Leaderboard

"Life is short" is a term we hear often. When we're young and say the term, I don't think most of us really grasp the concept. Life seems infinite. However---one day you will wakeup and say, "Wait a minute, just yesterday I was 20 years old and everyone around me is older. Where did the last 60 years go?" It happens just that fast. My recommendation? Don't wait too long to go after the things you want. Time waits for no-one.

Very much appreciate the discussion and the feedback, here. Please allow me to provide a response to some of the messages. 1) I am a big Mooney fan. Flew a 67 Mooney Super 21 for nearly 2,000 hours. Commuted to and from law school in Norman, Ok. to the family Ranch (100miles each way) on a daily basis for 3 years. 2) Part I - - Some aviation fuel chemistry history: A- During WWII fuels with very large amounts of aromatics were adopted. Arguably, the Air War would have been much more costly in terms of losses for the fighter aircraft without the introduction of aromatics to aviation gasoline. The fuel approved for D-Day was "100/150" - - and used a lot of different aromatic components; B- In the ranking of the levels of "aggressiveness" as solvents, the ranking starts (most severe) with benzene. Then add a single CH3 group and you get toluene. Yes. Paint stripper you buy at the paint store. C- Add a second Ch3 group and you get xylenes (three isomers - ortho, meta, & para) Xylenes are significantly less aggressive as a "paint stripper" than is toluene. <== THAT is important. Keep that in mind. D- Many fuel bladders were developed during WWII and are labeled "approved for aromatics" or something similar. If you look closely at some of the P-51s and other planes at Oshkosh, you will see a placard that states "approved for aromatic fuels." Part II - - Post WWII. A- We had "Green" 100/130 with LOTS and lots of lead. And even purple 115/145 (with lots of aromatics) At the end of the piston airline and going into the late 1970s and 1980s, the ASTM folks decided to drop the lead content and created BLUE 100Low Lead. Still lots of lead. But much less than GREEN 100/130. B- Some of the refiners had very good "aviation alkylate" (~ 70% of some 100LL fuel formulations) with relatively high MON values for that aviation alkylate (a less than pure form of isoctane). Those refineries could make 100LL with relatively low levels of aromatics (almost always "toluene" from the paint store). Maybe 10-20%. C- Other refineries (P66 at Borger, Tx, for example) had lower MON quality "aviation alkylate" and the had to use a LOT of toluene. I can show you detailed hydrocarbon analysis (GC-FID) test results for local (Ada, Ok. FBO) P66 Borger, Tx 100LL that has 29% toluene and another 4% of other aromatics for a total of about 33% aromatic content. 3) Fleet Experience during the transition to 100LL - - A-Starting shortly after the introduction of 100LL, with high levels of aggressive toluene, A LOT of Mooney, Piper, and other airplane owners that had aluminum integral fuel tanks (no bladders) began to leak fuel out of lots of rivet holes. That started a whole new business for G.A. with companies initially specializing in re-sealing those tanks. Later, companies developed retrofit fuel bladders for those problematic "integral fuel tanks". B- A big part of the problem was the aircraft manufacturers did an "inconsistent" (careful choice of words) job of applying the polysulfide sealant to the interior (rivets and seams) of the aluminum integral wing tanks as they were manufactured. [As we have learned during material compatibility testing, the devil is in the details when it comes to the proper application of sealants to fuel tanks. ] C) Over the decades, the level of toluene from most refiners has decreased due to better quality aviation alkylate, but some refiners - - for at least some production runs - - still (from looking at their data sheets) still have a lot of toluene. 4) G100UL Avgas - - A- Uses a very high quality aviation alkylate (2-4 MON numbers higher than the alkylate used for 100LL) and then uses xylenes rather than toluene in order to achieve the 100/150+ octane/supercharge rating for G100UL avgas. The right choice of xylene isomers will have higher octane blending value than does toluene. Using "xylenes" also has the advantage of being less chemically "aggressive" than is toluene. But the high quality alkylate and the premium xylene isomers also "cost more" than the related components in 100LL. BUT - - there ends up being no lead. B- We did extensive material compatibility testing, including a whole variety of older bladders and a whole range of tests for sealants applied to aluminum. All of that supervised (in person) by multiple FAA engineers and managers and