Leaderboard

I sooooo want to be in the cool club soon:)

Unless you use your plane for business, a plane has to be a passion. If you're not passionate about your plane, it will be a very expensive passing fancy and will join the thousands of planes tied down outside for years without flying. If you're "not sure what to entertain", you're probably not passionate enough to sustain ownership. Set a goal, fulfill the goal.

You have to define what you want to do with the plane. My friend keeps his Ducati motorcycle in his living room. That's only reason he got it. Never even started it up.

Since you're nearly done and about to leave Weep No More let me give you a "stupid pilot trick" I pioneered after departing from Paul's place. I departed in poor weather, flew about an hour over a thick layer and then switched tanks. When I did so the engine began to stumble badly so I immediately switched back to the original tank while worrying about what had gone wrong. Naturally, I assumed the worst, which was that some free floating sealant had clogged the outlet inside the tank (it's a tube with a small screen on it), meaning I would have to return to Weep No More and have Paul fix it. Well, fortunately I continued on course until I had about an hour of fuel left in the original tank, landed and checked things out on the ground. I couldn't duplicate the problem there, which seemed mysterious. I took off again but, wondering if some of that sealant might ultimately find its way to the fuel spider and cause a real problem, was uneasy for the next several hours. So what was it? My guess is that, naturally, Paul empties the tanks to do the work, including the fuel lines. Almost certainly the engine stumble was due to the air bubble working its way through the lines on the second tank. It probably would have cleared up in seconds but I was so quick in switching tanks that I didn't give it a chance. I sure didn't want to make an IFR approach with a dead engine. And the whole time I was cursing Paul for what I figured was his sloppiness. The lesson? Be sure to run both tanks on the ground before take off.

Go straight for a PS Engineering unit... just pick whatever your budget allows in terms of features and new vs. used. Great hardware.

I apologize if I missed the thread where this was located, but I couldn't find it in the search function. On Friday, May 8th beginning at 12:10 PM, 15 formations of WWII aircraft will fly over the Lincoln Memorial to the Capital along the Mall in Washington DC at 1000 feet. These will include dozens of historic aircraft representing turning points, theaters, and various aspects of World War II. The final formation will be a missing man formation. Here is the link for more information. I'm going to be down on the Mall somewhere to watch. http://ww2flyover.org/ The formations are: 1. Trainers 2. Pearl Harbor 3. Doolittle Raid 4. Guadalcanal Campaign 5. Battle of Midway 6. Yamamoto Shootdown 7. Ploesti Raid 8. Escorting the Bombers 9. Big Week 10. D-Day 11. Marianas Turkey Shoot 12. Battle of the Bulge 13. Iwo Jima 14. Final Air Offensive 15. Missing Man Formation For specific aircraft check here: http://ww2flyover.org/flyover-formations/ -Seth

I don't have a CPL, so therefore all flying is discretionary. In buying an airplane I hoped to be able to fly more regularly and more often. In buying a Mooney M20C, I hoped to be able to afford to fly more and more often. I was catching up the log book last night and noticed these numbers. I like them :-) I doubt I can keep up this pace, but I'm having fun.

Sad fact.... Based on all the fixed costs associated with aircraft ownership, I'm not sure I could fly enough hours to bring those costs into the category of "reasonable". 100 hours/year is what I base my calculations on, but I rarely fly that much. To make matters worse, I have two airplanes. This is a depressing subject for me. Happily, my wife has a horse, so that's like "Carte Blanche" for extravagance....

People pay a lot more for "Art"... That bike is definitely ART, but just sad that it is not being enjoyed by owner and others in it's gallery... A twisty road with tree's on each side making beautiful music to be appreciated by all that hear it. Half the beauty of that bike is the sound and feel..., but like all fine art it appreciates with time.

