Leaderboard

Not referencing any particular MSer or thread, but my life would be marginally easier if everyone said Dallas (RBD), rather than just RBD. I read most all the posts on MS, and spend some time flipping over the Airnav to check to see where Kxxx is.

Oh, the one that Mooney Pilots are the most levelheaded, responsible, quick thinking, good looking, and all around best airman of anyone flying four seat singles?

Maybe all of us airplane guys can agree on one thing - boats are an expensive pain in the ass and no one in their right mind would buy one.

Race him from fuel pump to fuel pump. Both planes fill up, race to the destination and top off. That way you can beat him twice with a single flight!

Note to self. Don't post pics of my avionics bay (or engine bay) These MSers are eagle eyed.

My beautiful Mooney and I made the cover of MAPA Log this month! My thanks to Trey Hughes, et. al, for the honor!

Followed the sunset this evening looking for the green flash. Never saw it but got this PIC and a great video of the sun going down over SOCAL... Fly Safe Mooniacs!

So... How much would the annual be to fix all his squawks?

Great shirt for my IFR training weekend. #ShePersisted Getting that rating in 2017. But first an AB FAB flight down the coast to LA. #MooneyZoom

He is under part 103 a powered ultralight and under part 103.17 prohibited from class A B C D and Class E 5 miles from an airport without prior approval from ATC.

Here's why not. A few years ago coming back from Oshkosh one of our stops was Ogden, Utah. I pulled up the ATIS, but apparently didn't listen well enough. They were advertising 0G20. I'd never heard that before. On final I applied full flaps. There really wasn't a crosswind, it wasn't bumpy, and there wasn't any variation in airspeed as I came down final. Then it happened. I was in the flare and was just touching down when the gust hit. Instantly we were pushed up about 20 feet in the nose high landing attitude without the benefit of ground effect. Anyone who has flown with me knows that I'm a "fly for the passenger" kind of person. That's how ATPs are supposed to fly. That means every control movement is done gently and smoothly so as not to alarm the passenger. That was NOT called for in this situation. Without thinking I pushed the nose down and crammed the throttle full forward, not a good thing to do with a turbocharged engine. I figured it was a prop strike for sure, and possibly worse. Somehow the speed at which the nose was lowered and power added saved the day, as we hit the ground somewhat hard, but not hard enough to do any damage. I could have salvaged the landing at that point, but decided to go around and do it again--this time with approach flaps. The second approach and landing went uneventfully. Shirley was still upset as we pulled up to the self service fuel pump and got out of the airplane. As I was pumping the gas in no wind conditions, all of a sudden a huge gust came up and nearly blew me over. Shirley looked at me and we knew what had happened only minutes before. I know that had there been a prop strike and I said a big gust came up and caused the problem no one would have believed me. I wouldn't have believed me. The moral of this story is that there are times when full flaps are NOT appropriate.

Good thing I bought a Mooney, it would have been terrible to have bought something else and not fit the profile of those 'other brands.'

I'm looking at the 76-78 Lance's for my long-term goal. I love my Mooney but every time I go flying, the seats are always filled. Maybe I need to do a lottery system when I choose which friends to take LOL

What concerns me is the stress that they can't detect that may manifest itself sometime later...hundreds of hours later.

I agree, especially when touting upcoming events. "Come on over to KXYZ, for the most fun EVER," with great detail on time, cost and available fun. Never having heard of KXYZ, I'll either ignore it and miss out, check back and see if someone else mentions at least what part of the country it's in, or Google the stinking code and find out its anywhere from a 20 minute flight (hey, I can go!) [yeah, right, that's happened like twice] to 2000 miles away (many times . . . It's surprising how much of this country is that far from Lower Alabama, and there's Mooney pilots all over it). OK you formation training clinics--you listening? I've figured out from repeated exposure and poster's avatar information that one is in Texas (only ONE thousand miles way! ) and another is in the Virginia SW area (not too far past Mom & Dad and my inlaws--always good for a combo trip). Guess I'll swing by 41A tomorrow and check on the plane, may even take her over to 08A (haven't been there in a while, and I need to stop at 1A9 while I'm over that way).

Upgrade?

Yep..... That one !!!!

Also remember that "insured" is not the same as "free". We all pay for the teardowns in our premiums.

Obviously you don't fly then cause all your planes do over 100kts. But same or less than my Mooney.

Gosh dogs are expensive.

What the Mooney out-costs on parts gets saved on the fuel so overall costs are a wash. But the Mooney gets there quicker!

I think the viruses on the pilot relief tube would worry me more. Just sayin...

Unfortunately, EASA STC is out of the question for me. Too much money to get it approved and then you pay a renewal fee for the STC every year. The reciprocity agreement between EASA and the FAA is really a joke. We give everything away in the US and have to pay EASA for our STC's to be approved there.