then later approved by the FAA. 5) The 100LL we have at the airport in Ada (typically Phillips from Borger, Tx) still tends to have a lot of toluene in that fuel. A- Late October of 2023, AOPA brought their 1965 demonstration Baron to Ada. Two freshly overhauled IO-520s. One fuel bladder was 46 years old and the other ~50 years old. They were supposed to have been replaced with new, prior to the start of testing, but the bladders were on "back-order". B- G100UL avgas was exclusively kept in the LH bladder and 100LL was exclusively in the RH bladder. C-Within 30 days, we noticed fuel "spots" on the hangar floor. Investigation - - we found fuel leakage and staining on the bottom of the RH wing - - which had ONLY ever had 100LL. See photographs. 6- Oshkosh, the leakage from the LH wing tank (G100UL Avgas) was ( based on Eagle Fuel evaluation) caused by pre-existing damage to the tanks and the gaskets associated with the access panels. (In addition, there were pin-hole leaks in both fuel bladders). 7)-G100UL Avgas is NOT a threat to normal aircraft paint. A- Embry Riddle did extensive certification testing of G100UL avgas. They used G100UL in their C-172s for over a year, at Daytona Beach. They had no evidence of any fuel leaks and they had zero staining on the wings. B- As part of our due diligence, wee have deliberately spilled a LOT of G100UL Avgas onto various painted components from the many Bonanza aircraft that come through the TAT shop for turbo systems. That includes LOTs of wing tips and the lower cowling access panels, both of which are removed and replaced (with tip tanks and newly louvered lower access panels.) C- Some of that has been allowed to dry on those painted surfaces and then the process was repeated. NO SIGN OF ANY LOSS TO THE INTEGRITY OF THE ADHESION OF THE PAINT. D- We have even soaked a couple of those side panels in G100UL for a week or more. The paint was fine at the end of that. E- What does and will happen - - is if you do not properly clean up the spilled fuel, and allow it to dry, it can and will leave a light tan stain on the paint. If you do properly clean it up, it will not stain the paint - - even after repeated spills in the same location. But, to date, we have never seen any evidence of any type of "paint striping" activity to any of the dozen or more aircraft parts that were removed from our customers Bonanzas and used as "test articles." See https://g100ul.com/dl/Refueling Hygiene G100UL Avgas.pdf F- An aside - - some of the recent crystal and graphene coatings improve the resistance of aircraft paint to any damage from any variety of 100LL or G100UL - - but that is not a cure all. See the link Refueling Hygiene! 8. So "what happened" on the bottom of the Mooney wings ? A- In one case, the sump drain appears to be leaking. Likely the fittings inside the wing are also leaking. B- In the other case, there appears to be some kind of leakage from inside the wing. Not sure from the photographs. C- Almost certain that old drain valve has a "nitrile" set of O-rings. D- The paint on the bottom of the wings has likely had many months of exposure to steady drips of 100LL. In California, probably with only ~ 15% toluene in the 100LL . . . maybe. E- No information about the age of the paint on the bottom of the wings, but from its overall appearance and the multiple rivet holes that are bare and which have lost their paint - - it is likely a they are rather old paint jobs. The paint on my personal Bonanza, N11RT is about 35 years old and it is in much better condition than the appearance of the paint (away from the damaged paint). F- It would be good to know the age of the paint for each of those two aircraft. 9. What to do ? A-There is a long standing FAA / maintenance bulletin (20 + years old ???) that tells mechanics that when they find fuel leaks or deteriorated fuel lines or gaskets or O-rings, they should replace those components with parts that are made from chemically resistant materials (viton, fluorosilicones, etc.) Those types of materials are specifically stated to be for use with a wide variety of fuels, including aromatic based fluids. A lot of mechanics have ignored that recommendation over the years. Last . . . 10. I would like to have the chance to borescope an older Mooney fuel tank that has not been converted over to a bladder. A- If anyone on this forum would like to bring their plane to Ada we can do that here. You might find it interesting. If you have the STC you can probably leave with some G100UL in your tank, if you want. I hope this information helps to bring some clarity and understanding to these issues that will be the subject of conversations during the transition away from leaded avgas. Regards, George Braly gwbraly@gami.com