George- 5.5 hours is also my longest leg in the logbooks - from GAI to Minnesota as well. Not to Wilmar but one of the airports in Minneapolis - KMIC - Crystal. I had been into flying cloud quite a few times to visit friends and clients. For me it was 5.5 hours there, and 4.5 hours back - tailwinds make a difference. Glad it was a good experience and I plan to take my aicraft Paul at Weep No More when I need it resealed at some point in the future. -Seth

Thank you Rookie. What is your name and what is your home base or what airport would you be based at? Also you have to include luggage. So: 515 lbs people Fuel . . . TBD let's say 60 gallons at 6 lbs = 360 lbs 3 bags at 33 lbs each: 99 lbs Random pilot gear/supplies/tools: 30 lbs 1004 lbs useful load. That is doable with some of the F model Mooneys. Take out some fuel when it's the three of you since no one will make it 3 hours, and you'll save 15-20 gallons, or another 90-120 pounds. Many Mooneys of models can take 900 lbs in the air. When we know where you are based we'll have a better idea of what to suggest - turbo or not, FIKI, what is your budget? We love hypothetically spending other's money. -Seth

A Mooney is a cross country machine, best for trips further than 100 miles. They are fast, do not burn much fuel, are generally not very expensive to maintain (for a complex plane), have very few ADs, and are stable with a good safety record. They can be used as a 4 place plane, but range is limited since fuel will have to be left behind. They can operate on nice grass strips (I don't), but they are not a bush plane.

And don't forget the most important question of all; how much your passengers weigh. You make for a great front guy... Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Last 30 days.

2 hrs in Jan 4 in Feb 10 in March 14 in April at least 20 in May (going to KERV) my target is > 100

Vans RV12 with a 100hp Rotax engine. Cheapest plane the school has to learn to fly in. Reading the QT website it claims the foam will do the best job of keeping it quiet? Will know more tomorrow on my next flight lesson as I will have time to try a different canal.

I can't tell whether Rookie is serious or not. Could be someone just started this thread as a bit of a trolling exercise. Lord knows we love to pontificate on "why Mooney" more than most folks. But on the chance that Rookie is sincere, I'll echo the advice already given. You have to define your mission and why you want a plane. Once you've done that, the choice of brands and models will become more clear. The answer is different for everyone. If you ask instead, "why did YOU want a Mooney?" then for me the answer is because only cool people fly them, of course!

I just read this this morning. It's a light read with just enough technical information to make it interesting. The engineer's name was Frank Walker and he helped to pioneer water injection. From what I gleaned from the profile, he was also instrumental in discovering how to use super lean efficiency ratios (LOP). Sorry for the crude link; I can't embed links with an iPad. http://www.enginehistory.org/Frank%20WalkerWeb1.pdf

Damn, a life well lived...

Wasn't there a thread recently that talked about poor customer service and high repair costs for Garmin audio panels? And that you had to have a Garmin Dealer to even just remove the audio panel for repair? PS Engineering- any A&P can install.

Wow . . .

Data points: In my first Mooney flight. I taxied quite a distance with the fuel selector in the 'Both' position. The carburetor bowl probably has more fuel in it than a FI system. Enough to attempt T/O...? From my early O flights, Blocked tank vent, could take considerably longer to detect. *** Logic: Test as many things as possible, then taxi, run-up, T/O, climb to altitude on one... Pay extra attention to FF and/or FP to compare to previous flights. *** George has sparked a couple of interesting conversations in one thread!

Looks like your re seal has gone well George. I think all of us are acting test pilots whenever we take that first flight after any maintenance has been done. For me personally its that first flight post annual that really has me on my A game. As for fuel selection I always start and stay on fullest tank making no changes until well into flight and my tank changes only occur when I have an acceptable field or runway within glide. I know there are many who would disagree but I will never run a tank dry I don't know why some would say then you never really know how much fuel you have, I know because I know how much I put in and how much I burn. also if you run one dry and then switch what happens if there is a problem with your other tank you have nothing left to go back to. End of flight.

