Leaderboard

In 1991, my aspirations to fly and be part of aviation were finally satisfied, as my cousin and close friend invited me to be a fourth partner in a hangar project. My cousin, Dave Oliver, and Steve Phillips, who he worked with at a Fed Ex maintenance facility, had added a third partner, Bob Larson, (the founder of Northwoods Airlifeline) just prior to my opportunity. I complained that not only could I write the support check, I had carpentry skills and was capable of helping with the build. Just as we completed the hangar, Dave decided he wanted out for a pretty silly reason (that was his way), and Steve, who barely knew me, asked "I suppose you want out too?" I said emphatically NO. A partnership and friendship blossomed from there. Steve owned the beautiful E model Mooney I've posted pictures of in the past. He accompanied me in 1994 for the pre-purchase of my first plane, a C-150 (Steve was an A&P too). He flew me down to Falcon Field in March of 1996 to do the same blessing on my first Mooney, an F model. He flew with me to Seattle in 2001 to do the same on my Rocket purchase. I performed most the maintenance and annuals on all 3 planes over the years, under Steve's guidance and leadership. By the end of the years he trusted me to perform his annuals as well. We flew many, many airlifeline flights together, flew to Florida for a pre-purchase on my sister's Cherokee 180, and he flew it to Denver for her with me in chase (well, he was in chase to MY Mooney). About 3 years before finishing my Lancair, I talked him into giving up his last job, truck driving (he loved the road) to help me finish the Lancair. He asked how much time before we would be done. I told him 6-9 months. He never failed to remind me that ended up being 2.5 years. He also drove for my dealership, delivering trucks that were far enough away they would require an airplane ride from me once delivered. He took on another Lancair Propjet project, moving it to our hangar, to finish the instrument panel and wiring installation (Joe Trepicone's from Columbus OH). Steve was with me on two engine failures in the flight levels. He helped me by flying the Rocket down to TN when I dropped the Lancair off for paint and interior, and brought me down to pick it up when done in May 2018. We flew both planes to Houghton for a Young Eagles Event, and have flying stories long and deep enough I could write a book. He was my camping buddy at Oshkosh too. Most recently, he was "key man one" on the EAA Chapter hangar/concrete project I just posted about, there for every work session in spite of his own on going home re-siding project. 28 years ago he was new friend. 15 years ago he was one of my 3 best friends. For the last 10 years..... he was my best friend....... I mean BEST FRIEND! While in Florida this past Monday (came home Tuesday), he son called me and told me he died of a surprise heart attack. Man this hurts!!!! Tom Picture of Steve's last flight with his Mooney and him and his wife this summer at Oshkosh.

Jenny is a class act. Despite her recent loss, she took time to express gratitude for the extra time she had with Mark due to the heroic act of Thomas Hunnicutt. Godspeed Jenny. https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/widow-of-plane-crash-victim-thanks-man-who-rescued-her-husband

Bob, Urs lives in Switzerland and bases his airplane in Zurich. I'll give him a pass on his English because I'm quite sure his German is better than mine.

Just brought this home two weeks ago. Magical

FWIW My wife says she feels safer flying with me in the Mooney than on the airlines. The airlines don’t have parachutes either. That being said whenever we walk by a Cirrus she says “let’s get one of those” Then I tell her what they cost and she says “too bad, they sure are cute and they look so comfy” She never mentions the parachute.

I was with JD at SWTA on Wednesday to pick up my plane after an oil change. He was still able to call Mooney and talk to the parts guy and order parts. Apparently, the "parts guy" (name unknown to me) said, "News of my demise has been greatly exaggerated." It sounded promising to me. Obviously, the major topic of our conversation was the Mooney factory status. So, this is just hearsay and I don't know what it means long-term but, here is a very weird lizard for your enjoyment.