I outgrew my headset bag and just couldn’t find something that I liked. On a late not whim I went down a Reddit hole and found this beauty. I gotta tell you, if these guys upped their marketing game, they could quadruple their price and still beat the competition. I guess it’s marketed as a range bag. Heavy duty, lots of pockets, one whole side of MOLLEE. Zippers all work well and plenty of room inside to separate “stuff” from your headset. It doesn’t look or feel cheap in any way. In fact it looks like a $250 bag some Insta influencer would market. $35-40 on Amazon. Full size iPads fit with ease. I can squeeze in multiple logbooks, goggles, my clipboard, electronic doodads, emergency radio, snacks, Gerber, and my headset. Exos Tactical Range Bag – Medium Size https://www.amazon.com/Exos-Range-Subdued-Patch-Included/dp/B07BZFLVJB?th=1&psc=1 Even comes in pink leopard if you’re super manly.

Good evening folks - I thought I would share some interesting points about my flight today from Pontiac, Michigan (KPTK) to Philadelphia (KPNE). The weather brief was consistent for the prior few days: A strong low pressure above Maine with dense isobars promising a powerful tailwind for the trip. The specific forecast was about 75 knot tailwind at 15,000. Surface winds were gusty at both departure and arrival. The morning low temperature caught me a little by surprise (12 degrees F), as we had enjoyed milder temperatures so far this winter. Fortunately, the night before I set the SwitchOn to give me 5 hours of engine and cabin pre-heat prior to my planned 9am departure from Pontiac. By now, I've figured out the clothing needed to manage the in-hangar pre-flight and only open the hangar door when the plane is ready to drag outside. (This is my second winter season, but much of last winter had the airplane in the shop for one thing or another.) The arrival at the airport hangar was in bright (cold) sunshine with scattered clouds at 4,000 MSL. Gusty winds were nearly down the east/west runway. I packed the plane with gear I might need in Philadelphia (TKS hand sprayer, 100 foot extension cord for engine heater, tools, etc.) and pulled the plane out with my Sidewinder tug. Or tried to. There was a light coating of snow on the pavement outside the hangar, maybe half an inch, but a dry area for about 10 feet outside the door before the snow layer started. As I pull the plane out, I wait for wing to clear the door then turn the tug to the left to angle towards the taxiway. I got the plane partially out, cleared the wing and started the turn. When the nose wheel hit the snow, I noticed the sidewinder having trouble getting purchase on the snowy nose tire. Then, when the mains hit the snow, enough resistance built up that the sidewinder simply slipped on the nosewheel. Luckily, the tail was clear of the door so that it could be closed. The plane was at a 45-degree angle, so some prop blast would be towards the door, but seemed (and turned out to be) fine. If snow had piled up against the door, obviously I'd be doing some snow shoveling while guessing how the tires would track so that I'd only need to clear the track for the tires. I have a shovel in the hangar and all this dawned on me as I looked at the airplane sitting there at the 45-degree angle. The pavement slopes downward away from the hangar door, so gravity was working for me. Putting the plane back in, up the slope, in snow, may not be possible with the Sidewinder. I remember pulling a club Mooney a long time ago into a hangar with a winch at the back of the hangar. I need to figure this out. The runup, clearance, and take off were normal, albeit "sporty". Once the power was in, I glanced at the airspeed tape on the G1000 and saw 45 knots really quick. Cold and headwind. This plane has the 310hp STC. I push the go-around button before takeoff to set the flight director and prepare for AP engagement at 400 feet AGL. Tower was a little slow to pass me off to Detroit Departure, so I was able to engage AP at 400 feet and was about to select heading when Tower passed me over to Departure. As I was reaching to select Com 2, there was a