Here's a few pictures of the new baffling being fit to the cowling. I have to wait for the new parts to come in for the front baffling to be completed. David

Having had my tanks re-sealed last year, I discovered during the annual this year that the stripper used to digest the old sealant had run into and pooled in a number of locations in the belly. The stripper took the chromate off of the surfaces so treated that it came in contact with and congealed into something like dried glue which was very difficult to clean up. Though the airplane is old, it is very low time for its age and the innards are nearly pristine so I was a little bummed. I don't know if getting to it sooner would have helped but, in hindsight, I wish I had pulled the skins & panels off as soon as I got the plane home and done a little cleanup.

Easiest solution, take less fuel and luggage! Definitely not 182RG - not much of an upgrade. Bonaza, Lance, Saratoga, RV-10, and all twins all too expensive. The best fit I can think of is Cessna 210N. But to be honest, if you need full tank to get to your destination, probably easier and cheaper to fly commercial. Save your Mooney for short family trip.

Your girls are "above average". C182s are nice, but a C130 would be good for you...fuel burn is probably a little higher! Make sure they're strapped down!!!

Howdy, neighbor! Sounds great! I flew roundtrip 06A --> 33A --> 06A over the weekend. I went via BBASS on the southeast side of Atlanta. Northbound was very relaxed but bumpy at 5500; coming back at 10,500 ATL Approach was much more concerned and actually called for "approval" of my VFR route outside the Bravo. It just seemed wise to get FF going that close to them. Rutherfordton is where I file to going to 33A, but I've yet to need an approach to get in, popping into the clear on descent and canceling. At least GSP doesn't care when I ask to descend through the Charlie, or forget and call the airport "Landrum" (the town name) instead of "Fairview." I was WOT/2500, 50 ROP, but my GS was ~135 knots . . . Go long body!

The unbound boomerang piece has all of its edges hidden by other pieces of carpeting. The partially bound piece with the rounded front edge goes on top of the nose gear hump with the bound edge toward the cabin.

Thanks I have been looking on ACft SPrc but no luck on finding affordable units. EI sounds real nice. I'll check out aerospace logic. Thanks,

Just not my girls Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If his F is like mine he's already got 1000lbs+ useful. Running the numbers for a 500NM trip with 1hr reserve, I can theoretically take 790lbs in the cabin. A 182 with 1100 useful can do 788lbs (at what I consider as optimistic 12gph@150kts). Most RGs are decent load haulers, but they're not the load haulers that many claim them to be. Some of the early 70s stiff legged birds with basic equipment are will do 1200lbs+, but there is a huge range. I used to rent from an outfit that had an RG and useful was less than 1100 on that bird. It would burn 12GPH and it would do 150kts. It would not however, do both at the same time. That's just one anecdotal data point, I'm sure there are better performers out there. I have nothing against C182s; they're great aircraft. I just don't see them as much of an upgrade unless you're just looking to burn more gas. I know that some of the newer Mooneys are not load haulers. The F model in many cases is pretty reasonable. Many have the capacity to carry 2 average size couples and weekend bags for 500NM with reserves.

I addition to the very standard suggestions to solve the growing family problem of Bonanza, Saratoga, 210 and various twins, I'd like to add the RV-10. This gets you out from under the government squeeze and allows you to have the very latest avionics, do whatever mods you see fit, work on it yourself and save a load of money. If I ever leave the Mooney fold, it will be for an experimental.

Don't rely on your fuel gauges. Make a fuel stick that you can manually check fuel quanity. Made mine from a wooden paint mixing paddle and marked with a Sharpie. I never leave the ground without "sticking" the tanks.

I would suggest a Cessna 182RG. You'll get the same speed as your Mooney (150 knots). You'll burn about 12 gph. And the useful load will push 1100-1200 lbs. But with a partial fuel load, the capacity in the cabin is quite large. I think the C182RG is somewhere around 88 gallons fuel capacity.