Ok, so last weekend I was flying from KNEW to KORL... we got a little behind and ended up getting in after dark, which I don't particularly like to do. Anyhow along the way I was playing with fuel flows at around 55% power, which theoretically means I cant hurt the engine... well I was in some bumps and messing with the mixture and I heard a "THUMP"... that got my attention. I still do not know waht it was but it was either a mild backfire or possible my phone sliding off the glareshield... I had it sitting on the eyebrow and after this thump I looked around to see it far forward against the window. It may have jumped up in the turbulence, who knows. So, everything is still looking OK, EGT's CHT's, TIT, fuel flow... everything is normal. I proceed on to KORL and make an uneventful landing. However, when I get out I am greeted by a line worker on the brightly lit ramp and as we are pulling bags he says " what is this discoloration on your cowl?" I perk up and go up to the front of the plane and sure enough on the front left of the cowl is a darkened area of paint. " it Looks like it got hot" he says. I hold my hand up to it casting a shadow on it and as far as I can tell, it looks like there has been a fire under the cowl atop the front left cylinder which has burned the paint. It is even tapered back to a point.... I'm thinking Ohh crap I have done it now. This CANT be good. I Immediately pull the top cowl and start looking around with a flashlight. I scour the area but I cannot see anything that looks amiss. Now I am really confused and even more worried. I keep looking... Nothing. I decide to investigate the paint again... this time I hold up a flashlight onto the paint.... no discoloration at all.... I turn the flashlight off, again discoloration.... So what gives? Well for any of you who have seen a Rocket, the modified cowl has a lump bulging out on the front left to accommodate the underlying cylinder. The ramp lights were casting a shadow from this hump onto the side of the cowl. There was apparently enough of an angle from the individual lights on the array that holding up my hand and casting a shadow on the area did not remove the effect. Damn, that is the most scared I have been in a while! Gotta love these little coincidences in aviation... I have plenty of stories that were the result of silly little coincidences stacking up like this to make me think I was stuck with a broken aircraft.

Honestly, there’s been quite a few people coming in , buying a 22T and then asking us to train them in it. I’m not saying it’s a smart way to learn or efficient, but they do it. Money be damned. There are some other folks that use our SR20 for training and then purchase a 22T for themselves. The transition is simple. These folks want the whole package, car like interior, autopilot, chute, glass. The chute isn’t the whole thing, but it’s definitely part.

Cirrus - chute + great handflying = Cessna TTX. And we all know how that ended... There, I did the math !

Yes. Mooney has been out of business many times before... we're still flying them. There are other companies that make Mooney parts, i.e. LASAR. Having Mooney in business doesn't guarantee access to parts from Mooney. There are many parts they haven't produced in years. The salvage market is alive and well... meet @Alan Fox Many parts for our Mooneys are available off the shelf from places such as Aircraft Spruce. Owner produced parts are a real thing and an approved option. Mooney might not actually be out of business. This might be just a temporary pause. I'm not worried...

IMHO Anyone who believes a four place, single engine airplane manufacturer can compete with Cirrus without a whole plane parachute is kidding themselves.

Y'know, the more I think about it, the more I'm convinced we're all being overly pessimistic and Mooney is "just fine" (for our purposes, anyway)... 90 employees still kept on, not making parts, and the "parts guy" says the rumors of their demise are greatly exaggerated? Yeah, that sounds a _whole lot_ like retooling. If so, that might be a good sign of things to come. Of course, there are still lots of issues they need to deal with: Marketing, new phone system & FTE's to answer it, being properly competitive with Cirrus, etc. Baby steps, though...

Diamond is another example of “what could have been” in the trainer market. However, you can go slightly more optimistic for Diamond: “What could be”

My wife is nervous about flying with me in Mooneys - she's ridden in the back on a couple flights with @smccray and @DonMuncy. She has expressed great interest in the chute that Cirrus offers and asked why other manufacturers don't offer that. But she also has been convinced that Mooney has a strong stucture. But I can tell you that's a harder sell than a chute. I like going places in planes. And I don't care to go alone (I want wife and future kids to be along for the ride). If/when an airplane is in the picture, it'll be one of these five: SR20, SR22, M20J, M20K, M20R. And if someone hands me $1MM and says "go buy a new airplane", I'll be first in line for a Piper Seneca V.

I’ll have one on my Missile soon too . . . -Seth

So carrying forward, push the wing on top which is equivalent to diving both sides of the equation by the term TTX Cessna = (Cirrus - chute + great hand flying )/TTX add 172 to both sides Cessna 172 = 172+ (Cirrus - chute + great hand flying )/TTX

The reason I have three screens . . . is because they don't make four.

Agree with Paul... No need to panic or even worry, frankly. On the remote chance you find corrosion in the wing or get some hangar rash, a competent sheet metal mechanic can almost certainly make a repair from raw stock. Typical wear/consumable items are readily available from non-factory sources. Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

Fair enough. My bad, I should know better. Of course it's his logic not his English that I take exception to...

Because people with that much disposable income want to be able to unlock and provide ramp presence (wingtip led’s) from 20 feet away.

I see his point.

In my experience, there are some deltas where an overlying C controller can clear you through as vfr traffic, and some where they will not and you will have to talk to the delta tower. Either way, you cannot assume you can enter those deltas just because you are talking to the overlying C controller. Best just to ask the C controller.

Aircraft has been sold.

