inevitable someday anyway. It would just be good to understand whether newer sealants are more compatible or will it just leak again in short order, etc. Basically, if G100UL ‘wins’, what does the world look like for us? Also, if it really is true that the EAGLE alternative is lower octane than ‘100LL’, I don’t know that a slightly better materials compatibility situation outweighs the loss of detonation margin, especially after it seems likely that the UL94 valve seat issues were octane related.

Thanks, George. I genuinely believe you have developed G100UL to help keep our fleet flying in the face imminent government-mandated requirements to phase out lead additives in fuel, and that you have been very forthright during the entire process about the development of G100UL and testing you have done. That you are willing to post here on our Mooney owners forum is a further testament to your openness and service. I'm a long-time scientist near the end of my career and learned long ago that you need to understand the experiment to understand the result. The tests posted online by YouTuber mluvara seem to do a good job of replicating the effects of a seeping fuel tank on a wet-wing bird like our much-loved Mooneys. There does seem to be a difference between soaking panels in a large volume of G100UL and mluvara's test letting the more volatile components evaporate leaving behind components that more aggressively attack paint. Perhaps you could replicate mluvara's test? Again, I believe your intentions are altruistic and you truly want to find a solution. I heartily thank you for your multiple contributions to the welfare of general aviation. - v/r, AJ

I am an A&P with an IA and I’m not going to go outside what is listed in the manufacturers IPC unless the part is obsolete and not obtainable. Then I’ll work another way to find a part that will work in form, fit and function. There’s millions of o-rings of all sizes including metric. Why do I want to take on the liability of researching to find an alternate O-ring and not be sure it’s correct? What owner wants to pay for my time to research this and hope it’s right? This is a no win for mechanics.

I've got over 20 hours on the mixture of 100LL and G100UL. There does appear to be some minor staining at the fuel openings as indicated previously. As to operations, it performs well. I will continue to use it, monitoring carefully fueling and inspect drains and vents more carefully. I choose to put more weight on the positives as opposed to the potential negatives at this time, but each to his own.

Let's try this again... As G100UL becomes more available in California, it would be nice if some of the early adopters would share their experiences both good and bad. 1) Increased fuel density of G100UL --> if you fly LOP what has this translated into difference of fuel flow for you? 2) Cold Starts --> initial tests suggest that this shouldn't be an issue, but boiling point is higher and evap rate longer; is there an environmental temp where this becomes an issue? 3) changes/improvements seen on oil analysis? borescope? savvy data? 4) paint staining or damage? do you follow fueling hygiene/ceramic coat/age of paint? if issues, age of paint and pictures of before and after. 5) fuel tank leak --> if you have issues it would be helpful to mention what is worst leak before, hx of patches, age of sealant/last full reseal, and what sealant used if you know. 6) fuel prices for G100UL compared to surrounding prices 7) any unexpected benefits or detriments? changes in how you run the engine? I think it would be helpful to shed light on alternative fuel use (of whatever type) as we move forward to learn how best to prepare our aircraft to adopt smoothly without issues. Ideally it would be nice to keep politics, wild speculation, and exaggerated commentary to a minimum. For people moving to unleaded fuel, it would be good to get a picture of the fuel filler area, sumps and any fuel seeps/under wing paint damage prior to adoption so that we can be as objective as possible. Even if your commentary is "transition was smooth, fuel works great, no issues after 200 hrs. of use" that would be helpful. Would be helpful to add your Model/year/engine just as basic details. If you don't use an alternative fuel / G100UL, then it would be helpful for you to avoid/minimize commentary on the thread to keep this for field reports of use. Would like to keep this constructive and informative with FIELD REPORTS of use and avoid speculation please.

