Leaderboard

I used to have a sailboat but couldn't find enough time to enjoy it! Someone once told me - "I know there's money in airplanes, boats and autos because I keep putting it there!"

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

3-5 days... 5 if I am helping... Scheduled way in advance so I could be off from work while it is going on. You are interested in your plane, it shouldn't be a problem to stop and look at everything while it is opened up. Call to see if you can fit in their schedule before they close it up. There are so many decisions an owner can make on the spot. These are things that are not AW related but you may want to have done this time. Or know about to decide on for the next time... Stay interested.... It’s not like auto mechanic projects where you drop off and pick up on a schedule... PP thoughts only, not a mechanic... Best regards, -a-

I kinda said the same thing, but started doing wonder assist annuals a few years back. I learned several things. First, I learned that airplanes are mostly way simpler than cars or bikes. Makes, sense, they're mostly antiques. Second, I learned that annuals are way cheaper if you do simple things like take off coverings and inspection panels. Its really easy stuff to pay someone to do. Third, I learned a metric crapload about my aircraft and how it worked. Fourth, I had it pounded into my head what a ham-handed mechanic I truly am. No news flash there. Still, best way to improve is practice.

Remove the hose from the sensor or gauge and the other end from the servo. Blow the line out with compressed air and reassemble. The sensor or gauge relies on the air in the line as a compliance to smooth out the pressure pulses from the mechanical fuel pump.

Yes, upgrading from the F to the Missile was a massive increase in both utility and systems. I had 1016 useful load in the F and actually got an increase to 1067 in the Missile; +51 lbs. I had a fast stock F 148 knots all day and with the Ram Air open 150+. Saw 152 knots average on a GPS 4 way cardinal direction flight speed test on a cold winter day. So 51 more lbs and nearly 40 knots increase in speed. Plus, GPS in panel, better interior, better avionics all around, and all the speed mods I would have paid for. The small things that I didn’t realize were the small increases in systems. It makes a non upgraded F to a J worthwhile where I thought speed was the main reason. Originally I wasn’t looking at an M20J from the F as it want enough. But again, due to all the small upgrades from an early stock F - yes it’s worth it. A late 75 or 76 F? Maybe not. Mine was a 67F. I figured it would be 45k to 60k to upgrade my 67F the way I wanted which means it would have a been a top F and maybe have sold for the high 60s if I ever needed to sell - maybe touch 70k. Instead, I sold my F, added what I would have spent and have a Missile that is worth a Missile should I need to sell, plus an airframe 16 years newer. As for range, I’ve got the extended Monroy tanks with 98 gal total capacity. Only two main issues with the Missile. Fuel burn - I can’t just go out, fly for two hours, pop 16 gallons in the tank and realize the real efficieny is a 200HP IO360. Instead, I’m assisted to speed, go fly for two hours, see how far I can get somewhere and I’m putting in at least 30 gallons to top off. Instead of blocking 10-11GPH flat out, I plan for 15GPH at 180 knots all in. I can knock it down if I’m at 8000ft or so to 14.5, but factoring in the climb, headwinds, I just base quick math on 15 GPH. I also could slow down and get nearly J efficiency, but I don’t do it often. The weighting is the other side. Heavy engine on the mid body makes for a much heavier nose and aircraft while maneuvering or landing. The F was light and nimble. The weight is another factor - grass strips. Full fuel in the tanks weighing on the gear picks. Things to consider. 800 lbs of payload or does that include fuel? Also, all depends on speed. I have 1067 useful load and 99 gallons. I can go 1000 miles in 5 hours or 1500 in 10. 800 lbs is under my total UL, so that equals above. For 800 lbs in the cabin, that leaves 267 for fuel or 44.5 gallons. So at 150 knots that’s a bit less than 600 in just under 4 hours flight time with VFR reserves. At high speed that’s nearly 400 miles in just over two hours 12 minutes with VFR reserves. Great questions. -Seth

You look like an expert in turning a large fortune into a small one

Here are my rides. I wish I could say both Mooneys are mine but the one on the right is my M20E.