At this time we intend to have no waiting list. If we grow to 1000 people attending. That may change, but we should have enough capacity for the largest Mooney Summits thus far and everyone on the waiting list (plus some more). The last few years we’ve had about 165 register and 80+ on the wait list. A good amount cancel. And we backfill from the wait list. Normally we have 120 or so attendees at the meeting session on Saturday. I’m anticipating on 200+ attendees but we should have space for easily 250 and can make 300+ available. Would love in a few years to be even larger. We’re just glad we have made the decision to grow as there is indeed demand. More details to follow! -Seth

Urs, IMNSHO your generalizations are as bad as your spelling/spell check/typing! On the occasion of receiving the FAA's longevity award at the recent Mooney Summit I pointed out to that great assembly of safety conscience Mooney pilots, most of whom had their (flying) spouse with them, that my flying "career" began when my young bride, she was 23 at the time, gave me a learn-to-fly starter pack - 2 hours of instruction and a couple of books recommended by the flight school - for Xmas (1968). At the time Nancy was a stay at home mom with our 17 month old daughter. I do not think she'd ever been in any plane smaller than a Martin 404. And I do not believe that Nancy's attitude then and now is unique or even rare. Millions of people would love to fly even though they probably know there's some level of risk. I suspect most folks would be more interested in the pilot's experience than in the airplane's equipment. That some other non-pilots have an irrational fear of flying I do not doubt, flying is not everyone's cup of tea. But I don't believe for one minute that a parachute makes a scaredy cat who tenses up whenever there's a little turbulence into a confident passenger ready to take off into a 300' ceiling "knowing" that the 'chute makes everything okay. That's silly. Mooney has numerous challenges - sales, marketing, manufacturing, management, cultural issues (TX & China), etc., etc. Exactly zero of their problems would disappear if only their new products have a 'chute.

In all my years of working as an a&p over 75% of nose wheel shimmy are caused by a bad nose wheel tire. Always put the best tire you can buy and it will most always cure the shimmy problem.

Same here. Weird thing is I swear I get just as good climb at 120 as I do at 100 or 105 (down low).

Guys, please take a step back and look at it from the point of view that there is a reason Mooney only sold only a small number of airplanes this year whereas Cirrus sells 200. And not only Mooney, also Piper and Cessna don't sell anywhere in that class. The reason is so obvious, it is not worth discussing anymore. Lots of us have parnters and possibly kids. Many of them do not like to fly in small planes and do it just to please us. Many do not fly in small planes at all, marriages have broken over this, lots of them. People generally are afraid of flying, this includes a fair share of low time pilots too. Now comes along a company which makes airplanes which have the one solution every 3 year old "knows" is the rescue from any plane in trouble. That company soars to become the only manufacturer turning out any reasonable number. What more do you need to be clear on the why? Yes, it is the "anxious wife" effect but not only. Safety conciousnes has massively changed over the last decades or so. Daredevils were yesterday. Today, people don't look at private pilots, motorcycle riders and high mountain climbers as heros but quite few as stupid people who do not know what is good for them. In this climate, a parashute equipped plane is the only answer many anxious pilots, wifes and companies will ALLOW to be brought into their household. Believe me, I have coached quite a few first time owners in recent years. 80% of those who ask me about an airplane are 40-50 year old family people. My first question ALWAYS is, does your wife approve? 90% of those I meet will grow red faced and say "she does not know I am here". Of those, maybe 1 in 50 buys a plane afterwards, but if there is cash available for a Cirrus, I'd say the chances a reluctant wife will agree is maybe 1 in 10 instead. Those are facts of life. The time when a Lamborghini parked in the front yard got girls interested is long gone, at least here. It's responsible driving in a massive safe car by now. For a long time, people with kids bought even cars with crash worthiness in mind, that is what Volvo used to make a living of. It's the time of airbags, fines for not wearing seat belts and insurances which include broken nails. So it is also the time for single engine planes with parashutes. Mooney had the chance with the M10, it had the chance to get into a really good market with the Mooney 301 but it missed out on both, even tough the 301 lives on in the TBM. This has nothing to do with my own love for my C-Model, which is unchanged, even though I have to admit that with the prospect of having my 3 year old fly in it, I wish I could afford that shute. Call me a whimp, but that is just what it is. Most probably my family will not fly with me ever again, as too many accidents in recent years, too many people lost and too much confidence particularly in our engines shattered by mounting numbers of reports of SEP's which come to grief because those WW2 relics up front, many 30 years old or more, will stop in flight and leave those without a shute left to find that flat piece of ground. My own prediction will be that while the market has decided already, the FAA and EASA will eventually follow and mandate BRS on SEP airplanes which need to carry passengers. Those companies who by then have not gotten their act together, will simply be relegated to history. Similarily, either the aviation industry finally makes a leap in technology and brings up up to date engines and finally stops living in the 1950ties, only because it is no longer financially viable to certify new planes. And either that changes or certified aviation will simply die out.

how about something that has not been started yet like the Factory Closing down.