CAM LOBE CORROSION? A DULL TALE OF 1200 HRS SAFE LYCOMING OPERATION Surface corrosion noted on a cam lobe after pulling a jug isn’t great, but in isolation it is a terrible reason to split a Lycoming case – it may need overhaul soon, or maybe not... My illustrative anecdote: >10 years ago, a newb pilot/owner buys an M20C with a 600hr SMOH O-360 that had spent some time sitting and needs a little cylinder work at the outset. After pulling a couple jugs, the well-known Mooney A&P/IA who did the prebuy finds surface corrosion on multiple internal components and even some pitting on cam lobes but normal lobe height and lifter faces. The A&P sends pics of the extensive pitting and says newb owner you must overhaul. The collective “wisdom” of the internet also says that the newb pilot/owner/doctor must overhaul and asserts that he is just another vertical-tailed doctor killer-buying sucka. His demise in a smoking crater seems likely to all because he is arrogant enough not to accept A&P or internet guidance without asking questions. The sucka pilot then takes deep dive into authoritative literature by Mike Busch and others, learning that (1) there is zero danger in running it until cam/lifter truly spalls and (2) it’s easy to monitor the situation through the filter so that once it happens, further damage to the engine can be prevented. Armed with real knowledge, the arrogant newb pilot/owner pushes back hard against the A&P/IA, getting him to sign it off under some duress. Though this newb’s demise seems imminent to all, he flies regularly, uses Camguard, and keeps engine dry in winter by heating it uniformly and continuously. He also cuts and scrutinizes his filter nervously at every oil change, finding nothing for many hundreds of hours. He gets a good engine monitor, learns how to use a borescope, and learns spark plug maintenance, allowing him to monitor the top end as well. He does oil changes and oil analysis religiously but ultimately quits oil analysis after learning enough about it to conclude that it’s utterly useless for real world maintenance decisions on this engine. Finally, after flying for another 1200 hours over 10 years and accumulating ample instrument time, he notices a subtle but consistent decrement in TAS on recent flights. At the next oil change, he finds ample ferrous shavings in the filter (pic). He had become lazy recently and was only cutting every other filter, and so he pulls the previous filter off the shelf and also finds similar metal, realizing that he flew about 80-90 hours with cam lobe(s) and lifter face(s) coming apart. He flys it one last time to a major engine shop 3hrs away for overhaul, marveling at the aircraft’s fast and smooth performance during this serene flight and wondering if he is making the right decision. At overhaul, the suspected cam/lifter spalling is confirmed, and metal shavings are flushed from the oil cooler and governor. The prop is IRAN’d/resealed, and the hub is found to be in fine condition, as is the crankshaft. He’s finally back in the air and still (mostly) enjoying the continuous learning involved in the Mooney ownership journey….

If your money was on the master relay, you are a winner. It has been replaced.

I just wanted to follow up on this thread since I was the one that started it three and a half years ago. I ended up installing the PS Engineering PMA 8000G about a month ago. I talked to Mark Scheuer ( @Mscheuer )the owner/founder of the company, at Oshkosh last year at the PS Engineering booth and I’m glad I did. I had been considering the Garmin audio panel but I’m really glad I got the 8000G. One simple reason- I’ve had some post installation questions and Mark gave me his cell number to call if I needed to. I guarantee nobody at Garmin would’ve done that. I’ve never been much of an audiophile and after 10 years in the Army and 35 years being around airplanes I’ve likely lost a good bit of hearing. But I was shocked at how clear and good the sound was in my headsets compared to before. I don’t listen to music while I’m flying, but I plugged in the music from my phone and couldn’t believe the clarity and sound. It’s better than my car, and my car is really good. Lastly, I love not having to adjust the squelch for the intercom. I decided on the 8000G over the 450 series primarily because of price (about $600 cheaper after all was said and done). Plus, I really like the large buttons and I really didn’t need 2 Bluetooth inputs. So anyway, I’m very happy with my choice and I don’t think you could go wrong with any of the PS Engineering products. I upgraded from a King audio panel and a basic intercom which I always figured “Meh, it’s good enough.” But this is really so much better.

If you are looking for an excellent Avionics Installer you need to consider Eduardo Perez out of KGMU, he has excellent pricing, impeccable workmanship and a really nice guy...My first experience with an avionics upgrade and I'll never take my plane(s) to anyone else...great communication throughout the process, no suprise pricing and it was started/completed when he said it would be, also an A&P (IA) and pilot... give him a call at 864-790-0411

@BaileyWood-EAGLE "Through the STC process, fuel developers are solely responsible for testing the compatibility, safety, and performance of a new fuel with specific aircraft and engine models. Under the FAA’s traditional STC/AML process, an applicant is responsible for demonstrating that the aircraft and engines meet all applicable regulations and minimum standards under the normal certification process when using the new unleaded fuel. The FAA reviews the compliance data provided by the applicant and, upon approval, issues an STC." Mr. Wood, thanks for joining. Perhaps you can speak more of the FAA process for expanding Fleet Authorization as well as STC from test aircraft/engines to have an approval that is fleet wide with airframes that may not have been directly tested? I think there are plenty of us that don't quite understand the testing process, what materials are tested, how they are tested, and how this is subsequently applied to engines and airframes that seem more approval by extrapolation than direct testing. Also it would be helpful to learn how materials are tested over their service life or how determinations are made regarding addressing aging airframes that may have installed equipment/seals/hoses/o-rings/etc. that may be outside of "service life." Are these things addressed by Fleet Approval or STC? Are these determinations left up to owner/maintainers? Do you expect this will be a "fluid" process where we'll see more frequent service bulletins/advisories/changes in ICA/ADs?? Has the STC process/EAGLE/PAFI identified issues that need further testing that may not have been tested initially prior to approval, and what is the process for review and amendment of such issues? Many of us don't have a clear understanding of "what to expect" moving forward...from FAA, from STC's, from EAGLE/PAFI. So help navigating this and understanding this is appreciated.