massive jolt, as if the Fist of God had hammered the top of the airplane. My head (more accurately my Bose headset) hit the ceiling and I was momentarily stunned. Not physiologically, but mentally. You've experienced it: an event that shocks your system and takes a couple of beats for your brain to check in with body systems to assess damage. The Bose crackled a bit, seemingly unhappy with the ceiling impact, but I felt no pain. By the time I wondered about the airplane (a second or two later), my brain registered that the engine had not missed a beat and nothing abnormal was felt in the controls. Before I could think to worry about the structure, the plane was saying "don't worry about me". A few seconds later, I got it together and switched to Departure. Interestingly, other than that jolt, the rest of the climb through 4,000 MSL was fairly mild bumps up to the glass smooth air above the scattered layer. As I climbed, I looked at the seatbelt to cinch it tighter but realized that with the 3-point design, there's not a great way to get much more vertical restraint. Perhaps I can get the lap belt portion tighter. The rest of the climb out to the southeast was uneventful, other than the promising ground speeds that were developing. I filed for 15,000 to get the optimum tailwinds (about 75 knots according to Foreflight) but ATC held me at 9,000 until I cleared Detroit's airspace. Tailwinds were 24 knots at 9,000 feet, but Foreflight said the tailwinds jumped fast a little higher. Sure enough, as I continued the climb tailwinds exploded. By the time I got to 15,000, which happened at about 500 fpm at 120 knots indicated (FLC set to 120) I saw a max of 87 knots of tailwind. Ground speed maxed out at 254 knots. For much of the flight, there was an undercast broken layer and snow showed on the Nexrad display on the MFD. The descent started around Harrisburg and as I headed down at 1,000 fpm the top of the green arc came up and I pegged it there by varying the descent rate. Ground Speed hit 270 knots. The undercast disappeared toward Philadelphia, causing me to forget that there was probably a thermal layer nonetheless where turbulence would start. That happened as I descended through 7,000 feet, and it was pretty rough. ATC wanted expedited descent which I translated to 1200 fpm and speed builds quick into the yellow band. Speed brakes will quickly shave off 10 - 15 knots at a given power and descent rate, and the rest is done with power reductions. Turbulence seemed to exacerbate the tendency to creep into the yellow arc and once I saw the over-speed warning that seems to be triggered about halfway into the yellow arc. Speedbrakes and power management need to be jumped on early. I noticed the left speedbrake would not retract fully (about 1 inch proud of the wing surface) so it would seem some lube is needed. When I looked after landing, it was fully retracted. The arrival into Philadelphia (KPNE) was looking good with one of two crossing runways pretty well lined up with the gusty winds. The Tower cleared me to land from outside of the downwind on the visual approach. Then on the frequency, "Tower, this is Vision Jet XXX, we seem to have had a blowout or something." Tower asked if they could clear the runway and they couldn't. I knew what was coming and it wasn't going to be fun. I was rerouted to the crossing runway and I offered that I'd give it a go. It was a 60-degree crosswind at 17 knots, gusting higher. One of those where your base to final turn overshoots final by a lot. The landing was miserable, the crab and kick out worked OK, but gusts resulted in me plopping it down on the mains, in one of those sinking sensations where the runway is further away from your wheels than you thought when the wing stops flying. The LHS system didn't help much because the gusts interfered with how my mind processed the varying aural heights. The wide runway helped keep the plane from being blown off the downwind side. So, the tailwinds were wonderful, the fastest numbers I've even seen in a plane I've flown. But, there's likely going to be a price to pay at either end of the journey. Ed