This has nothing to do with your roughness, but others are giving tips (good ones) on climb power settings and mixture... do you really climb at 100mph as you said or is that kts? I have an F, so not exactly the same, but I thought it was pretty normal to climb at 110-120 mph or so. You will notice better visibility, lower chts, and likely be more efficient... we have a research paper around here on climb speeds... I think most efficient for a long flight in the paper is like 1.4 x Vy. I would use Vy or Vx as appropriate until at a safe altitude, then accelerate to your chosen cruise climb speed. Mine is 120mph.

Here are a couple 300 cuft cylinders on a cart - plus the adapter from the CGA540 to the planes O2 port. I started with lighter 200 or 220? But didn't feel I got that many refills. Rather than going to a third tank I went to larger T size which are also 2400 psi but it usually come fresh at 2600 psi This is working out much better and they help keep me in shape Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I need a wind tunnel

I believe some minor modification of the front 2 cylinders baffling may be required. I will be installing one on a J for the FAA/PMA cowling. Yes, absolutely. It will take some time and I’m going to contact Transport Canada while the STC process is in work with the FAA to hopefully make it available to Canadian customers. Thanks, David

George, first let me say, welcome back! Its been some time since you owned a Mooney and used to frequent our forum and I hope I speak for many of us in saying we are glad to have you back sharing your rich aviation experience and opinions. So now let me please disagree with you vehemently. :-) It is not an emotional justification to say in response to your statement what will you do when flying over mountains or at night what will you do to then say they do not fly at night. This is exactly my response too. I feel I am safer at night not flying and waiting until the next day to fly in the sunshine than any Cirrus pilot is flying at night with their parachute. This is not an emotional statement but there are unfortunately no collected statistics to back this up since there are insufficient statistics to compute the following conditional probabilities. probability p(incident with bad outcome | airplane mooney)>p(incident with bad outcome | airplane cirrus) (this is the one with stats collected to estimate the actual values), but what we do not have p(incident with bad outcome | airplane mooney, do not fly at night) ? how does it compare ? p(incident with bad outcome | airplane cirrus, does fly at night) and I believe now the inequality has reversed direction. Or said even more bluntly, p(incident with bad outcome | airplane mooney, careful aeronautical decision making) ? how does it compare ? p(incident with bad outcome | airplane cirrus, less careful aeronautical decision making) and again it is our belief that it is in our favor. Of course, a wise and experienced pilot such as yourself would be in the p(incident with bad outcome | airplane cirrus, more careful aeronautical decision making) category, but when discussing statistics, versus probabilities, we are usually interested in our own safety statistics but all we have access to is a bulk statistic, like the first one. It is not emotional but wisdom though to make decisions with guessed statistics (so I am declaring it wisdom to guess mathematical outcomes in our favor without actual statistics - and I say that as a professional math professor by trade), guessing things like, flying at night without a plan b is dangerous so I will restrict my flying to the day time, and I am guessing it is even safer than a cirrus flying at night. As they say in Lake Wobegone, all the children are above average. Anyway this falls under a technical phrase from psychology of risk called "risk compensation, " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation and note in particular Pelztmen effect from economics to explain " regulation has not decreased highway deaths". There is another interesting principle who's name I forget at the moment but it roughly says "90% of the risk is concentrated on 10% of the individuals" but the problem is to figure out if you are on of the 10% and to figure out how to be not in the 10%. Simpson's paradox is fun here too: "How to PROVE two opposite arguments" - https://towardsdatascience.com/simpsons-paradox-how-to-prove-two-opposite-arguments-using-one-dataset-1c9c917f5ff9 Safety statistics were a factor when I first purchased my Mooney about 12 years ago. At that time, Cirrus had poor statistics, in large part because people were making bad decisions flying into bad conditions hoping for the chute to save them. So the Mooney without the chute vs Cirrus with the chute, Mooney was same or better. Since then, through better training largely (and the well trained pull the chute early and often), Cirrus has pulled way ahead. Fun statistics - from memory of comparing bulk risks (which again I don't necessarily believe in as individually full relevant) I remember that canoes, bicycles and small ga airplanes are roughly comparable risks per 100,000 hrs (again why don't I believe fully in the relevance of such risk assessments since digging in, one finds that canoe's are mostly dangerous because of drinking and boating, and I don't boat and drink - so what is my conditional risk?) Anyway I wasn't finding quickly on google the relevant table but I did find this study: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~cushman/books/Numbers/Chap10-Risks.pdf The following activities all correspond to the same level of 1 in 1,000 risk of death. Rock climbing 25 hours Skydiving 50 hours Riding a motorcycle cross‐country 55 hours = 2.3 days Being a 65‐year‐old man 2 weeks Skiing 340 hours = 14.2 days Flying on a scheduled airline 1,200 hours = 50 days Which just goes to prove that if you are a 65 year old man, don't think of compounding that risk by driving a motorcycle to the airport, to fly to colorado to go skiing, and ask them to let you jump out to sky dive to the resort. At least not until you are 66.