Briefly… I was sleeping in a hospital when this was written… (way back in 2011) i woke up the following day… to find out I had a lot of work to do… reading and writing became my primary focus… for a decade…. lesson learned… diet and exercise are important for everyone…. Some need Simvastatin…. a big thank you to everyone for helping on my journey… it is great to be part of such a wonderful community. 1) I have learned so much here… 2) I have relearned so much here… 3) some people do a daily crossword puzzle, or a sudoku… I read MooneySpace. 4) for years… I was able to read every single post. That takes a commitment! 5) the most fun part… meeting so many MSers in real life. 6) So many common interests… some not even aviation related… 7) Special thank you to our friend @201er the OP of this thread… who has organized so many Mooney fly-ins in and near NJ. Go MS! Best regards, -a-

Happy new year to all Mooniacs ! First flight in Mooney (second flight of 2025): quick trip to Amiens (LFAY), cold weather here in Normandy but nothing compared to “freezing bones” in Chicago The first flight of 2025 was Wing-Shift ULM (sort unregulated LSA), takeoff on skis at 9500ft elevation on top of Alps, a very short flight though: at -15C, this is the best fun one can have with LOT of their cloths on, it did not last more than 15min my wife complained about flying in freezing cold on “something that looks like motorcycle”, I reassured her that it makes us younger: the cold help to preserve meat for long conservation, this analogy did not go very well

Hmm, our country has a history of passing laws to PROTECT minority populations; I guess minorities of minorities get laws passed against them! And, you're okay with that, apparently. I am not. Whatever is 'coming' should be based on RATIONAL, not EMOTIONAL, reasons. In another post I shared the results of a government study (southern California Air Quality Management District) that showed the airborne lead levels around Whiteman Airport (KWHP) to be no greater than in the Los Angeles basin as a whole. Further, the levels were way below the Federal limit! Yet, many here on an aviation forum, of all places, seem perfectly okay with rolling over to, at the very least, paint staining, swollen O-rings, and a higher price to 'solve' what, in reality, is a political issue, NOT a health one! Frankly, unbelievable. The Consent Decree is not only unclear on what constitutes "commercially available" fuel but is based, originally, on the fact that Proposition 65 warnings were not adequately provided to residents surrounding airports (as well as proper airport signage). This is the basis for the 'lead free' requirement. Thing is, Prop 65 covers all kinds of chemicals that pose a potential "risk to society", not just lead. It turns out things like benzene and toluene are also covered by Prop 65. So, once the NIMBYS and real estate developers "get the lead out" of our fuel, what do you think is going to happen next? This is entirely POLITICAL. At what point are YOU going to fight for your freedom to fly? So, yes, I blame Kalifornia. They have long been the leader in restricting freedoms.

George, I know this is not exactly a friendly environment for you, and I'm not a proponent of how we got here, but I do appreciate you logging in. It would be easier to just turn off the computer.

The FAA provides approval of STCs. They provide approval for the certification of our airplanes. They took over 12 years to approve this STC. They are strict in their approval process. Every time I get in my airplane I am depending on the Avionics, the design details of which I am not familiar; the engine, the design details of which I am not familiar; the manufacturer of all the components, the designs of which I am not familiar; the fuel, the design of which I am not competent to render a judgement on. I am a pilot and I know how to fly an airplane. How an airplane is made and it components, while interesting, I leave to the experts. Based on past history, I am willing to trust the experts. Do I like that G100UL stains paint? No, but mitigation was described in the paperwork that came with the STC. I think the fuelers need better instructions including use of their wing "protector", that I think caused my issue. Do the people who have commented on these threads commit the time to investigate every component on their airplane? I think not. As an example, we trust our Avionics without question, don't ask to look into the software to see if we can find a problem. We blindly read the manuals and assume it will work as published. We use the avionics and from time to time find flaws in it. I have found and communicated flaws in the Aera 796 and 760, and even the G500TXi, for example. Garmin for the most part has fixed them. Avionics issues could harm us quicker (and has with failed vacuum pumps in the past) than this fuel issue being discussed ad nauseam. Much of what is being said, and my not being an A&P, is incomprehensible to me. Bottom line to me is if you want the benefits of unleaded fuel with some caveats use it, and if, not, don't. That being said, Happy New Year.

