Leaderboard

Today was a 5.5 hour slog up from the Caribbean - she handles well and landed w 29 gallons (eg carefully managed fuel). Such a versatile bird! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don’t try this in Kalamazoo today !

I think you are making this too hard To quote 21.601 (1) A TSO issued by the FAA is a minimum performance standard for specified articles used on civil aircraft; Part 91 specifies which equipment is required to meet specific TSOs. Examples are GPS navigators and transponders. There is no such regulatory requirement for a clock. If you have anything mounted in your panel that will continuously display time in hours, minutes, and seconds, you’re good. Skip

As our numbers have grown in the Pacific and Mountain Northwest, I'm pleased to announce that the NW Mooney Caravan will host two formation clinics this year in Pendleton, Oregon (KPDT). May 14 - 17, 2020 : Beginner 2-Ship / Mooney Caravan Qualification Our first ever basic clinic for beginners and 2020 Mooney Caravan Qualification will be May 14 - 17, 2020. This clinic is intended for qualifying pilots who are new to formation flying to fly in the 2020 Mooney Caravan to Oshkosh. This is also the Northwest recurrent training event for previous Mooney Caravan participants who plan to attend again in 2020. Registration is now open for this clinic: https://bit.ly/NW-Mooney-Caravan-2020 September 10 - 13, 2020: Advanced Clinic Our Third Annual Advanced Formation Clinic will be held September 10 - 13, 2020. The advanced clinic is for those pilots who have attended at least one basic clinic who wish to learn more additional maneuvers 2-ship maneuvers necessary to progress into more advanced formation flying. No beginner instruction will be offered at the advanced clinic. Registration is now open for this clinic: https://bit.ly/NW-Formation-2020 Aircraft of similar configuration and performance such as Cirrus, Bonanzas, Arrows, Tigers, RVs, etc are welcome to attend either clinic. Andrew "Sausage" Soleimany NW Mooney Caravan Squadron Lead 4321as@gmail.com

Here’s the new member of our family - 5 mo rescue Courtney adopted today. She’s a real sweetheart. Came home to the in-laws two dogs so we’ll see how this goes. Now we need a name :-)

One significant advantage of altitude is VHF radio range. On overwater flights I always carry marine radio frequencies capability (156.8Mhz). If you are going to be ditching you want to be near a boat. On most routes there is plenty of boats that will hear your call. Just make sure you choose the right boat.

Gliding distance into the wind is largely irrelevant IMO. Cruising low; especially at 1500’ agl gives you very little time to deal with an emergency let alone pick a suitable landing spot which will be limited to a very small area. Cruising high gives us a lot more time which comes with a much larger range of options. I would much much rather cruise in VMC above any weather in smooth air and take a few minutes longer than suffer continuously in less than smooth VMC conditions to save a couple minutes. I enjoy finding the smooth ride as well. Rarely, but it happens for one reason or another, I can’t get on top, not because of performance but sometimes it’s really bad turbulence in clouds from the really crazy winds up there or it may be icing. I guess I never fly what many here are referring to as low except when doing ground reference maneuvers with students and never x-ctry. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interesting, but Why? 400HP on a C172? It's a homesick angel with 225HP O-470 (yes, there's an STC for that). Just a side note, but is the company name an oxymoron of "Quiet Aviation"? A 300HP C180/185 propeller goes supersonic. He'll need to go to an 8-bladed prop to absorb all that HP.

Actually, it turns out that mirror is far useful than for me checking our teeth or make up, the gear failed to retract halfway along the trip and electric indication was U/S, so we had to pump and look to that mirror to check, for someone used to the M20J with at 8.7G/h in the M20J flying at 100kts while burning 10G/h in a complex C172 that flips on a water ditchea was a torture Luckily the view down the road in Florida & Bahams was super nice to see at those speeds I will write a trip report on MS when back to the UK for winter and many thanks to Deb & 2*Dave's!

A bit more info on aluminum:

I believe Redbird has a locator on their web site. There seem to be many Redbird FMX units (full motion) out there. I’ve seen $25-40/hr for them; they are $59k new. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Exactly what I'm going to do tomorrow.