OP, I could be mistaken, but are you sort of self teaching yourself the maneuvers? If so, I'd recommend you not try that and get up with a CFI that's solid on his/her commercial maneuvers. One thing I do is separate my chandelles from Lazy 8's because they are very different maneuverers. The chandelle is mechanical, the lazy 8 is art. I'm by no means a master instructor, but in general, they are constantly rushed. Two things right off the bat, many commercial students have a REALLY hard time looking out the window. So much that I just cover everything but the TC. I won't try to teach via Mooneyspace but SLOW DOWN. Airspeed doesnt really matter, but 130mph works well in my F...but so does 120, 125, 135...airspeed isnt really important. The maneuver is about capturing energy, then releasing that energy, and then recapturing it once again. I make students talk out loud at the speed of "one-Mississippi" "Pitch, pitch, bank, SLOW". It takes very little bank input and as your aircraft starts to slow, it will bank all on its own. I disagree with not selecting good reference points - and any DPE will too. Don't force the plane to fit into the reference points. Pick some, fly the maneuver well, and see what the results are. Constantly envision yourself on a skateboard half pipe and where on that half pipe you are. Eyes outside always except a quick glance to make sure you're coordinated (and therefore maximizing the energy transfer). This is a maneuver that takes very little control input. The aircraft is doing what it wants to do if you were not there. Look outside. Feel. Listen. Stay coordinated. Relax & slow. Practice and they'll come naturally and become one of your favorite managers. Oh, slow down.

I am 63 years old. I upgraded my panel because I wanted to fly with the best I could afford for the last part of my flying years. I love it and no regrets.

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/iclothwipes10.php

I installed the 2 new diodes and tested the system for 40 minutes yesterday without the gear alarm sounding. I believe that fixed the problem. We will do more operational checks Monday and then turn it loose for a flight test. I did find a nice mouse nest while I was behind the pilots side wall panel.

I believe it! I wore an exposure suit on a winter crossing once (fully on) and it was so bulky that it made using the travel john an exercise in flood control. There’s a song by a fighter pilot band about wishing for an extra couple inches…

A couple of data points. According to an AVWEB article, 1. the gunk on the underside of the left wing of the AOPA Baron originated with a leaky patch in the 50-year-old bladder in that tank--no telling what was used to affix that patch 2. fuel then got between the leaking bladder and "chafe tape" that is applied to the wing to protect the bladder from wearing against the metal. The fuel dissolved the glue on the chafe tape, and that glue was the sticky residue on the underside of the wing 3. also, there were minor leaks from the other (100LL) tank (only 46 years old), and evidence of past leakage of 100LL from the left (G100UL) tank before the side-by-side test began. https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/aopa-baron-wing-stain-traced-to-leaking-bladder-patch/ These points don't constitute exoneration from all past, present, and future issues with the new fuel but, as usual, the conspiracy theorists that said the G100UL "ate right through that bladder" were hyperventilating.

This drawing from the Skybolt catalog shows how the SK40G1 grommets take up the shear load. The top drawing is the 4002-HS grommet Mooney used. The hole has to be larger than the shank to allow the lip that retains the retainer ring to pass through the hole. The SK40G1 has a larger diameter shank and a groove to capture the retainer ring. The hole can be reamed for a tight fit and, since there is no movement, there should be no wear of the hole.

This is an important distinction. I work in a potentially high-lead environment, and we test our staff regularly. The only elevated lead levels we have seen are in people who do reloading at home. I suspect they are aspirating it when they tumble or otherwise handle brass. One had to be sent back to remedial training when he or she put little packages of condiments into an old ammo case box. Metallic lead is not generally absorbed through the skin, but rather by rubbing eyes, nose, touching food, and the worst: touching cigarettes and vapes. You guys that made lead soldiers should probably be ok :-) -dan

In your POH, in Section VI (Weight and Balance), your Equipment List should show you everything available from the factory and which of those items your airplane has.

You wont see this on the YouTube videos of transatlantic flights, but…. when we had new Diamond twins flown over from Osterland, the ferry pilots had to wear Gumby suits. Most fly with it around the waist, since they are bulky and hot. Given the reclined posture in the DA42 seat, dealing with a full bladder with a half-on Gumby suit was, well, a rather dodgy exercise. Solution? adult diapers. And I’m told that the first time “letting go” into one is really, really difficult since it goes against all training since infancy. Flying, and especially ferry flying, is sometimes not so glamorous. -dan

Yes, and I'll add to that: "get what you want before you retire."

It’s difficult to justifying our flying we’re only on this planet for a short time do, get what you actually want. I’ve got a good friend who was a pilot for 35 years starting worrying about penny’s wife passed he’s worth over 1m and watching sitcoms. Enjoy..