I've had and flown with 2 good sized labs over the years. Just never together. Labs are very mellow breeds and their disposition makes them great passengers. I wouldn't have dreamed about crating either one, but they have always been secured with a harness (not their neck) tied to a shoulder belt which kept them in the back seat and away from the front seat if we had an emergency landing. But a single lab takes up the entire back seat or it can't lay down which it really needs to do. I just don't think either the baby or a lab sized dog will be happy sharing the back seat together which means neither you and your wife will be either. However I have done my lab with an adult pax in the rear many times, but that takes a willing pax that doesn't mind the dog's head in the pax lap which is really the only way a 70+lb lab can lie down. Before I was a Mooney owner I rented aircraft and had no problem with the dog. Just like with rental cars, we got a cover that would entirely cover the back seat to help control the dog hair. We'd still need something like sticky tape for the carpet. But planes weren't as bad as cars. Cars almost always had fabric seats that attract the hair while vinyl and leather is much more common on older aircraft rentals. So it was really more of a car rental issue. The C177RG does have a lot more room in the back but I don't know if I would want to carry a family lab in the cargo area either. I have a friend with a C177RG that used to carry around 2 huge Great Danes. She had the rear seats removed and it was no problem that way, but not manageable with the seats. But as you must be aware, the C177RG using the same engine as the Mooney J model is going about 40kts less than the Mooney, maybe a bit faster than the Arrow (I don't recall Arrow speeds that well).

I agree dogs jumping in the back would not be ideal. If anything i'm pretty sure my young lab would be trying to get up front to put his head out the window. Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

Two 70-80lb dogs should be in crates when in flight. Sorry, but its a safety precaution...plus they make my copilot nervous!

I don't think there's enough cabin room for all five of you. If you left the dogs at home, or reduced down to one dog, you'd be fine in the Mooney. You and the wife in the front seats will be comfortable. The baby will be in a car seat that will take half the back seat. That won't leave much room for one large dog, much less two. Of course the dogs could go in the cargo area, but it's limited to 120 lbs and then there's no room for luggage. My wife and I travel around the country in our Mooney with one large dog and it works well. I'm not sure there's enough room for a car seat AND two large dogs in the back seat.

I just passed my IFR written. I used a combination of Aviation Seminars and ASA. If anyone would like feedback, send me a PM. Now on to the fun part.... or at least more fun.... the flying. #MooneyZoom Happy Mooney Girl

Matt -- I was using Boeshield way back in the 1990s. I think it was commercially available before CorrosionX and the rest of them. Boeing probably didn't have an interest in marketing it and the rest took the market. It's good stuff. It does turn into a wax and it is less likely to ooze out of your plane. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

That happens with the airlines, too. Most recently just a couple of weeks ago, several thousand flights were cancelled a day the national news networks were full of people sleeping in airports for several days waiting on the planes to get moving airports gain. His 11-1/2 hours drive doesn't include mechanical breakdown, weather-induced stops (I sat one night for 3+ hours while the road was salted after an ice storm, then traffic crawled at 10 mph for several miles . . . ) or traffic jams. No additional delays are in any of the times shown for comparison, because those delays are highly variable and unpredictable.

I've worked on mine, gently, with a small hammer. Don't lose the little bitty bearing . . .

Pictures... you gotta see lots of clear and close up pictures. I gotta see pictures of the panel that is clear enough for me to read model numbers on the radios. If a seller won't send pictures... any iPhone or Android phone will do... I'm a bit suspect. If they're too tech challenged to take phone pics, tell them to get their grand kid to take some pictures and send them to you.

The seat backs can be removed independently. After this, then bottom bench seat is more or less flush with the cargo floor. If you remove the seat bottom, then there is a lot of exposure to uncomfortable and sharp pieces of metal and rivets.. just remove the seat back, then throw a blanket over it all and it becomes more or less level.

found the answer... AF15473 is the exact replacement for LW15473, but made by tempest.. i ordered a new one instead of overhauled.. This experience has made me fully appreciate that I have a continuous duty electric fuel pump on board!..

Seth I went into KPBI last month and was the only single engine piston I saw, the controllers wanted me to maintain 170 on final to the smaller runway, it's no problem, I had the feeling I was not wanted, it's quite pricy for fees, a pain driving around the airport, other than that if the weather's suspect I need a certain approach I'd go back, my first choice next time will be Lantana. I also was vectored an extra 20 minutes os so I assume for landing traffic although I didn't see a problem, I think being a small slow plane I was a bother. I often go into KBWI and feel no such problem's there. Who knows. Good luck and give a PIREP on your trip there, I'll be going back soon

Great points, I will give this a try for sure. My next problem is that my available landing distance is less than 2200 feet, and doing short final with no flaps and a few knots extra speed will be sporting... and probably a little scary. But I am glad to hear the differing points of view.

Panel looks great!

Definitely better than in a short body. I remember looking at a 175 that I shared the hangar with and it had way more room than my C

I really don't think they'll fit any better in the 182 - not on the back seat anyway.