Since we don't have any kids, I concider these as my children 1967 427/435 roadster and my 1966 M20C. The second picture also shows my first little bird 1973 C150L. My wife said something had to go (me or one of the kids) . . . Just kidding

I have owned an 1967 M20F now for 10 years. I have redone the avionics, new paint, tanks stripped / resealed, and even an engine rebuild back in 2015. Back in 2010, i did a rough cleanup of the interior and had lived with it up to this point. I had been looking for a good shop to do an interior job for me. In my search, i came across Jaeger Aviation in Willmar, MN. (KBDH). This was the same airport i had my tanks stripped / resealed ( WeepNoMore, http://www.weepnomorellc.com). I made a visit to Willmar and Bruce Jaeger showed me his Spatial panel system he designed for old Mooney's. The Spatial system enables easy removal / replacement of the panels without using a ton of screws, which was one of my biggest gripes when i reworked the interior. My visit was back in 2016. This year, i decided to really redo my interior. I had SCS Interiors (https://www.scs-interiors.com) recover the seats in leather and also bought their carpet kit pre-fitted for M20F. So, i made the trip Aug 1, 2017 and i worked alongside Bruce Jaeger, which, saved me several labor hours. He taught me how to repair, patch, and refinish the old panels that we would be re-using. What a nice outcome! Along with the new Spatial panels, the old window frames, baggage area plastic, nose gear housing, and headliner look practically new! We removed about 350 screws from the old interior and only re-installed about 40. The side panels and spar panel are easily removed for maintenance & inspection. i have attached some photos of the a job well done. Feel free to ask me any questions. If you would like to contact Bruce about redoing you interior, http://www.jaegeraviation.com, bruce@jaegeraviation.com, (320) 444-3042

In the mid 70's I found a derelict 66 Super sitting in Fall River, MA. Flat tires, tired paint bad interior but good engine and prop. I bought it and ferried back to Strawberry Plains, TN. At that time I had lots more energy than now so it didn't take too long to bring it up to date. Interior, new paint, Rajay, New top of the line avionics. Called radios then, Collins Microline. Hard to imagine all the kids spent many hours in the back seat. Although I really liked it, other things got in the way and I sold her. Years later I was in a small town in Louisiana and she was sitting unloved again. Flat tires and all. I bought it and went through the whole process again. This time somewhat slower. Later a I met a gentleman who spent lots of time going to the mountains of Mexico and because of the turbocharger he convinced me he could not live without my little jewel. Lots of money helped too. Sooo for many years I have bemoaned and missed her. Now I am much older and much slower. Periodically I go to the faa website and pull up the present owner which for many years has been the man I sold to. I sent him inquiries over the years but nothing in return. a couple weeks ago I went to that same old website and lo and behold it had changed hands. I contacted the present owner who turned out to be an extremely nice FBO who said "sure I will sell it but you better come look first". I had seen her derelict a couple times before but nothing I couldn't ferry. This time she is beyond that point so I plan to pull it apart and use a trailer. So is it an old love affair or just plain stupidity? JerryP

Haven't been able to get both in the same picture yet and now it's a little chilly till spring.

You will like that! Did mine just a very few months after I purchased her, so I can't really comment on the differences. And it was in 2007 . . .

Pretty $&@:,. stupid, isn't !!!,!

We've got two threads on this site of Mooneys crashing and being mostly destroyed (one into a house!) and the pilots and pax walking away. Cirrus can have their chute.