Just how much faster is a J, Missile or Ovation going to get you to your new missions' typical destinations and at what cost delta? Personal property tax, insurance, annuals & direct operating costs will all be higher, so in the end it boils down to what puts the biggest smile on your face. Only you can determine if that's worth it. My plane was vintage '65 when I bought it, but now has a new GMA345, GNC355, GNC255, used GTX327 & a reorganized 6 pack with a GI275 HSI. I don't miss the Narco Mk12s at all and the GNC355 is vastly more user friendly that the GNS 430s & 530s in the rental fleets I flew before buying my Mooney. Life's too short; you worked hard for your $$$ and retirement. Enjoy the fruits of your labor and don't over-analyze it. Blue skies & happy retirement.

There should be a grounding strap from the engine to the airframe in all Mooneys I believe. There certainly is in mine. (Guess I was slow, Mike beat me to it.)

No. Engine is absolutely (should be, anyway!) grounded with a large grounding strap. Bad electrical stuff will happen, if not.

Yeah, as an EE I'm not buying into this guy. I've always used the exhaust. It sure seems like there should be a decent electrical connection to the engine and, hence, the airframe. I'm going to test my plane tomorrow. He could have a bad connection in his exhaust and there could be a bad connection to someone's tie-down ring, for that matter. Without checking you can't say for certain. And, low resistance (<1 ohm) is really not necessary; the idea is charge dissipation. While there may well be a very high voltage (10's of thousands of volts) built up on the aircraft it will rapidly discharge to ground through any reasonable resistance in a second or two.

I'm actually avoiding flying my airplane over NJ at night for the foreseeable future after all this talk about shooting things down and countless pictures/videos of manned civilian aircraft being claimed to be "drones". There may by sightings that pose genuine concern, but there is far more hysteria mixed in with that as well. This is so clearly a regular helicopter that it is shameful to be used for a front page headline about drones. Or in this video 2:28-2:38 it is so blatantly obvious it's an airliner. You can see the nav lights, strobes, and even tail logo light. I tried posting a screenshot but then it looks "like a ufo or drone" but in motion it looks just like an airliner.

BIG difference between metallic lead (sinkers, soldiers, bullets) and soluble lead. Metallic lead is not skin absorbable. You need to ingest or inhale it. Soluble lead compounds, like TEL in fuel is very skin absorbable.

1970 F - but believe this applies to a very wide range of Mooney models. I’ve read every headrest post on MS. There’s definitely some misinformation out there. My interior is getting redone and I really wanted to add headrests to my front seats. My rear reclining seats had them, but they were stuck in the seats. The fronts used to, but for whatever reason the PO covered them over in the 80’s and tossed the headrests. I took some exact measurements, made a cardboard template and went to my childhood happy place - the junkyard. I found a perfect match on a 2014 Nissan Pathfinder S (from the front seats). My interior guy just messaged and said they’re perfect. A little extra Google work and it appears the fronts from a 2013 - 2016 (trim doesn’t matter) will fit. I probably checked 200+ cars…but it was a nice day and I was having a blast. Total cost was $15 ($3 entry fee and $12 cost for a pair of headrests). They’re far better quality than the OEM Mooney and are farther forward which is great for actually using it. As you can see, all four seats had the tubular structure in the seat. You can feel the open tube through the material if you want to examine if your seat already has the tubing.

I still have Cleco that fell out of a lightening hole in the rear of C-152 Aerobat wing during my hammerhead turn and jammed up the right aileron. I have a friend that worked for years as an A&P at United's San Francisco maintenance depot. She told me that they found so many tools inside airframes that they instituted a rule that you could never set a tool down on, or in, an airplane. When I volunteered doing maintenance at the museum, the mechanic had us stop work half an hour before quitting time and clean up and put all the tools away. If we were missing a tool, we had to find it before going home. We should have inventoried rags. Someone stuffed rags in the intake of the left engine of the B-25 to prevent FOD from falling down there (the intake is on the top of the cowling) when we were working on it and no one saw it and so it got left in there. When we ran it up, it ran OK, but later the museum owner complained that the left engine wouldn't make takeoff power.

