Leaderboard

Um, the legislation was already passed and signed into law by the President last year. It's the goddamn FAA dragging their feet on the implementation of the part 23 re-write. The law gives the FAA until DEC 2015 to give it up and adopt the changes but those treasonous bureaucrats are dragging their heels until 2017 from last I read. (which I don't understand how that can be legal). Btw, you don't have to come up with a term, what you guys are coining "E/FB" already was included in that legislation as part of the recommendations of the ARC (aviation rulemaking committee). It's called Primary non-commercial category. It will allow you to change a factory airplane from a normal/utility category airworthiness certificate to this primary/non-commercial A/W certificate, allowing you all the discretion of E/AB in the maintenance, [lack of] records keeping and modifications of your factory built spam can, without having to ask mother-may-I to the FAA in the form of STCs and go-nowhere 337 field approval requests. Primary non-commercial, as the name implies, forbids you from using the aircraft in commercial operations, much like E/AB delineates in their airworthiness certificate category limitations. Additionally, primary non-comm airplanes can be reverted back to normal category A/W certs provided you return the aircraft to the condition specified by the factory TCDS (type certificate data sheet), which nobody is likely to do, I might add. It will absolutely be a reinvigorating element in the otherwise sure death of GA. Stalling it is doing nothing but continue to hurt GA. I can tell you right now, if primary non-commercial became a reality, I would automatically go out spend 15 AMUs in labor and parts to various avionics vendors and sheet metal shops. I would immediate begin work on installing Arrow III tanks on my Arrow II (48 gal usable to 72 gal usable upgrade, currently not available in STC nor does the FAA have interest in entertaining a non-cost-prohibitive 337 request) and rip my panel out and install experimental AHRS-based PFDs to forever be free from mechanical gyros, crappy heading inaccuracies and partial panel nonsense. I would additionally be able to replace my autopilot for pennies on the dollar and have a more robust AP. Oh and throw in a wing paint job after the tank modification, in there for good measure. Could I do all of this today? With the exception of the tanks, probably, but they want all that extortion money. So I sit on my hands and don't contribute to the economy instead, as a matter of principle. My flying is more dangerous (IMC behind mechanical gyros) and I'm less likely to burn that avgas and support businesses because I'm worried about certified maintenance kabuki eating me alive getting stuck broke off-station. Oh well. Im not paying their racket money though. Sorry Aspen, I'll buy your PFD if you match Dynon's pricing. Otherwise, I can wait. So, we're here already on the legal front, but the FAA yet again is robbing us from the opportunity of moving ahead. It rest solely on the FAA's head right now. They're the enemy. Not Congress.

Visited the engine shop on Friday. The installing shop is going to remove the engine and deliver it to the engine shop for teardown on Tuesday. We do have a couple options now, one would be to have the engine replaced with the 2 separate mags (A3B6) i believe is the number. Thanks all for the praise. Clarence, There was a small layer of oil on the inside of the cowling. The case was not cleaned before any photo's were taken...the rod cap bolt in the picture was pulled out of the hole with the set of pliers you see in the photo...it was literally just sitting in the hole of the case. There was oil all down the belly of the plane, i don't believe the case is empty of oil...As i said in the beginning of this post, there is no witch hunt here, as a Millwright I understand machines fail, wether or not it was a part failure or human error in assembly procedure, lets tear it down find the root cause, and fix it properly so I can go flying !

It is amusing to me that much of the innovation in aviation is coming out of the unregulated sectors. Free enterprise and product development really doesn't respond well to government control.

Exactly... If your plane meets the majority of your missions, then it is the right plane for you. Trust me, I have tried to convince myself (let alone the CFO, aka my wife) a number of times how a plane that flies 20 knots faster than mine is worth it. If I begin flying over big rocks, or tougher weather, I will reconsider. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It's generally not a good idea to have two different shops working in your plane at the same time, and a major avionics upgrade can be quite messy. Better to pull the interior beforehand and send it off to the guys who know Mooney, have done hundreds of Mooney interiors, and who many of us think is the best shop doing Mooney's. Then get the interior back and install it after the avionics and panel is done. You really won't lose any time, you'll make it easier on the avionics people who will have more room to work, and you won't have two different shops messing with your plane at the same time. YMMV, but.....