I wish to share my experience in finding an issue with my ignition system. I really like the Savy Analysis tools. I can sit on the PC for hours and view the data from my flight logs. For the past several months I noticed a stumble while flying LOP. I call it a stumble but once at LOP I feel a very quick shudder almost like turbulence for a nanosecond. All engine indicators are in the green. After researching this a bit more I decided to test the ignition to see if something can be revealed as a weak link. I have a new ignition harness, recently overhauled mags, and Tempest fine wire plugs with 300 hours on them. I flew at 8500 and ran an LOP mag check per Savy instructions. Their detailed flight analysis showed the following. The L, B, and R stand for "left mag", "both mags", and "right mag". Note the EGT1 going cold during the right mag test. While on the right mag, sparkplug on cylinder 1 was cold. It was not even firing I do not believe. The engine was rough on the right mag. I replaced the plugs on cylinder #1 and ran another test. Indeed the bottom plug was bad with a cracked insulator. My A&P said it looked like it had been dropped. See the new data with new plugs in #1. Now temps are normal and the engine was very smooth at 50 LOP. Savy has some very nice analysis tools and I appreciate the help in determining the source of the issue. Just sharing this information in hopes it helps someone. Russ

I spoke to Mike Busch who made a presentation to a full tent at AOPA Fly-In Saturday. I mentioned "our own" @kortopates and how helpful Paul is... he reacted to the effect that Paul loves Mooneys and probably grabs all the Savvy subscribers who have straight tails.

EYEWITNESS STATEMENT AIRCRAFT: CESSNA 172 PILOT: 30 YRS OLD, CFI, IR FATALITIES: None DAMAGE: Substantial DATE OF ACCIDENT: July 10 1982 WITNESS: Line attendant at airport Pilot came to airport at 9am, 10 Jul 1982. Line boy reports padlock on his hangar door was so rusted he had to break it off with a 10# ball-peen hammer. Also had to inflate all 3 tires and scrape pigeon droppings off wind screen. After several attempts to drain fuel strainers, pilot finally got what looked like fuel out of the wings sumps. Couldn’t get the oil dipstick out of the engine but said it was okay last time he looked. Engine started okay – ran rough for about 1/2 minute, then died. Then battery would not turn prop. Used battery cart and although starter was smoking real good, it finally started and the prop wash blew the smoke away. Line boy offered to fuel airplane up but pilot said he was late for an appointment at a nearby airport. Said it wasn’t far. Taxied about 1/2 way out to active runway and the engine stopped. Pushed it back to the fuel pumps and bought 3 gallons for the left wing tank. Started it again. This time, he was almost out to the runway when it quit again. Put a little rock under nose wheel; hand propped it; and was seen still trying to climb in the airplane as it went across the runway. Finally got in it; blew out the right tire trying to stop before the cement plant. When he taxied back in to have the tire changed, he also had the line boy hit the right wing with 3 gallons of gas. Witness, who saw the takeoff, said the aircraft lined up and took off to the north. Takeoff looked fairly normal – nose came up about 300 ft down the runway. At midfield nose came down. Engine coughed twice – then cut power and applied the brakes which made both doors fly open and a big fat brown book fell out on the runway and released probably a million little white pages with diagrams on them. Looked like sort of a snow storm. After several real loud runups at the end, he turned her around and took off in the other direction going south into the wind. Only this time he horsed her off at the end and pulled her up real steep like one of them jet fighter planes – to about 300 ft – then the engine quit! Did a sort of a slow turn back toward the airport – kinda like that Art School guy – and about 30 ft off the McDonald’s cafe she started roaring again. He did sort of a high speed pass down the runway; put the flaps down to full and that sucker went up like he was going to do an Immelmann! The engine quit again and he turned right and I thought he was coming right through the front window of the F.B.O.; but he pulled her up – went through the TV antenna and the little rooster with the NSE&W things – over the building then bounced the main wheels off the roof of 3 different cars in the lot – a Porsche, a Mercedes and Dr. Brown’s new El Dorado. When he bounced off the El Dorado the engine roared to life and he got her flying. Came around toward the runway and set her down – once on the overrun, once on the runway and once in the grass beside the runway. He taxied into the ramp, shut her down, and ordered 3 more gallons of gas. Said it was for safety’s sake. Then he asked where the phone booth was as he had to call his student and tell him he was going to be a little bit late.