Good for you for fixing what the prior owner did. I never realized how important headsets are as a safety feature till a 252 takeoff accident documented here on MS likely over 10 years ago. It was an aborted takeoff that resulted in a fatal to one which the report blamed in part on the removal of headrest leading to a broken neck. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Some years ago, my glareshield was in horrible shape and was a glaring eye sore after upgrading the rest of the interior with Hector. I checked out the Ashby and thought it was big downgrade in appearance and functionality. I was about to search for a salvage glareshield but Hector surprised me resurrecting my old one to better than new. Hector sometimes has some used ones if yours can’t be resurrected. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I resisted any avionics upgrade (other than an ADSB-compliant transponder) for my first 22 1/2 years of ownership and was perfectly happy. But I realized I'd get added performance from a WAAS GPS and decided if I was going to do that I should do some other things at the same time. I really love my IFD 540 and my dual GI-275s. I flew a DME arc on a recent IPC and felt like I was cheating it was so easy, even after I disengaged the autopilot with GPSS. The ability to fly LPV approaches was a real benefit to my upgrade, but it's not so much that I'm able to do more with my plane than I was before, and more about being able to do the same things more easily. Considering my missions can involve long days of flying, I'm probably getting a safety benefit because the flying is less demanding than it used to be. Like you, I thought about buying a faster plane instead of doing an avionics upgrade. I decided I don't need that; my plane gets me where I'm going plenty fast enough. YMMV. Choose additional speed/altitude/engines if that's what floats your boat. If you don't make that choice, an avionics upgrade will definitely make a difference in your flying experience.

If you wanna stop the cowling for moving, and I mean stop it from moving a single millimeter, put the stopper block on the inside of the cowling on the upper part and put a piece of angled aluminum on the edge of the boot cowl and when those two pieces butt into each other it can’t move. Now for the bottom, Lasar sold this mod that was a little strap. it was just above the bottom of the cowling, with a nut plate on it, and you put a hole through that in a screw with a smooth shank on it. And then the entire cowl can’t move a single millimeter. Whenever we did all this work, we filed the back edge of the cowling with about a one and a half millimeter gap. And 10 years later, the paint still isn’t chipped and the gap is the same. The harder you clamp down on the cowling with fixed nut plates and short cam locks, the more it wears the holes. The metal in the fiberglass layup is a piece of .020” aluminum which slows it down, but it doesn’t stop it. The camlock’s job is to keep the cowling flush with the skin. The shear loads have to be absorbed by something made to hold shear loads, and a 3/8 in. Square of aluminum, riveted to the airframe, butting into a piece of fiberglass that’s the same size. It ain’t going nowhere in 1000 hours.

Just won an Ebay auction for a D3. Paid $471. I have the necessary center post Ram Mounts from old IPad use. Looking forward to having the Dynan in my plane. An example of something you didn't "know" you needed until you saw a Mooneyspace thread.

+1 for Parker. He doesn't only have the best rates but also outstanding support.

A loose connection. I had this on my J

I have a 1970 F model and my strap is on the lower right side from near the footwell to a bolt near where the governor mounts. Pulling the right side cheek cowl reveals it.

I think you have to be honest with WHY you want the upgrade? It sounds like, for 25 years, your set-up has met all of your mission needs. Going forward, what new mission requirements necessitate spending money on new avionics, or a new plane? Hey, if you just think all the glass is 'cool' and 'new' and whatever, that's a perfectly fine reason...don't really need to justify that

Substitute "witches" for drones and "Salem" for New Jersey and you understand.

I have heard about the bed liner issue and have seen the warnings. It’s crazy that you were one of the first victims of the bed liner. Glad to hear you weren’t seriously hurt.

Can't say I'm that super organized, but am still pretty good about remembering what tools I have used when I'm putting them away. I'm still looking for a 10mm socket that's probably in my front lawn somewhere. I hate losing tools! But your exactitude especially makes sense for working on an airplane vice an old Miata.