Thank you, I have ONE 8 Track left, Deguillo by ZZ Top, unfortunately I have nothing to the play it on. The TA is a numbers matching original , ( I have the build sheet and window sticker), the original radio is a Delco AM/FM with no 8 track. BTW, did you now the 8 Track player was invented by non other than BIll Lear of Learjet fame? I actually place some Bluetooth Mega boom speakers in the back seat and run my 70's playlist from Spotify off my phone, Boston, Foreigner, Kansas and even some Bee Gees and KC and the Sunshine band, now where did I put them platform saddle shoes I used to have?

I'm old school, I'm still holding on to my 98 Dodge Ram because it has a 5 speed and you can't them any more. I have owned a 79 911 Turbo (wish I kept it), an 84 911 and 84 944, all GREAT cars. driver cars. I still marvel at watching Steve McQueen ring out that 68 390 Mustang during the Bullet chase seen as well as old clips of drivers in LeMans, Curious what an old school driver would perform against a new driver today with the various technological advancements. I guess the same could be said for piloting, old seat of the pants with minimal instruments vs. newer and safer technology. When I was in high school, the rich kids all drove Trans Ams, always wanted one especially after seeing "Smokey and the Bandit", couldn't afford one in the 70's so I drove a used Jeep CJ-7. I was in Denver about 4 years ago and stopped at a dealer that had a seal grey Carrara 4. I had been looking for one and stopped in to take a look. While looking at the Porsche, I noticed a black and gold TA in the garage, I asked what was the deal with it and they had just taken it in on a trade in on a Lambo (along with the Grey Porsche). I asked if they wanted to sell it and they didn't know much about it as they deal with exotics and euro sports. So I ended up with it, only play 70's music and still looking for platform shoes The toys in the hanger belong to my friend, however I di have a affinity for the l-29 as well.

Zulu Aviation Corporation has a Mooney M20F for rent in Fort Worth at KFTW. We are running a sale in the month of February: rent the Mooney for the price of a C172! Any hours flown in the month of February will be charged a rate of $145 an hour. Check us out at https://www.zuluaviationcorp.com/.

Does your airplane hqve bladders or not? Because the caps are different.

Not when operated LOP ;-) Bravo and acclaim guzzle tons of fuel in the climb, and there is plenty of leftover, unburnt fuel to make CO in that flight regimen. Both my Mooney’s have shown 30 ish levels of CO in taxi and climb. No biggy for me. -dan

Thank you Anthony..... the great communicator !

After watching that video- there is no way I would want to fly an aircraft with an engine that sounds like a GM automobile engine. Just my opinion. Growing up around irrigated agriculture where natural gas powered big-block GM engines without mufflers pumped groundwater for days on end, that sound just doesn't mean anything like "flight" to me.

Very impressive group activity... Summary of challenges to not getting this right... 1) The old down block wears in a way that it builds a step that inhibits locking the gear down... this leads to GU landings... 2) The old up block... when it loses control and lets the gear down at cruise speeds... the steel bat rips through the cabin at lightning speeds... anything caught between the floor and the panel is at risk... it really hurts to be hit by the bat... even just a glancing blow... something to consider when thinking about testing the gear operation outside the normal range... there is a real reason to not do this... 3) Even though it doesn’t seem like it is doing an important job, when it doesn’t do its job... you can see how important the job is... Just some thoughts on how important it is to get this right... PP thoughts only, not a mechanic... Go OPP (owner produced part) ! Best regards, -a-

I had a similar problem and found two pin holes at the oil sump causing the leak. Sealed the holes with Marine Tek and problem solved. It is not unusual for a casting to loose some of the grain over time

I disagree with both these statements at least as far as I am concerned. I fly a Mooney (65 C model) because I had the money of either buying a PA28 or similar or this C model at the time and it didn't take me long to figure out that the Mooney is by far the best bang for buck there was to be had for the price of an otherwise 110 kt airplane. This C model runs 150 kts at 9 gph and will fly some 600 NM with the 52 USG it's got and carry 3 people with full tanks. The competition simply was not up to anything like that. I could not and never will be able to afford a Cirrus. Would I buy one if I could? Maybe but if so, then because and only because of the parashute and the fact that I have a wife and a 3 year old kid and I fly over very inhospitable terrain for emergency landings almost all the time. I would also consider flying night and low IFR with a shute which I would not do with a non parashute SEP. if i could afford a Cirrus, probably I would go Twin instead, either a Twin Commanche or a pressurized Cessna twin or similar is what I really would like to fly. And think about it: some of those can be found in the marketplace for a fraction of what either a new Cirrus or Ovation/Acclaim cost. Even turboprops like Cheyennes can be found for $200k leaving close to 600k to fly it before you get close to the purchase price of the new planes.... I know a guy who started looking into buying a Cirrus brand new, then a Vision Jet... then he ended up with a F44 equipped Citation 501 Eagle which he is totally happy with and so is his family. He paid 300k for that one, less than half of a new Acclaim or SR22, not to speak of a Vision Jet. That was 3 or 4 years ago and he still has not spent his original budget flying it. Well, it USED to sell the best SEP ever made. Only it did not sell enough and now the market has spoken. Mooney has gone the way quite a few good designs have gone and I am not optimistic it will ever come back. As for the transition, I am not so sure about that. The SR22 is quite a handful to fly particularly low speed and imho requires better flying skills than a Mooney does, however my experience does not stretch to Ovations or Acclaims, but certainly 201's or vintage Mooneys are no problem to transit to right after your PPL checkride. I've had several pilots do exactly that, it requires some 10 hours transition training but it works. I myself originally transitioned from a C150 to a Piper Seneca, which is a quite difficult airplane to fly particularly OEI. I would assume that with sufficient training you can do that with an Ovation too. I've only once flown a SR22 but I noticed that the flight control forces e.t.c. are quit different than on a Mooney and imho more diffcult to master. For me, there is NO reason that Cirrus won the market other than that parashute. None whatsoever. Neither efficiency, nor flight characteristics, nor speed. Yes, the cabin is also nice, but they did win for their excellent agressive marketing of that chute. Both the Columbia and the Ovation were much better airplanes, but Cirrus did their homework on marketing better than both of those. Face it: GA has an appalling reputation in terms of safety, deserved or non deserved is totally irrelevant. Every time one of our GA planes comes to grief, it is headline news. People are wary up to outright scared to fly with us. If they then have to, it better be that plane with the shute. IMHO, no plane without one will stand a fighting chance on the market place unless they come up with some very innovative concept which guarantees a similar outcome. And that I have yet to see.

tl;dr'ed the entire thread just to drop this- my previous mechanic had an Aero Commander 690 with LS engines (don't know what type). He's been working on getting it certified for a long time- perpetual FAA roadblocks from what I hear. It sounds like two Corvettes in 6th gear doing 100mph when it flies past you. Very dull tone like the T-28 Trojan

Awesome news!

while driving my car today, i noticed it's at 1613 hrs. I was instantly terrified about the prospect of an overhaul in a few hundred hours. oh yeah that's only 40k miles. My belief, with proper engineering, and i do say proper, an auto engine could be successful. who's willing to pay for it

Not to throw a damper on @kevinw’s potential sale, but the shelf life on TKS fluid is 2 years according to CAV Aerospace. If this barrel was procured in 2013 when the OP purchased his J model, it should be disposed of unfortunately. Again, this according to a conversation I had with CAV just a few weeks ago when I procured a new drum, as some of mine was beyond expiration date and I had asked them to confirm the shelf life.

I think it’s some variation of this. https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/mcfarlanewireclampbolts.php?clickkey=3417449

Well, this thread has produced some real chatter! From the looks of the block — appears to be a cast. from the FAA ac. Note 7075 is an accepted material: we need equal or superior to original part. My guess this and the other material I linked to will (7050) suffice. -Don

Actually not switches. The switches are limit switches which means the down limit switch is not in play when you are bringing the gear up. Yes the limit switches should be serviced to a workable condition.

What intrigued me about the PAV concept was it was entirely compromised to be manufacturable. From the commonality of airframe parts, to the out of the crate LS1 engine. The most complicated component that I saw was the ducted fan “propulsor”. And while it was not as efficient as a traditional propeller, it did have certain other advantages. Lower noise, it allowed higher RPM from the direct drive engine, and more safety from inherit prop strikes. One of my biggest disappointments in aviation development was when Bombardier decided to shelve their V6 project. Here was an experienced engine company, well capitalized, (or at least I thought so) that had the best chance of any at coming out with a modern GA piston spark ignition engine. Ah well, I guess ‘twas not to be. But every year at Oshkosh I ask Rotax if there’s any chance the V6 program will be revisited. I always hear no, but last year someone at Rotax after he said no to that question added to not be too surprised if in the next few years we see a 6 cylinder derivative of the 900 series. So I guess there’s always hope. Anyone have any inside info on how Deltahawk and EPS are doing?

I think I may have some 8-track tapes somewhere in the attic, if you need them.

There would be a large increase in frontal area. I would think the MP14 would go better on a P-51 Mustang or Spitfire.

Ron Wattanja has done quite a bit of accident analysis for the EAA. According to him, most experimental airplanes crash for the same reason as our certificated aircraft, pilot miscontrol. But there is a category of accidents in experimentals that simply doesn't occur in certificated aircraft, and that's builder mistakes. and in that category there is a significant uptick in auto engine conversions. The other thing I've noticed is that when these conversions are used for aircraft, unless they've already been engineered the builder spends enough time, energy and money trying to shoehorn the auto engine in that it would have been cheaper to use the airplane engine in the first place. The only auto engines I've ever heard of having much success in aviation are air-cooled ones like the VW and Corsair. And even then, the success is mixed at best. We shouldn't forget that John Monnet's son died flying one of his VW powered designs.

So in Garmin's world a PDF that essentially is a customer-oriented summary of marketing materials on a product web site trumps installation manual? ;-)

Air pirate’s official alias is now “Bandit”.

Of course the convertible at OSH is cool cool red got a new cousin.

Sending up a flag for those in the thread that expressed interest, if you have already contributed then please disregard. https://www.gofundme.com/f/gear-down-lock-block @ragedracer1977, @M20F-1968, @rbridges, @CWM20f, @67 m20F chump, @LunkenPilot, @Raptor05121, @moodychief, @Jim Peace, @jwarren2, @Browncbr1, @Flybeech21, @Hector

No, not really. The airlines have been begging, on their knees for a real 757 replacement. Delta has their checkbook out of their hip pockets and badly wants to be the launch customer. Boeing has had its head in the sand believing they could use an "on the shelf" product, the 737 until it became clear and they threw in the towel and capitulated to the airlines demands for a real MMA.They thought for a while the MAX might cut it, but the airlines said no and even before the first MAX rolled off the lines, the MMA was on the board. As far as the MAX goes, two things drove it. LEAP engines and Southwest Airlines. LEAP engines because Airbus was easily mounting them to the A320 series which would give it a 15% SFC advantage over the 737NG. As for Southwest, they have been the driver or the "albatross" around the 737's neck. Back when the NG program was contemplated Boeing wanted a next generation (NG). They wanted to dramatically upgrade the 737 cockpit and systems, all of which would have required a new type rating, most notably changing the motive source in the flight controls. FAR 25 is quite clear that change the flight control system, new type rating (unless you are McDonnell Douglas building the MD-90 then you get a pass because you are broke). So SWA keeps demanding they put new engines and "changing the stereo" in the '57 Chevy so they don't have to depart from their single type fleet. Boeing obliges its largest customer naturally. When it all comes out in the wash, Boeing will build the 777, 787, MMA and 737. The problem is everyone of these airframes are different enough to incur significant fleet differential costs. Airbus has very carefully cultivated the A320 family which is an enormously flexible platform, the A330 and A350. The A380 was a bust. However one thing all these platforms have is they are a "true family". You really can transition from the A320 to the A330 or even an A380 in about a week. The cockpit of the Airbus have great commonality and system similarity. If Boeing had built a "new 737", they could have drove themselves into a near Airbus like platform with great commonality between their aircraft.It is a gross product mistake on their part.

I will chime in here with some experience. I have thousands of hours in both. I was a Check Airman on both. The main reason why Boeing ended the 757 was it was an expensive airframe to build. Further when many airlines wanted to buy more, Boeing would only produced them with CDS (common display system IOW side by side screens) rather than the vertical display "classic configuration". That does not seem like a big deal, but it is to the FAA and they decreed that such a fleet mix would require 90 day currency as well as double training foot print on each type of display system. I personally ran into this when I was the initial cadre to check out on the 737NG which has a CDS. The company thought they would be smart and bought 12 used 737G with the classic configuration glass. Before it was all over I took two rating rides (one in each variant) and had to stay 90 current in each variant. It turned into a huge debacle. So difficult is this issue that when Southwest bought 73N they still had "round dial" 737s. To maintain a common fleet, SWA had the pinout on the CDS changed so it displayed round dials and they flew them "dumb". That said, Boeing has tried for years to peddle the 737-900 and now the MAX as a 180 seat middle market airplane. Neither of those models are middle market airplanes. Indeed Boeing is now developing a 757 replacement because even they realize the 737 is not a MMA. The -900 is so payload- range limited I was taken off of one in SFO on a flight to ATL for payload limitation and runway performance. That would never happen with a 757. For most airlines the 737-900 on west coast to HNL has turned into a debacle. For most HNL routes, Delta threw in the towel and brought back the 757's. To correct some things said here. 255,000 pound 757-200 is rare. Most airlines bought them in the 200K level. I've only seen one that was rated above 225K. Equally so a 200K 737 is rare. The numbers you got are the maximum you can buy, but those numbers come with some maintenance and life limit caveats that the airlines are rarely willing to sign on to so they buy lighter weight models. Could you hang LEAPS on a 757. Don't see why not, but you cannot overcome the airframe building costs disadvantage. Boeing's mistake as pointed out above was relying on the 737 as a MMA model rather than developing a 757 replacement. As for the 737, Boeing will keep building them as long as SWA demand it.

Phil nailed it - the Cirrus buyer isn't an advanced pilot. A neighbor of mine bought a brand new SR-22 turbo this past summer. A year earlier, I got a near new Ovation 3. We've flown together, I have 25+ hours in the Cirrus line, all in the SR-22's. Nice plane. Gear welded down and locked. No prop control. Fully automated. My neighbor takes off, engages the auto-pilot and never touches the controls. Last month, she got stranded. I took the Ovation to pick her up. A one hour flight returning to our home airport, I never once engaged the auto-pilot. She looked at the G1000 and noticed our speed over ground, fuel burn, and comfort. She was blown away. She also realized that I was "hand flying" the airplane. Cirrus pilots let Hal drive. Cirrus gets people into airplanes by selling a culture. Mooney sells the highest performance piston single ever manufactured. You can transition into a Cirrus from a C172 or C182. I can't imagine a low time pilot coming out of a Cessna and stepping into an Ovation or Acclaim. The transition may be the biggest difference between the two product lines, spare the obvious performance of the Mooney absolutely smoking any SR-22. Two totally different product lines. If you don't appreciate the Mooney, buy a Cirrus.

Its not pointless. I am not describing airplanes. I am describing customers. It is customers who buy airplanes. I am describing myself as a buyer. We can describe Cirrus buyers a certain way as we have been doing...Cirrus buyers like this. Cirrus buyers like that. Cirrus buyers want a parachute. Cirrus buyers are tech-gizmo-geeks who want to check their oil pressure on a cell phone app remotely. SO I am describing another kind of buyer, whom I am one of. Unfortunately, there are many people like me (well if we end that thought there....I guess I would feel sorry for my wife!). Unfortunately there are many people like me and being like this I purchased a used aircraft and I purchase used cars. I think many people are like this by nature who enjoy the value in a used car or airplane and fixing it up, perhaps more than buying new, even cost being not the main object. And people of that kind may well be many of us here who gravitated to Mooney. I think this is a systematic problem for Mooney factory generally - I am describing a variant of the CB syndrome. I think Mooney fans are systematically biased to be of this nature who are not as much excited at the plane being new, as the idea of a plane being fixed up like new. It doesn't help that the new Mooney are so very much like a 1981 Mooney rocket, in my humble opinion, right or wrong. But back to new vs used Mooney or Cirrus. With $150k in my pocket today if I were buying today I would buy a Mooney something. I would not buy a $150k Cirrus something. So I assume if I were an 800k new piston buyer (which I said I am not) that would scale up.

757burns over 7000 pounds an hour, while the 737 max 10 is going to burn around 5000. But the 757 has tremendously better runway numbers, and it’s got a lot more range. They may be able to fly the max 10 to Shannon Ireland from EWR on the best of days, but the 757 goes to anywhere in Europe. 3300 miles of range versus 4500. So will the A321 neo XLR. So here is where Boeing went sideways, the 757 was obsolete, the 737 could not really be stretched any further. They did not have a Viable long range narrowbody midmarket airplane. Instead of spending 35B on a new plane, they bought 45B in stock back

Whenever we fly together David correctly guesses the departure and all enroute frequencies 90% of the time (ok maybe just departure). P.S. very nice of Cessna to put that mirror on the wing, I assume to make sure you have nothing stuck in your teeth...

Check out this C172 for only $116 hr wet. https://www.plusoneflyers.org/fleet/montgomery-fleet/item/105-n3386e EDM 900, GFC-500, GTN-650, FlightStream and Powerflow. This is popular and typical for instrument rating students in SOCAL. The average plane won't have the GFC-500 yet and may only have an EDM-830, but the C172's in this club and usually far superior to your typical Vintage Mooney. And all I mean by that is that since many Mooney pilots buy a Vintage Mooney to do their instrument training in, whom do you think is getting a better education for flying IFR in today's NAS? But I totally agree with you wrt to once you make the decision to buy, I too wanted to get something much better than I could rent. Its very true here in SOCAL that I can rent a nicely equipped plane much cheaper per hour than own it - especially if not flying more than 100 hrs. I just wouldn't have exclusive access and would be prevented from flying it anywhere I want including dirt strips and Mexico and Central America. One pays a premium for having exclusive access and I am happy to do so. From what I read here, most of the country doesn't have such good economical renting options.

We had the pleasure of meeting Brahim (@Ibra) and Alexandra this morning before their flight to the Bahamas. Bon voyage!

Gasoline is miraculous. Cited above, "Australia describe development and testing of a Lithium-Sulphur battery that has a charge storage capacity of over 2.7 kWh per kg of battery mass" is also miraculous. Given its that far - I won't hold my breath since I will pass out in 2 or 3 minutes and I don't think it will happen in the next 2 or 3 minutes. But Maybe maybe, in my lifetime, it will get to compete with avgas. However, also besides energy density, are more properties to make a battery technology viable for such a use, such as, recharge duty cycle - how many times can it be recharged and still hold a large fraction of its original power, cost to build including complexity, but also rarity of the materials. Stability - e.g. certain lithium battery technologies are very volatile since bursting into flames is not something I want on my airplane. Recycle-able? It would be nice when the battery is all used up if I could crush it up and make a new battery, or at least dispose of the materials in a reasonable way. Of course cost is mixed up in all this. If a battery costs a thousand times more than a hundred fill-ups of avgas and its only good for 50 recharges, then .... its not worth it. Even if a single recharge marginal cost is almost nothing. All that said, I have high confidence that liquid dino-fuel is not going to be necessary before my sons are grandpas. If not electric batteries - then I will be just as happy with a mini nuclear reactor to be invented. How about 100,000 hour endurance for a 20,000,000 nm range? (corrected for winds aloft of course). (and considering the need to install the Jose' liquid dispenser relief tube). Once upon a time horses were IT. And transportation technology revolved around improving the experience involved with horses. Suspension systems for carriages. Building a better whip. Then one day, liquid dino-juice replaced horses. Once upon a time, traveling on the ground with horses was replaced with traveling on the ground with wheels, or ships powered by engines. Then travel through the air made certain travel over the ground obsolete. Then one day.... Beam me up Scottie!

@adverseyaw and I did some formation practice today