The ceilings were a little low this morning...

Market's weird. Acclaim is faster, more comfortable, safer, more efficient, has better engineered landing gear, and (subjective) is better looking. Cirrus will, inexplicably, sell more inferior planes than Mooney will sell superior ones. Same thing happens with cars, too. Toyota will sell more Corollas than Mazda will sell 3's despite the 3 being a vastly superior vehicle in every way. Most consumers are bad consumers.

Did they remove a rib from one side to make the other one? (It worked for Adam and Eve...)

Concerns? Not at all. Granted, I could get dinged by an FAA inspector, but I could also get dinged for my GoPro mounts, etc. It's very subjective. After discussing it with a few IAs, they told me the FARs are vague on the subject, requiring only that bulbs have enough light for night operations and not present a fire hazard. That's it. Our GE halogen bulbs carry no TSO/PMA of any kind. It's just a tractor light pulled off the shelf. AvWeb's Paul Bertorelli even said this: Stock 250W GE Halogens are 300,000 candlepower. The Whelen Parmetheus PLUS is only a 10-degree beam, at 35W and barely eclipsing 2100 lumens at a measly 50,000 candlepower. This unit is a 15-degree beam, 55W at 4200lm and 200,000 candlepower. I've already replaced my GE halogen 3x at $30 a pop. I'm tired of spending money and crossing my fingers that the landing light won't blow out hampering my safety at night. This is the only nighttime picture I have (before I installed it). The camera settings on my phone dumb down the lower light to the sides, but it has a decent spread.

Yet we're all flying the same wing, the same bouncy landing gear, same door/baggage (not counting one or two new ones built), same proper tail, same four seats. Sure there are some small differences in rear seat leg room, costs, and hp up front, but they all have more in ommon than with any other airplane! They only range from 180-310hp, 150-200kias top speed. Just cause it's a huge premium to go a tiny bit faster, doesn't make them all that different.

Because somewhere in this Great Land of ours a woefully forlorn bridge is missing its troll. And, unfortunately, he wandered our way. If you refrain from feeding him, he might, just might, find his way back home.

Got the interior of the wings cleaned up and applied ACf50 and covers back on. New tires, tubes and brake discs and gear greased. next rusted rods and bell cranks. Ripped out the full Brittain panel mounted autopilot. tail cone interior finished. engine cylinders removed for inspection. crank, cam and all inside look new. 1200 since factory reman. Lots and Lots to go. Almost sorry i started because of lack of time to devote to it.

I use Helium, it make for quicker and higher flights...

Not by any means in order of adoration level.

Scarving is mechanical process to remove thin layers of a material. A lathe is a typical scarving process... as is a thickness planer.... A small version of the thickness planer is just a plane... Using a plane to scarve off thin layers of your plane's surfaces can get pretty expensive... Taking it to the Corvette shop wouldn't cost nearly as much. For some reason known.... A scarved polymer product that we are most familiar with is Teflon tape. Teflon tape starts out as a giant roll, that gets scarved down and slit to width at the same time. Sometimes the word skived is used... scarfed scarved skived All the same process of using a plane to remove thin layers. Except, the focus is often on the removed layers in place of what is left behind... +1 on that awesome plane's awesome HP to weight ratio... Best regards, -a-

Huh? I can name loads of scenarios were it's more efficient. It's not cheaper, but additional passengers help. My bird is only good for 150kts and there are trips nearing 1000 miles that think could be done faster via Mooney than airline. Certainly more pleasant. As for the OP, to me, your post reads like it's time to get out of GA. Calling a 4 place mooney a "flying jetski" illustrates that your feelings for you own machine border on contempt. I think you should sell your plane and avoid GA or man up and buy something that's worthy of your admiration.