I also use Airspeed Insurance through @Parker_Woodruff, insured with Old Republic I think. Rates are reasonable but have increased the last couple of years. There is usually a break at 100 hours Make & Model, and also with Instruments. Some companies will prorate the rest of your policy when you complete the rating, so always ask. The Mooney Flyer has a state-by-state of CFI / CFIIs, check it out. Huntsville is nice, I'm a little further down in Alabama. While I like my local CFII (retired Navy pilot), she's not a Mooney specialist but is very good as you'd expect from a long-term military pilot. Brownaero@gmail.com for information.

Two reasons. One is so you do not eat and ingest the lead. Also, primers contain lead styphnate, which decomposes into lead oxide, is expelled from the barrel as lead fume, can also be ingested or inhaled. Lead oxide is also skin absorbable.

I go through Parker @Parker_Woodruff at Airspeed. I am insured with Star.

Me too! Hard to believe it in the modern context. Of course, the kids working the the government today are probably trying to ban lead in pencils because they don't know the difference! (BTW, nice to see your name, Jeff. I keep running across friends from the old Mooney mail list. Glad you're still flying, and a much higher end plane!!)

Weird. I would have expected a 3/8” in there.

When I attended George's session at the Buckeye Air Fair this year he said straight out that it is hard on paint, so don't spill it on your paint, and that it may be harsher on seals and gaskets. I suspected then, and moreso now, that he was underplaying the concerns. He did flat out say that there were potential issues, though. So this is at least two aircraft (more if you count the Cirrus) that have sprung leaks or damage after storing G100UL. Neither is definitive or proof of anything, but I think both warrant concern and keeping a close eye on further developments. This is the sort of thing you really can't know until field deployment starts, and use still isn't widespread or even enough to get a good sense of what a complete deployment might look like.

The G100UL works great. It's been mixed with 100LL in my plane, so its benefits won't show up until I use it alone all the time, and that's not anytime soon, since so few airports have it right now. It does weigh a little more than 100LL at 6.15-6.30 lb/gal. GAMI says to use 6.25 lb/gal for weight and balance calculations. The fuel has "slightly higher volumetric density" so has about 1% more energy. I've found FF to be slightly less at cruise power to get the same TIT. One thing to be aware of is the necessity to carry an absorbent towel with you when fueling or dumping fuel back into the tank after checking for water. The fuel will stain the paint if not wiped up immediately. So far the price is fair at $6.99/gallon.

I know not what others may say but as for me, give me LEMO or give me death!

The newer headsets, specifically the a30’s take batteries and can be used with an adapter in any plane. I prefer not having to worry about batteries, but noise cancelling headsets are a second choice to clarity aloft. They don’t require batteries and I find them much more comfortable. that being said, I am in the smaller minority, most seem to prefer the noise cancelling headsets. I do like the Bose a30’s, but prefer the clarity aloft.

@NickG @M20S Driver @Bolter well clearly these “needles” exist in the haystack! Your airplanes would all be perfect! Thanks for sharing. It helps keep me optimistic as I continue to look. My next new airplane is out there, I just have to find her.

Most of the value in getting an instrument rating comes from developing the ability to easily and precisely control the airplane with less and less cognitive power, such that you have more and more cognitive power to tend to other things: reading charts, programming navigation, obtaining weather, interacting with ATC, scanning for traffic, etc. Pilots who obtain an instrument rating get fairly good at this, at least at the time of their check ride (the skills lapse if you don't use them). These skills certainly make one a better and safer pilot, but there are other ways to develop them without getting an instrument rating of course - mostly just a lot of cross-country flying with flight following. The rating itself may not have much value to any particular individual - especially if they do most of their flying in a part of the country where the weather is not conducive to flying a piston single regardless of having the rating.

you might consider hiring somebody who has done this a lot, maybe do the 201 windshield swap

Fill with helium and get a useful load increase (Wonder if landings bounce more, though)

Mooney used door seals manufactured by Brown Aircraft https://www.brownaircraft.com/Default.asp The original foam-filled BA-189-139 tended to flatten and is no longer manufactured. The replacement is T-9088. Attach with 3M yellow weatherstrip adhesive.