Regulation is a bit of a damper, but in fairness, liability is IMO, a bigger damper. The word "Experimental" written on the side of an airplane combined with an official document from the FAA that the plane is experimental and does not conform to FAA standards does wonders for letting manufacturers off the hook from lawsuits. Once again I make the pitch for an E/FB category. Allow us to turn our certified airplanes into experimentals with the same rules that people buying used experimentals enjoy. The key is "Experimental" From there, watch GA grow again.

Service ceiling on Ovation is 20,000. plenty of room to get over the rockies!

We are all hoping for such an outcome! I'd much rather update to a fancy Dynon for $4000 than spend $15,000+ for a new Garmin touch screen, or even $8000 for a used G430W if anything happens to mine.

Ovations are sweet planes. I love the long body Mooneys very sexy planes.

Totally agree with Mike, and I have the exact same experience. Love my Interav alternator, when my regulator went bad I replaced it with the Plane Power and have loved that even more. I will continue to overhaul my Interav alternator until it dies completely.

Dan, One other thing you might want to look at is the large cap that goes with the interav setup. If this is bad it could be allowing some of the peaks of the rectified sine waves from the alternator to present a brief peak that goes above the threshold of the ov relay. I have no idea if the ov relay even be able to respond to a peak pulse or not. My interav alternator was installed in 93 and is still working fine and I'll keep it as long as it working or makes sense to repair it. I had to replace the regulator and ov relay about 2 years ago. I went with the pp regulator and it's worked well the interav alternator. Mike

Yes, just let the dry ice sit on the dented area. Simple really.

I feel the same way sometimes, but if your current plane meets your missions, then you've go the right plane for you.

Everyone has an... opinion. And here is mine for buying old Mooneys: figure out the value of the engine uninstalled, look up the uninstalled avionics prices on ebay and add the 2 numbers together. These days the hull should be free and the bits are already installed. I think you have about 25K worth of engine and 3k worth of avionics here. Add on something if it looks pretty. Pay very little when you buy as you'll be plunging money into the sweetheart for the rest of your days...

I'd love to see someone love this plane and get it airworthy, but I concur with Alan. Economically it makes no sense whatsoever, and even if you value it as a labor of love, it is still a big roll of the dice to hope that it is even possible to make it airworthy. The engine is a crap-shoot...could be original to the plane with 2-3 overhauls already, which means the crank and case might not have enough meat left for another overhaul. Cam, gears and cylinders could be rusted beyond repair. The wing might be full of corroded rat piss regions. I would only bid on the value of the control surfaces, landing gear (and doors), interior, and panel if they look OK visually. If the rest of the plane checks out well and can be made airworthy, then that would be a huge bonus.

Low time...low time......low time. Unless it is a corrosion bucket, I think the low time is exceptional and trumps other risks. The engine will need work, but not a major. Buy.....fly it, fix it, repeat. Beauty.

I figure it's about free as long as my wife doesn't snoop in the checkbook. Don't worry, be happy!

Amen that brothers - don't tell me how much it costs per hour and if you do I will put my fingers in my ears close my eyes and say nah-nah- nah to drown out the sound of sensible discussion of cost. I flew 175hrs last year which seems pretty good at rocket speeds.

Congratulations on your sale. Sorry to see you give in to reality/practicality. However, let this be a stern warning to the rest of us Mooniacs to NEVER figure the true cost of operating our addictions...er, aircraft. :-)

Aaron, If your interested, my Rocket is available even though I've been dragging my feet and not advertising it.

This is not going to be popular on this forum , but The folks I know from Mooney service centers say to stay away from the conversions (Rockets/Missles) and to lean towards the factory planes , they are faster , but apparently it comes at a cost with maintenance / quality....... Its kind of hard to ignore these planes , because there are some pretty smoking deals on Rockets out there......

Missiles are near Ovation speeds. If you consider "near" to include faster. From a value standpoint the Rocket/Missile stand out. They are more capable than the similar factory offering. I had a Rocket for almost 10 years. 8 years after selling it I bought the J in my picture. For my type of flying it was a disappointing mistake. I sold it last fall. I will buy another Rocket once my home and hanger are built. I am moving to Arizona this Saturday to start my retirement. I will be building on Pegasus airpark. (5AZ3) The J was effectivly out of climb at 17,000 while the Rocket was still climbing at 1500fpm at 26,000. Normally aspirated aircraft simply dont have the performance reserve to fly safely over the mountains.