Horsepower is horsepower. It doesn't make any difference if it is turbo or not. If both of them make 285 ponies at SL then performance will be the same. Where turbo makes the difference is above SL. With turbo you will get a better average rate of climb. You can also make more horsepower at altitude and thus higher speeds (but also higher fuel flow). The majority of us here fly non-turbo Mooneys. If I lived in Colorado, Wyoming, Utah... turbo would be nice for better takeoff performance. If you live east of the Mississippi I can't see that you really need the turbo. Personally, I would prefer not to suck on a hose so some of the benefit of a turbo would be lost on me. If I want to fly above 12,500' for more than 30 minutes, I'll find a way to get something that's pressurized. Bob

See. This is why I come here first. All great information and I thank all of you!! I think I will be keeping Riley. With all the work I have put in, she is becoming a nice plane! I really didn't want to get rid of her anyway... It is always important to look at a problem from all angles. You all have really helped out! Time to start working out and losing weight!! Lol!!

http://www.amazon.com/Tinted-Clear-Acrylic-Plexiglas-Smoked/dp/B00N58O9K6/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1430653460&sr=8-2&keywords=tinted+acrylic+sheet 2 inch blue tape clamp the old one on top trace it out with the old one marking the holes cut it out Sand the edges reinstall if you buy a big enough sheet you could make 2 and have a spare

Thanks guys. Its in. Looks nice. Almost done. I have an extra large piece of carpet I don't know what to do with. Ill take a pic tomorrow. Its wavy on the top and flat on the bottom. No edging on it. I want to replace the crappy material around the center console beh8nd the Johnson bar but not sure how to.

Lots of great suggestions one that is not thought of is Little river if you call ahead the Inn will come get you they have a nice restaurant bar with an ocean view. The field was created for ww2 training and is 5000 ft long. Santa Rosa has a nice restaurant in the terminal and the tower folks are very nice. A little longer trip and you will need a taxi to town is Ashland OR its a beautiful flight plan on a day. And of coarse there is Willows where you can park as close as 100 feet to Nancy's cafe which is pretty good

The FCC issue with cellphone use stems back to the early days of wireless, when there were many fewer cell towers and the system used an analog transmission protocol that required both the phones and the towers to put out a lot of power. The concern was that someone using their phone in the air could tie up a lot of transmission facility because it would camp onto too many towers, each one trying to vie for the traffic of the phone. As we have moved to digital wireless (GSM for most folks, CDMA for those Verizon people) the number of towers has increased enormously and the power output of the phones has decreased, so even up in the air they aren't going to be captured by too many towers and the problem is significantly reduced. The FCC just never bothered to change the regs, because I think frankly the side benefit of not having someone jabbering in your ear on a commercial flight was seen as a true positive. So while it's not technically legal, your cellphone will work just fine at altitude if you have any bars at all. Just realize that you're moving very fast through the cells, faster than the network is designed to switch you from cell to cell, so you will get dropped calls. And as others have said, text messages work better because they are faster, burst transactions that don't require a constant connection. I've even had good wireless data service as high as 8000', checking emails on my way across the Midwest.

This is not another Bladder V/S reseal thread. That grounds been covered, and covered, and covered... This thread is about long body mooney's that don't have a bladder option. A reseal is the only option. Paul at weepnomore is the recognized expert and with a 7 year no questions asked warranty and hundreds of happy customers, I'm confident in his abilities.

Knock on wood - but not all years at Mooney were leaky prone. I have been reading all these reseal threads with great interest since I am well aware that my time must be just around the corner. My 1981 K has never been resealed and is not leaking - yet. Knock on wood again. However, I have been thinking of repaint at some point but I wouldn't dare repaint since I know Murphy's law says that if I were to repaint that a big leak would start immediately following to spoil the paint. So George I am watching your story with great interest. Good luck! I bet they do a super job.

Leak stains are more likely to show during the winter than summer due to the colder temperatures. A leak into the inside of the wing will evaporate before reaching the outside thus not visible in the summer. You may not need a whole reseal but just a spot patch. José