"Animal House"

There is a movie that has Kevin B getting run over by a mob as he says “Remain calm”... Chillax. Plane in the hanger. Check Maintenance provider at the ready. Check. Would you feel better if a bunch of SB’s came out? ”Remain Caaaaaaaalm.......” (Mob overtakes and crushes “uninformed”) Fade to black.

Might look at @AGL Aviation. They are active on here and have had several of their customers give PIREPs on their service - always good responses.

Id go whelen or aeroled. Aeroled costs more but is brighter. When switching them make sure you take the plate behind the lights off. The first time i did it, i took off the clear lens. First light takes about 30 to 45 minutes. Once youve done it once, it takes about 20 minutes after that for each one.

...plus a constant. ;)

If that's all it is they've a really ham-fisted way of going about it. Then again, it is Mooney.

Contact LASAR.com They are the top Mooney parts provider worldwide. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

well here is the counter "!"

And this is why we're better than BeechTalk. We can thread-drift anything. Period.

Tom, I am sorry to hear about your loss and my prayers are with Steve's family as well as yourself. I would encourage you to write down your stories, not to publish a book, but for you and your family (and Steve's) to look back on. There have been times in my life where I was very good at keeping a journal and times where I wasn't. I am surprised by the number of times I can open up one of those journals and flip to a page, start reading, and realize I had completely forgotten about a certain event. It is easier now than ever to keep a journal as typing is faster than writing and using voice to text is getting better and more accurate all the time.

Okay then, for everyone disagreeing with Urs and his "whimpy" comments: Why exactly did Cirrus outsell Mooney 100:1 this year, despite the fact that it is slower, uglier and flies worse?

I recently took some dual in a SR20 to try it out and greatly disliked the control feel. Fighting against the stiff, spring loaded sidestick, particularly in roll control, was NOT enjoyable at all. My wrist was getting sore after .8 hours. I can see why they train going on autopilot after reaching 500 feet and letting the autopilot do the flying for you. Of course, that kind of defeats the purpose of flying light aircraft when you fly for fun in the first place. If Cirrus would work on the control feel to make it light and responsive like a Grumman Cheetah, for example, then they may very well have the best all around package ever made. As it is, the control feel is not to my liking and I would not likely ever purchase one for that reason alone. Otherwise, the PFD and MFD with all engine parameters displayed were fantastic. The cabin was roomy and comfortable. Visibility was excellent although somewhat impacted by the extra structure required for crashworthiness. It is a tall aircraft so there is a little effort needed to climb up into it. It’s not as easy to get into and out of as, say a Cessna Cardinal. The SR20 that I flew did not exactly leap off the ground with full fuel and two aboard. Climb performance was not impressive and we were at sea level on a August, summer day. The SR22 would clearly be a better choice for carrying a load or for high altitude operations. Why anyone would purposely make a light aircraft with such undesirable control feel is beyond my ability to comprehend. Fix THAT and there would be little reason not to want / crave one.

Very sorry. Sounds like a great best friend! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Here's where the old school Beechtalk-style emojis would best convey my emotions.

I had always dreamed of building the "ultimate" FS rig. It would be dedicated PCs just for graphics, flight physics, and instrumentation/controls. A minimum of a three screens just for the visuals; one for front and one on each side for that imersive feel. Each screen would have it's own PC to prevent any kind of graphics lag. The instrumentation PC woud run additional screen(s) for displaying my flight instruments and taking all of the flight control inputs. The flight physics PC would be responsible for all of the rest of the 'game,' i.e. ATC, Navigation, Other Traffic, and physics. All of them would be netwoked so I would be running one "plane" with 5 PCs. In my mind, that was the only way to get the resoution and frame rate that I felt was necessary. Then I decided a real plane was cheaper and bought a mooney