The trifecta :-)

66 E 09 987S

I vote absolute stupidity and hope you can do and bring her back once again. best of luck do lots of documentation these type of things are going to become more rare and need to be recorded for history.

That's what I called it...many years ago. :-D I had only been in a 747 and 737 at that point.

average annual time for the older Mooney's is around 32 man hours, the actual inspection is relatively quick, opening and closing the panels takes about half that total time. Brian

Or just a J/K that represents em all

For the G1000, the "TIT" is indeed the 3-into-1 temperature reading that gets displayed on the summary engine readouts when the MFD is in non-Engine mode. It's always about 100° hotter than the actual EGTs on that side. I am guessing that in an Acclaim or Bravo this would indeed be the probe used for TIT.

Yeah, or will be in a week.

Huh? One guy lands in a field in the middle of nowhere and suddenly no one needs a chute? That's quite a leap.

Flew Foreflight 9.4.3 today for almost 2.5 hours. Seemed to fix the issue with Stratux and the no traffic issue I was having with Navworx.

66 M20C and 1970 Plymouth Duster 340 for me!

Oh... $hit... ' (I think I saw a touch and go).

I don't use the flaps or the gear handle. If you leave the flaps up, you never have to think about them. Same goes for the gear and the added benefit is, you'll never have a gear up landing. The red and blue knobs are annoying too. I leave those all the way forward. Nothing good can come from them. My car has a throttle and a brake. That's all my airplane needs too. I've heard about cowl flaps, but I haven't found them yet. It's not cabin air is it? Anyhow, I don't see the point. Why would the cowl need more lift? Do they help you go up faster? Is that how you land in a nose high attitude, with full cowl flaps? Seriously, too much work. If it gets off the ground and flies with just the throttle, why complicate things?

I was booking out a trip to Santa Fe, NM last week, for next month - it got cancelled... but here is what I researched. From Potsdam (way upstate NY) to Santa Fe by airlines, door-door including leaving the house 4.5 hours before the flight since it is a 2.5 hrs drive to Syracuse (and 1.5 to Ottawa but the border adds other time problems), and 2 connecting flights, for a total of 9.5 hrs booked time, that makes 14 hours. Mooney Rocket I came out at 9.5 hrs there, plus 2 fuel stops (it would get there on 1, but its a bit long), and 7-7.5 hrs back and maybe 1 fuel stop. Assuming the weather does not have me zigging and zagging all over Texas and Kansas, and North Dakota. And the airport with my mooney is 1 mile from my house. But there you have it 1550 nm trip and STILL a good bit faster than the airlines. On more modest trips, like DC, I am at my destination before I would otherwise be parking the car in the parking structure at a commercial airport. Yes a Mooney Rocket does a good bit over 200 if you pour fuel into it, and still does a good 200 if you pour quite a bit less into it. Of course 300 would be nice... 400 even nicer. 500 even better. I would go suborbital if I could afford it. But 200 I can actually afford and own.

And I can carry my pocket knife.

200 kts won't change any of what you're complaining of. There is almost no scenario were GA is more economical or practical than the airlines. We love to fly GA because of many reasons, but if your reasons are economics and practicality, you should probably just fly the airlines.

The pressure of Nitrogen, Oxygen, and regular air all exhibit nearly identical behavior with changes in temperature. The compressibility factors of Nitrogen and Oxygen at 70 degrees F and 1 atm are 0.9998 and 0.9993 respectively. The changes in pressure of any of these gases or mixtures will vary with temperature according to the ideal gas law (PV=nRT). A tire pressure gauge would not be precise enough to measure the difference in pressure changes between Nitrogen and air over seasonal temperature differences.

Cylinder break-in is usually a full power, full rich affair... full rpm to go with that... Down low for good MP and air cooling... This makes the piston and rings go to the extremes of mechanical Travel... Check with your mechanic for his details. PP thoughts only. Not a mechanic... Best regards, -a-

I’m partial to an 80% nitrogen mix...