Leaderboard

I shot this video from my Acclaim Type S on a recent flight from Denver Centennial (KAPA) to Albuquerque Sunport (KABQ). I used an NFlightcam+ with a USB power adapter plugged into the plane's accessory socket. I have a love-hate relationship with the NFlightcam. The video quality is great, the camera mounting options are vast... but it's just not reliable on long flights. I've never been able to get more than about 2 hours of video before something goes wrong. In this case, the final third of the video was lost to file corruption in the camera. I tried several recovery programs, to no avail. This video would have been great if I could have captured the flight start to finish, but like a few flights before this one, it just didn't happen. I have a Canon Powershot S95 that takes terrific video, so I'm going to find a way to rig it up in my plane to capture long flights.

I put the MT 3 blade prop on my 1979 K about 18 months ago. It has added at least 200 fpm in the climb, and added 5kts at 18K ft to the cruise speed. I had the Hartzel 3 blade that was on it when I bought the airplane (still have it and would like to find it a good home). I am a believer in the MT. So far, its performed as well or better than advertised. Quieter and smoother that the Hartzel, and I had the Hartzel balanced.

Sabremech, Amen a thousand times over. I've listened to this nauseating crap about how special the maintenance is on a Mooney until I'm about to puke. I have used a very competent shop for over ten years that maintains exactly one Mooney, mine. I bought the service manuals and no problem has even been an issue including a leaking tank that was resealed, successfully, for a fraction of what some bozos are spending. If ignorance is bliss, there must be a lot of happy Mooney owners hauling their airplanes 1000 miles for an over priced annual on a dumb simple airplane. Jgreen

Alex-- I installed an MT prop on my M20J after my original prop sustained substantial rock damage 2+ years ago. The choice was to replace it with a similar 2-blade or to invest in the MT. I could not be happier with my choice. The MT is eight pounds (+/-) lighter than the 2-blade, which I contend places less strain on the crank shaft bearing at the front of the engine. Probably not a huge amount, but certainly measurable. It is perfectly balanced when it comes from the factory. What is most apparent from the outset is that long cross countries are more enjoyable because of the lack of vibration and a decrease in the sound level; over 4-5 hours, the difference is really noticeable. There can be no harmonic vibration when running the prop because the core is wood and cannot support it. I have had no issues with the finish on the blades. Almost simultaneously with the prop change,, I did an engine exchange, going from an IO-360A3B6D to an IO-360A3B6, and I do not see any difference in cruise speed. I consistently get 150K true now, the same as I did previously.

So why do so many people believe that A&P's don't know how to seal or repair a fuel leak in our Mooney's? It's great that there are business's like Weep No More, but are they really the only people competent enough to fix a Mooney? I'm in my 28th year of being an aviation maintenance professional (A&P/IA, pilot) and still find it insulting that we are assumed to be less than able to complete a simple task on a very simple airplane. Yes, the Mooney is a very simple airplane. The vast majority of us take our profession very seriously and would appreciate a little respect for what we do and what we put on the line everyday so you can safely fly your Mooney.