Have a great day D

All too common. It seems many new Mooney owners get their initial instruction from their Cessna or Piper instructor with very little Mooney experience and are taught to use much too fast of a final approach speed. We see it at PPP’s too. The same poor instruction leaves the new owner deficient in learning to properly trim the aircraft leaving them unable to slow the aircraft. I expect the complaint about RPM was a red herring. Not going to be able to get the rpm much lower going over 100 kts with the airspeed turning the prop till the plane slows down. Add in leaky brakes, worn pads and a tail wind and it just underlines the need to go around when not properly established and stabilized on final. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nor is it in the 7110.65. If the description of thew event is accurate (any chance this is on LiveATC?), the controller was not using standard terminology and then complained when they were misunderstood . And since "line up" in the 7110 is only associated with "line of and wait" I'll say it's bad nonstandard terminology, especially if the controller means "hold short," standard phrasing they did not use. I have heard, "Taxi up to the hold line and hold short" for what this controller apparently meant.

I read an interesting little anecdote in a shop the other day… ”every 20 minute job is one broken nut away from a three day nightmare”.

On the topic, how does one go about getting these approved? something looks fishy !

I’ve usually reserved things for big ticket items, a job well done, or worked in quickly. After my avionics were done, I brought my shop a brisket I smoked overnight for lunch as a thank you. I’ve brought doughnuts and pizza before. The intent wasn’t payment or a “tip” but a sincere thank you for their service In my mind the best tip is an invoice paid quickly in cash and vocal positive referrals.

I’m the guy who previously owned the 10,000 hour TTAF ‘78 J that Skip referenced above that Tom Rouch maintained during it’s working years as a radio station “eye in the sky” traffic spotter in the San Francisco Bay area in the 1980s. When I bought it in 2006, I believe, it had just less than 10,000 hours TTAF and when I sold it in late 2018 it had around 10,600 hours TTAF. It was an incredibly clean airframe that absolutely no one would know had that many hours without looking at its logbooks. But those hours were easy loitering hours flown by professional pilots and maintained by some of the world’s best Mooney maintainers, not training and touch and go hours flown with minimalist maintenance. The devil is in the details, but high airframe hours alone should not be of concern to the discerning Mooney buyer.

I served on a local county board which helped evaluate changes related to our industry and make recommendations to our country commissioners. one of the issues was staff wanted to require use of a a new type of back flow preventer called an RPZ instead of the double backflow. The latter being what has always been used, and they wanted to require a new one that they claimed was safer. During one of the meetings when I was questioning the requirement, I pointed out the problems with the new type which in some instances would require a building owner to spend upwards of a million dollars to upgrade. i had researched this issue extensively prior to the public meeting so I knew the answer to my question prior to asking. When I started pointing out all of the pitfalls of the new requirement, one of the staff suggested that if a baby died because of contaminated water, it would be on my head. Which was the perfect opening for my question which was… How many documented failures of the old back flow preventer had occurred, and as a result how many of those caused illness or death? As his face turned purple he claimed he didn’t know the answer, to which I replied well I do! The answer was zero! It had never happened. The bureaucrats had made the rule already and imposed it on more than a few residents and it had to be rescinded. The moral to the story is that while there is no argument that lead is bad for us to ingest or be exposed to, the actual danger is poses as a byproduct of fuel consumption is more difficult to quantify. It isn’t as if aviation exhaust is being pumped into schools. But the “save the children argument” is foisted and everyone’s hair is on fire. That being said, high pressure direct injection, and electronic ignition on engines would render this point moot, so if the FAA and EPA were actually interested in efficacy and an actual solution, they would get the f*$& out of the way and let some real progress In engine technology occur, rather than stifling innovation. I am of the opinion that the indirect mission of the FAA is to purge GA from existence, so endlessly harping on lead is much easier than admitting they want the whole mode of travel to go away. It’s a war of attrition with your own money being confiscated and used against you. government at its finest

OK, I watched the video. I don’t think he’s a nut searching for hits or whatever they are called. Personally I wouldn’t put this stuff in my lawnmower if I had an option not too just based on that Video Paint I think isn’t a significant issue, but I have a LOT of experience with Jet-Glo, it’s one of the paints that tolerates chemicals used in Aerial application, and some of those even eat fuel tank sealer, we used fuel tank sealer in the chemical hopper and it would get eaten up and need replacing regularly, but we never found anything better, anything that dissolves or eats up Jet-Glo is something that will likely have adverse effects on just about anything. Paint staining is an annoyance but it won’t hurt you, swelling fuel system “rubber” components can There are seals, O-rings throughout many fuel systems, some you can’t change out, like fuel flow senders for instance, there are plastics in places you wouldn’t think of too. I’ve seen plastic bushings etc in fuel pumps for instance so add pumps to the list of fuel system “rubber”

You can laugh but I suspect I am not the only one that feels that way. None of your present poll choices apply to this situation.

You need "I will not use G100UL until forced to"