I read that too. But if this was his difficulty in his final startup, I also read he had previously taxied to the runway to take off with a VFR on top clearance and then decided for whatever reasons he should file IFR to his destination - maybe he got a tops report he didn't like. regardless he then taxied back to the ramp. So I thought the hard starting later after he delayed to refile etc could have just been from the pilot havng a hot start challenge or even flooded the engine. I just wouldn't take hard starting alone to be indicative of a real engine issue. But not to say its not indicative of a real problem either. I don't know what to think about the low tail. But my first thought is that if the tail was practically hanging on the ground wouldn't the pilot be unable to taxi with the nose wheel practically off the pavement. i.e. you think it would be obvious to the pilot. Other reports are in conflict with the heavy rain on departure at that time. I recall only light rain. Anyway suspicions are neither engine was making power on impact. The propeller on the roof appears to be fully feathered and not bent in fashion consistent with making power from the better pictures we see in the news. So one of the good theories IMO is this could be a miss-fueling with JetA. And after suggesting above the hard starting could mean nothing more than something like a hot start, it could also help give credence to a miss fueling event (but I haven't had that experience with that and hope I never do!). If the registered owner was flying, its hard to believe an ATP rated and CFI endorsed pilot would take off with such an an out of CG condition that would lead to a stall that some others have speculated. I hope he didn't not bother to sump his tanks because of the weather or but if it was JetA he apparently didn't notice it was clear rather than blue. Here is an article on the JetA theory based in part on witness accounts of black smoke in trail as the plane went down, or possibly a ruptured fuel line: http://www.sbsun.com/general-news/20170302/engine-problems-smoke-hint-at-riverside-plane-crash-cause But of course we still don't even have the preliminary yet.

That's funny I thought of you today. There was a hawk playing on the thermals. He went 60 degrees on a turn low to the ground and had a pretty good bobble. I said to him "woo dude keep it standard rate when low to the ground"

All of the ones I've looked at, less one or two with J-type cowls.

But we are close if not the closest!

Avionics bay looks great! Looks like it's time for a new white battery terminal boot (MS25171-3S) on the battery in the foreground. I just ordered a couple for mine - they tear up pretty easily.

My current ride while searching for a Mooney is a rental 200hp Arrow. I call it the Sky Potato because it is bland, predictable, sorta sweet, reliable but generally unremarkable, a little misshapen and glides like a potato when the gear is down. Some of those attributes are genuinely good, naturally. I could definitely see owning one if you didn't mind not going overly fast or high, but I'm usually just annoyed by how much less efficient it is than it could be. They are super easy to fly, the emergency gear mechanism is dirt simple and effective, but otherwise the electro-hydraulic gear just seems way overly complicated for such an otherwise simple airplane. I'm 6' even and don't have a lot of headroom in it, but get less interference between my legs and the yoke than I do in a C172. They are nice enough airplanes that I can easily see an owner getting passionate on a forum, but it's a little apples and oranges comparing one to a Mooney despite having essentially the same engine. Potato wing vs Mooney wing is night and day.

I don't know the airplane, but nothing on the list you attached looks like a show-stopper to me. Agree with Alex you should further investigate the gear issues, but not sure I'd characterize them as a "big thing". Shims, bearings, and rod ends are straightforward. I'd need to know exactly how much the preload is out of spec before expressing an opinion on that - the factory-prescribed method of measuring preload tension via torque wrench and breaker-arm tools is prone to a lot of measurement variation. If you're going to repair the gear spring attach bracket, I'd consider installing new springs on both sides, which may bring the preload measurements back into spec anyway. I'd also take a close look at the nose gear. The play the shop is proposing to fix with shims and oversize through bolts may in fact require a whole new steering horn (that was the case with our airplane when we started to get nosewheel shimmy). The biggest question I'd have is, what is the complete list of stuff actually inspected on the pre-buy? The attached report shows a bunch of easily fixable items, but doesn't say things like, "Inspected spars and spar caps for corrosion, looks good"; or "removed interior panels to inspect roll cage for corrosion, no issues found"; or "no evidence of decaying tank sealant found in gascolator screen"; or "borescoped all four cylinders, valves and cylinder walls look good". A pre-buy which finds and offers to correct a bunch of minor issues is essentially worthless if the inspection overlooked all the major, expensive stuff. Sure is a good-looking airplane with a nice panel. If the bones are good, seems like a fair deal.

that guy has way too much time on his hands here is the finished product. Its been painted a year now.

The wing loading on a Mooney is higher and it will be more stable than a 172. I have 300 or so hours in a 172. The 172 controls are cables and pulleys while the Mooney use control rods. A Mooney going through turbulence is traveling faster and you will feel jolts instead of the wobbling feeling. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Most unusual, the factory usually uses Canon plugs. The non-pressurized units entirely replace vent on mags. The pressurized mag has a different vent with larger orifice. Never understood why rpm sensors for the pressurized mags didn't also use a similar vent replacing unit but they instead chose to use a washer that fits under the original vent. Then the soft metal wraps around the mag. It's much like CHT gasket probe and similarly fragile. You are much better off now! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk