Leaderboard

Had you posted your interest in N562BG on here before spending the money on the pre-buy we could have told you much of what the pre-buy told you . . . for nothing. I have pictures and logbooks and info in a file on dropbox that I would have gladly shared. Brian is the best at what he does, but spending the money to have Brian Kendrick travel out to look at that airplane is a little like hiring Picasso to paint your tool shed. Every once in awhile someone comes on here mentioning that they are looking at an airplane, asking all kinds of questions, but they are afraid to give too many details since they're afraid that someone will swoop in and buy it before they do. In nearly 15 years on here I've never seen that happen. It usually takes us about 10 minutes to figure out which airplane it is anyway. The Mooney community is small and tight-knit. People on here share lessons that they've learned. We don't charge each other for that. I might share one thing today but it's likely I'll need two things tomorrow. That's the community that we are. It's a net win for everyone that contributes.

Greetings all, First off, a sincere thank you to everyone who’s shared constructive feedback and thoughtful questions! We’re taking your concerns to heart and several clarifications have already been made on the website as we continue to add information. Some context: over the past year and a half, we’ve raised the capital to purchase Mooney’s parts division, stabilized and grown Lasar out of the COVID era, and taken on the heavy lift of managing and funding the Mooney facility itself. Since June, our small but determined team has been working to build and execute a plan that continues Mooney Product Support long into the future. Mooney Assurance is one way to help us get parts flowing and rebuild brand confidence. We’re not claiming that Mooney Assurance is currently a “home-run” value proposition, we simply want to provide as much value as we can while we tackle an enormous job. The idea for this program came from a number of Mooney flyers who wanted us to provide an avenue to help the brand. We understand why some may feel they don’t yet have enough information, and that’s fair. Our focus has been on the day to day, so communication with you all is something we’re working to improve, our goal being to balance sharing updates with digging in and doing the work. This project is a heavy lift, and many hands make light work. Your engagement, questions, and participation help move the entire effort forward. Please stay tuned for more updates as we work to “show” rather than just “tell.” For those who wish to discuss specific ideas or concerns directly, please reach out to Brett Stokes at brett.stokes@lasar.com. We appreciate your patience and hope you’ll join us in preserving a legacy. Stay tuned this week for increasingly informative updates. Sincerely, Brett Stokes and John Smoker Lasar Aviation

Couple thoughts. First, anyone who viewed Mooney's financials should NOT comment. They are in possession of MNPI and can be sued for tortious interference especially now that Privates are being solicited. Second, this LASAR plan fails within a year or maybe never even gets off the ground (see what I did there?). Based on the following. Third, LASAR's video showed lack of sophistication and I don't mean just the terrible production quality. The message was neither crisp nor enlightening. I get we are only talking single digit millions here, but as a 30 year Investment Banker who's seen a lot of presentations over the lifecycle of a company, that video was outright a waste of time. This latest message takes the lack of sophistication further (announced the need for funding AFTER you announce the deal). That's way backwards but in line with how they described the take over of LASAR; no real plan and no foresight to the issues. Fourth, it doesn't matter whether you consider yourself a lender or equity holder by paying the upfront subscription or entering into the Privates. The result is the same, you're equity given the lack of collateral based on some of the materials from LASAR and the 1st stage pitch distributed here several years ago. I bet NOLV is at best $500,000. Fifth, any creditor can involuntarily declare Mooney bankrupt should the amount of debt meet the limit (limit routinely increases but is surprisingly small). However, I would bet there's no debt here. Mooney couldn't even get terms on payables (a low bar) according to Mooney's hobbyist CEO. Also, unlikely any equity investor converted to debt (its usually the other way around). Lack of debt actually makes a buyout here easier. The change could just be a paperwork exercise with as little as $1 being exchanged. Ask Bombardier how that would work. They did it in 2017. Last, this train wreck was predictable years ago when the latest ownership group came in. A lawyer as a CEO rarely works (Frank Blake at HD being the rare exception). A lawyer who has no operating experience in any manufacturing much less aerospace (the issues here are not specific to the aerospace industry), funded by friends and family money, and wants to do a turnaround as a hobby? Well, that's laughable. Hey, I get it though, sounds cool at parties to say I am the CEO of an airplane manufacturer. I've had to make tough credit decisions. I've funded into companies that eventually went BK. I've negotiated forbearance agreements. An investment decision on LASAR's "scheme" isn't a close decision. It's just terrible. Btw, my name is William P. Rutkowski in Atlanta. Anyone is welcome to look up my credentials in LinkedIn. NOTE, THIS IN NO WAY SHOULD BE CONSIDERED INVESTMENT ADVICE. PLEASE CONSULT YOUR FINACIAL ADVISOR BEFORE INVESTING.

For years in manufacturing when a company was well-capitalized they produced parts that had a high-turn rate and sold them to their dealers to stock, taking the burden off of the manufacturer to carry 100% of the inventory and spreading that inventory through the dealer network. To be a dealer, or in this case an MSC, you had to stock parts. Once the machines in Kerrville are set up to produce a certain part number you can get some economy of scale by producing enough of that part to get your cost per unit down. Then if they could load up the supply chain to the dealers that would help take care of cash flow to keep the overhead paid. In my opinion, the MSCs should be the ones investing in Mooney. If they believe in the future of this, as an example, if 10 of the bigger MSCs put in $10,000-$15,000 each to get the ball rolling, to me that would make a lot more sense than individual owners who don't even need a part at the moment putting money on deposit. Smaller MSCs could put in a lesser amount but wouldn't get as favorable of a price structure. It wouldn't kill an MSC to keep some often-sold parts in stock. As @Schllc mentioned, start with the most often requested part and go down the list and build up the supply chain and sell it off to the dealers to stock. The risk for the investment goes down to nothing once the MSC has the parts they've paid for in stock. Mooney isn't alone in the supply chain being broken. Every shop now servicing any make, is used to ordering every part that they need once they know they need it. By not stocking parts dealers pay an atrocious price per part, and pass that and the shipping cost on each part on to the consumer, all contributing to make General Aviation very expensive for the average person, all while the airplane sits there waiting on parts clogging up the maintenance chain.

I got finished reading all of Mr Baber's posts in his recent thread on here regarding the prior engine issue. He sounds like a thoughtful and humble guy who handled the event carefully and intelligently. The sediment in the left tank sounded like the culprit, the approach to addressing it seemed fairly meticulous. It's very sad his efforts and those of his A&P weren't enough to keep him safe. What an awful tragedy. RIP Also f*ck the folks who immediately want to point the finger at him without knowing sh*t.

I finally completed this upgrade and got the plane back last week. Just wanted to circle back to this thread with the final result. Besides what is shown there, I also got a remote CO detector that I can manage through the PFD. Really happy with the outcome. Now to fly it a bunch to refamiliarize myself with the new panel and then dive deep into IFR training!

This thread has degraded quickly. I don't know Dan Gryder personally but I know two people that do. Those folks would likely admit that he can be a blowhard, a provocateur, a troll, and any number of other pejoratives one can imagine. However, in discussions with folks who know Dan, I have never inferred that he is an idiot. To the contrary, he’s been described as a pretty talented aviator that is often his own worst enemy. I personally find his style off-putting. I also find some of his public statements needlessly antagonistic. Some of those statements have resulted in litigation, and likely deservedly so. What is also off-putting is all the name calling and piling on by people who've likely never met the man. Anyone here who knows Dan personally, feel free to correct me with a personal anecdote. Those of you who want to continue beating this horse every time Dan posts something you hate should consider starting a new thread where you can have a Gryder hatefest, circle jerk. @Freddb34 did not post a lot on this forum, I am saddened that his final thread is tied to all of this Gryder bickering.

After some years of flying all of us have had experiences that cannot be had on the ground or adequately described. This past week we had an unusual for October weather system come through the Bay Area. I had a student finishing up training for his Instrument Rating and we were finally able to get some significant time in the clouds. After the days' training I flew back to San Jose. The IFR flight was at 6,000 feet and it turned out to be just on top of the clouds. I decided to video some of it. You can really get the sense of speed, as I was indicating 170 knots. BTW, my student passed his checkride later that day. https://youtu.be/v8VPCZS_JFI

I am the fat guy up front. still keeping the ovation, just want to get back to stick and rudder real flying

I've been thinking about this accident a lot since I read about it here on Mooneyspace yesterday. In my opinion this was an accident that shouldn't have happened, no matter the ultimate physical cause. For nearly 4 weeks and 4 pages of numerous thoughts this plane and circumstance has been discussed. Some very sharp people have entered the discussion. Yet it was clear to me at least, though the OP asked for assistance in his first post, he had his heart set on flying that airplane--no matter what. I have found the instrument rating provides a close look into the personality of an individual. Personality traits are magnified and by the conclusion of that endeavor it is not difficult to identify areas that could be problematic to future flying adventures. Although certainly no psychiatrist, I like to go over the 5 hazardous attitudes and discuss any one I think might cause a potential issue for the student in the future. Obviously this needs to be done tactfully. However, in 31 years of instructing I've still had 2 former instrument students kill themselves as a result of the hazardous attitudes I discussed with them. One was "resignation" and the other was "anti-authority". If I were to hazard a guess at this one, it would be a combination of a small dose of "impulsivity" mixed with a large dose of "invulnerability". I hope the lesson of this tragedy, is that we all carefully look through the lens of the 5 hazardous attitudes before we push the throttle forward.

The ideal buyer for the remaining assets is Univair. They’ve cracked the model for maintaining profitability by manufacturing parts for orphaned type certificates. They understand the business side; they understand the regulatory side. Mooney doesn’t need more dreamers to keep the fleet flying. They need an experienced manufacturer that already understands how to be profitable selling parts for certificated aircraft.

As has been stated here before, what are our options. Mooney has been for sale for some time and no one has stepped up. I was in the factory early July '25 and based on what I heard I was thinking the last days were very soon. The Lasar guys are taking a risk and I am hoping they are successful. We need a dependable parts supplier as well as new energy injected into this once great company. And we need some damn swag too. lol I've only owned my O3 for 4 years. I was led to believe Mooney was owned by a group of Mooney owners. It was all BS. Its owned 80% by an investor and 20% by the Chinese company. The communications in the last 4 years has been non existent. I've seen more communication from the Lasar team than I ever have from past owners. In my opinion, I know like belly buttons, we all have one, Mooney never financially succeeded in large part to not having any what its costs were, hence the multiple bankruptcies. I would love to see new birds rolling off the production line, but that's probably not in the cards. Personally I want to invest and help these guys succeed, be a part of the story. I have spoke to Brett and I like what I am hearing. Owning a Mooney is special fraternity of brothers and sisters who share a passion for flying faster.

This is the kind of situation where you should take the discrepancy list, separate out the non-airworthiness items and prioritize and group them because, as pointed out above, there are options and you need a roadmap for upgrades so your decisions work together. It's deceptively easy to piecemeal it and find out that the thing you bought last year won't work with the thing you want to buy this year. If you are willing to say what year and model airplane you have and publish the discrepancy list, I'm sure you will get lots of advice from the forum. Personally, I would ask the maintainer to explain each item and how they determined it needs to be done. For example, gear pucks have a specification in the maintenance manual and may well need to be replaced, but the shop should be able to tell you what they measured compared to the spec.

During installation of the trim servo, the shaft between the front and rear trim gearboxes has to be disconnected in the tail. If the shaft is rotated while disconnected, it causes this problem. The trim system needs to be re-rigged per the Service Manual. BTW, the easiest way to avoid this is to run the trim all the way to one of the stops before disconnecting the shaft and make sure its all the way at the same stop before reconnecting. The stops are at the front gearbox.

Fred Baber's story makes me think of my own early days after getting a C model, 10 years ago now. Unlike him, I was an 80 hr newly minted VFR wonder who also knew nothing about aircraft mechanical workings. The plane was flying when I got it but had been underused and had a handful of gremlins. I was nervously hyper-vigilant about these issues and was reading Mike Busch's stuff voraciously. But my ignorance and inexperience at that point made me ineffectual and also drove A&Ps and shop owners crazy. My point is that even if one is thoughtful, cautious, and a rule follower, progressing in aviation means entering situations that are more tenuous than otherwise encountered in routine daily life. I recall the fuel pressure in my C had a habit of dropping to 0 during climbout once in a while, in the days before I had a fuel flow gauge. We chased that issue ad nauseam before concluding in was just vapor lock in the pressure line, in absence of any other viable explanation. That assessment could easily have been wrong and cost me my life - perhaps not unlike what happened to Fred Baber here.

Since the passing of Freddb34, can the status be changed, instead of verified member, supporter…….maybe “gone west”?

Gryder is an idiot

After extensive troubleshooting, not being able to identify root cause of an engine issue that lead to an emergency landing several years ago was one of the most uncomfortable situations I've been in as a pilot; so much so that it lead to a firewall forward overhaul (which was coming due anyway). It looks like Fred may have had confidence that they had identified the cause (sediment in the tanks) and it looks like he implemented a cautious check flight over the airport. It's hard to second guess what should have been done. Just tragic and f'ing horrendous given the history.

What would we do without you Skip? I walked out to the hangar and in 5 minutes it's fixed. Thanks!!!!

I thought this was interesting and enlightening. Some of you may already know this but it was new learning for me. A good friend of mine is an instructor at the Cirrus Training Center in Knoxville. He explained to me why he would almost never attempt an off-field landing in a Cirrus. He said there is a very high probability of nose gear collapse and flip-over on a rough field landing, which would likely trap the occupants inside. According to Jeff: The Cirrus CAPS system is designed to descend the airplane in a slightly nose down attitude. In addition to the honeycomb seat structure that absorbs an amazing number of Gs on ground impact, the nose gear structure is designed to fail in such a way as to also absorb impact energy. Because of this the nose gear is not as robust as one might think. Anecdotally I recalled hearing about quite a number of nose gear collapses on Cirrus aircraft as a result of bounced landings, which now makes more sense to me. Jeff then showed me some pictures of Cirrus airplanes upside down in pastures where an emergency landing had been attempted. Now, I know you're probably thinking the same thing I was, that any airplane could flip over on an emergency landing in a soft or rough pasture. But according to Jeff the odds are way against you in a Cirrus, and the risk of getting trapped in the airplane if it flips is exceedingly high. If an unknown open field were his only option in an emergency he would definitely use the CAPS. So that's why the Cirrus training emphasizes (insists?) that the CAPS is the answer to an engine failure over anything but a suitable/designated landing strip. In optimizing the airplane for the survival of the occupants after a CAPS deployment the nose gear was developed with a shock-absorbing collapse as a design feature. That explained a lot for me.

Sorry failed the test.

Not to bash the OP, but asking to pay for the results of a prebuy that caused you to back out of the sale seems to be a bit silly. It’s obviously bad enough to avoid it, I don’t believe anyone is going to pay you for information that will deter them from buying, they just aren’t going to go there. An airplane with that much damage history is going to appeal to very few people anyway, and those will likely be offering less than salvage value. Traditionally we share these things on the forum as a community service, and we all hope someone can learn from our experiences. not demanding you to do the same, just saying you’re not likely to find a buyer for your info here. who knows, I could be completely wrong… In any event, thanks for sharing what you have. For me it would have been more than enough.

The missing component to secure interest in investment is a business plan.

Lasar, under CURRENT ownership and in new location are a relatively NEW entity. The history is NOT theirs. Only the name and the parts they bought. No one is stopping you from writing that check. I am glad you are planning to do so. I have ZERO interest in throwing money at a start up that is cash poor and having apparent difficulty in regaining approved status to build and sell parts.

I would respectfully disagree with some of your points. 1. Some highly qualified employees, like Frank Crawford, have been with Mooney through the various management and ownership structures and their contribution to the factory and to Mooney fleet is simply invaluable. They are probably worth their weight in gold, if not more. 2. Bad management does not automatically translate into bad employees. Managers come and go, but loyal employees who are passionate about what they do tend to weather the storms. I do agree with your statement that you have no clue about who works for Mooney and what they do. Your remarks appear to be rather offensive to those who have been part of Mooney for many decades and who kept our planes flying, despite some of the poor management choices made by the owners and managers of the company.

Anyway . . . this was a post about a person who was having problems with his airplane that turned into a tragedy for him and his family. Within a week, during a shutdown, we have an initial report with an eye-witness account. If you feel the need to debate over private sector vs. government employees open up another thread somewhere. Perhaps Pilots of America . . . lol.

I had some significant problems with my airplane when I first got it, which included three separate occassions of power loss, and I was extremely fortunate that in all three I was able to put it on an airport without damaging anything. In my case the issues were confounded a bit because we had a known issue with water contamination which seemed to include trapped water coming out and getting ingested at inopportune times, as well as a fuel servo which had been subject to unknown contamination and was "full of grit" according to the shop that ultimately overhauled it. So the first power failure, which was a complete loss of power on takeoff, we *think* was due to water, but because of the later issues that turned out to be the fuel servo, may have been because of the fuel servo. When I rolled off the end of the runway onto the taxiway the engine was idling, so it had restarted somewhere between when I pulled the throttle back to make the runway and when I rolled off the end. That seemed to support the water ingestion theory, but servo failures due to contamination can be intermittent as well, so who knows. The second failure was a clogged injector, also on takeoff, which on a four cylinder takes about half the power away. In that case I still had about 100 ft/min climb, so I felt my way around the pattern pretty low, did an actual short approach and got it back on the airport. The finger filter in the servo was completely full of junk, and when we cleaned that and the failed injector things seemed to be back to normal. It was an indicator that was, or at least had been, contamination in the fuel system. By then we thought we had all the water out, and couldn't find any signs of contamination anywhere else, so I kept flying it. The third failure was another total power loss, but we were, very, very fortunately, already within glide range of our destination, so we landed there. Again, it was idling when we landed, but wouldn't make any more power than a little above idle, basically barely enough to taxi. The mechanic on that field had heard us taxi in and my attempts to get it to make power, and had already diagnosed it by the noises it was making as the fuel servo. He's a really good mechanic, and he was right. The servo got sent off for overhaul and I've put essentially a thousand hours on it since with no more similar trouble. On every one of those flights there were no indications of trouble during startup, taxi, or runup, or even the takeoff roll or the climbout right up until the actual failure. In this case the fire probably erased any hope of finding out the actual problem. Because of the symptoms and the similarity to the issues I had, I suspect there was a problem in the servo that was intermittent, maybe due to some particulate contamination that got into the diaphragms and needle valves. FWIW, contamination can get inside the servo via the ram air tubes that protrude into the throttle body. On most airplanes the air that goes in there is always filtered unless the mechanical bypass opens, but on Mooneys with the ram air door the filter can be bypassed by opening the ram air door. If this happens with dust or other contamination in the air, that contamination get into the servo, and basically has no way to get back out. This is one of the reasons that I recommend that people with J models with ram air doors that are so inclined should delete the ram air door and cover it over, and there's a kit from Mooney and an SB to do this. On other models, just be very careful to not open the ram air door until you're in clean air (although you can't ever really be sure), and remember to close it before you descend or enter rain or the potential for dust/bugs/whatever. So there's no way to know for sure what happened in this case, because it really could have been a few different things, and any evidence in my personal prime suspect, the fuel servo, was probably destroyed in the fire. All we can do is be careful, pay attention to the filters during service and annual inspections, sump for contamination and water, do thorough runups, and pay attention to misbehaviors that may be indicating deeper problems. I raced cars regularly for twenty years and never lost a friend or even an acquaintance. We had some injuries, myself included, but never lost anybody. I've been back to aviation for about nine years and have already lost a number of acquaintances, and I include this as one of them. Risk in GA is higher than we sometimes care to admit, so it's really important to stay diligent and pay attention.

Ideally it shouldn't be a "fly it first and let us know" kinda thing, imho.

The OP paid a not insignificant amount for an inspection. Accordingly, the results of that inspection are his property and have tangible value to anyone interest in purchasing the airplane. It is not unreasonable to offer that information to interested parties for a fee. It shouldn’t concern any of us uninterested in purchasing the airplane.

Thanks all for the work and advice. I think we've solved this for now! After determining that it wasn't just the #3 that was high, but that the whole engine was running hot and the #3 was just the hottest, we took a whole engine look approach. We checked the timing, found the Surefly to be timed at 0 TDC exactly. But then we check the right mag we found it to be advanced to almost 35 degrees! The bolts were finger tight and it had obviously slowly been moving and had rotated to be extremely(!) advanced. After fixing that right mag, and cleaning up the baffles for good luck, I just did a long test flight and was able to keep all CHTs, including the new cylinder, all easily under 380 even with the cowl flaps completely closed and power at 75% or greater. That has never happened as long as I've owned the plane. Thanks for the discussion, it definitely helped us hone in on the right answer.

I actually feel extorted. "Give us money or your plane will potentially be grounded because we wont sell you a part because others will be in line before you but trust us, without showing you any company information, it's all just a problem of money, so if you do make a donation, you'll be sure to get that part!" I don't react well to stuff like this.

Bryan Turner released a new dating app for pilots only but if you watch all the way, you may realize why you’re ineligible.

One, when they shut down, then started back up a few months later just about everyone who was called, returned. Sign of dedication to the company. Two, when I was able to get through with a need, I was supplied with an above and beyond answer, in one case including a photo of my airplane on the assembly line int 2004. Three, Last time I was at Kerrville, I did not see any expensive or late model personal vehicles in the parking lot. (It's a tell for how well your employees are doing) Four, I was employed by an airline that had a sterling reputation until bad management took it over and we suffered a 10 year decline to the point of bankruptcy. I and fellow employees kept our heads up but if you don't have the tools, you can't do your job. The new management came in and said (this is a direct quote), "We will no longer balance our books on the backs of our employees" We went from worst to first, the most financially successful airline in the history of mankind and with the results announced last Wednesday are pulling away from every. competitor. Because management completely changed the business paradigm of not trying to sell the cheapest seats but getting the most money for each seat sold by creating value in the product. Finally, and I am sure because of your location you are not aware of this, but the Kerrville area suffered flash floods Friday July 4 of this year. 107 deaths including 37 children swept away, some bodies still have not been found. I am sure not a person in the factory was untouched in some way personally being a tight community, but a part I ordered July 1 was shipped shipped out on Monday July 7. Dedication.

I think that is excessively harsh and un-necessary. The production and engineering employees of Mooney have conducted themselves in exemplary fashion under very trying circumstances not of their making. I am sure they are ready willing an able to step up when properly led by good management. I've seen this movie before and when properly led, employees respond faithfully and enthusiastically.

Perhaps this is a good time/place to support the FAA/NTSB (government employees). I expect several will read this thread. To those that do, thank you for your service. It wasn't a debate until they were trashed. But yes, what an unfortunate tangent.

You may not believe this, but the NTSB has a duty, bound by federal statute, to investigate GA crashes to their conclusion, using all their training and experience regardless of the obvious limitations (no CVR, FDR). Gryder is known to be an idiot in the real circles of flight safety Keep your partisan political bullshit to yourself.

Perhaps some of the sentiment in my post can be attributed to my regret over the last few days that I was not more adamant when I mentioned the both fuel servo and that I thought he and his mechanic were “way upstream” of where where they needed to be. An intermittent power plant failure is a challenge. If the failure is determined to be fuel related, it would seem natural to start at the point of failure (the power plant) and work your way back. However, I fully understand that the fuel tanks are low hanging fruit and easy to inspect. I’ve posted pictures of the tank pick up screen before but Ive included a close-up below to make the point. Only fairly large particulate is going to be stopped by the fuel tank pick up screens. The fuel system on our Mooneys starts with a course screen, and the largest diameter tube in the system. As fuel progresses from the tank toward the fuel injector nozzles, the fuel will encounter finer screens (at the gascalator and fuel servo) and the inside diameter of the fuel system plumbing gets smaller and smaller. Now, I think it’s highly unlikely that sediment and debris blocked fuel flow through the pick up screen of both tanks. However, if I did see evidence that contamination was the issue, then I would absolutely assume that everything downstream had also been contaminated. The simplest way for me to put this is that I can envision no scenario where debris in both of the tanks would cause repeated engine failures yet leave the rest of the fuel system airworthy. I wish I had said as much to Fred.

I obviously don't know what caused this accident, but it does sound like fuel starvation. I had similar engine issues that started about 20 years after I purchased N1310W. I experienced 3 incidents where I suddenly lost engine power, only to return a few minutes later. Those incidents were spaced several months apart over about 3 years. During that period, I tried to troubleshoot the issue, including injector cleaning and an overhaul of the fuel injector system. I never did find the cause of the power loss, but hoped that the steps taken had eliminated the issue. Difficult to tell, especially since the problem occurred once every 6-12 months. The 4th occurrence in July 2012 resulted in an off-field landing, with damage that totaled N1310W. https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=da0b1baa577a20b3619c1bbb6d80cdcd90f5c06aa938d080087b90bd8ddc3410JmltdHM9MTc2MjU2MDAwMA&ptn=3&ver=2&hsh=4&fclid=10042cb7-72d6-62cd-192b-3a8373dd6330&psq=n1310w&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhLm50c2IuZ292L2Nhcm9sLXJlcGdlbi9hcGkvQXZpYXRpb24vUmVwb3J0TWFpbi9HZW5lcmF0ZU5ld2VzdFJlcG9ydC84NDQwMC9wZGY The NTSB found "loss of engine power during cruise flight due to a malfunction of the fuel injection servo due to a damaged O-ring". The O-ring fragment found in the mixture control lever assembly was only found after I asked the NTSB to send the system to a shop for teardown. Otherwise, the investigation would not have discovered the cause of the fuel starvation. I reviewed all maintenance logs since manufacture, and suspect that the O-ring was original to the aircraft. It was likely pinched when initially installed. After decades a fragment that had broken loose floated around and blocked fuel flow intermittently.

Hi David, I have all the data I need to move the down and uplock blocks to a PMA part. I refuse to do it at this time as the OPP disagreement still stands between MIDO and myself. I turned my PMA back into them out of protest with their actions. I will make OPP downlock blocks but until this issue is resolved, can not do as a group in MIDO’s determination. FSDO is absolutely fine with the group making the needed parts. I don’t know of anyone in the group that has removed their downlock blocks over the letter. I informed MIDO that any owner that does should sue them if they have a gear collapse due to a worn downlock of which Mooney has no published wear limits. Thanks, David

This just breaks my heart, hope the surviving passenger makes a quick and complete recovery and can shed some light on what happened. Following this thread you could feel the excitement about the new to him Mooney. Also the frustration trying to solve the issue but what was he to do after he was told that the problem was solved including test flights. I agree with the comments that conditions should have been a no go for a new to him flight with a possible issue with reliability. this really sucks

I won’t speculate as to the cause of this crash. I am quite sad about the whole thing.

If you listen to the interview of the homeowner where his airplane ended up, the only thing the homeowner heard was a loud thump like a tree falling, no engine noise. He was shocked to have his neighbor tell him that there was an airplane on fire in his yard. We won't know for sure until the report but adding that to everything else that he had been dealing with this last few weeks on this airplane, it sure seems like he lost power shortly after take off. (When you hear hoofbeats . . think horses, not zebras.) "I heard a loud thump on the ground, but I thought it was a branch from one of my trees that fell to the ground. And so, I came around and then I came to my front door right over there. And there was a fellow running across my yard. He lives over here. And I said, what’s going on? He goes, ‘the plane fell!'" - - - He took off on runway 23 with wind at 250 @ 15, with gusts to 26, 10 miles visibility. That by itself would have been a little bumpy but wouldn't likely lead to loss of control.

It may come as a surprise to some of you that not everyone flying and owning a Mooney has massive amounts of disposable income that can just provide a significant investment into something so ambiguous as this. Don’t want to see LASAR or Mooney fail but it’s really not our responsibility to insure their success. People are free to do whatever they like with their money but I take offense from anyone trying to guilt folks into this.

I just got cataract surgery for lens implants in both eyes. It's amazing. Game changer for me.

If belly skins are the only thing holding you up from returning your E to the air, then you should just fabricate new ones. They are quite possibly the easiest owner-produced parts on the airframe! OPP are completely legal, and the regulation/provision was created for situations just like this. Those skins are non-structural and cut from simple sheet aluminum. The spec and thicknesses are given in the maintenance manual. Use your old ones as patterns for the boundary and fastener holes. The holes are oversized compared to the screws, so getting them located within a few thousands is not required.

Actually, here is the value of the factory in a picture. 265 kts GS. 194 TAS. 14.9 GPH. CHT ~300 degrees. And I’d like the parts to keep it that way.

A turn around of Mooney would simply start with a focus on the typical first steps for a turnaround; overhead and WC. To be clear, my comments earlier were not primarily focused on Mooney's past. If that's the only thing someone gets from my post, they really missed the mark. The timing of the solicitation for Privates and the whole idea of a subscription model is a huge red flag. It's a very typical play for a company desperate for cash and is usually the last gasp before it closes. Summary: this is a train wreck, I would not give LASAR any money upfront until they have a very clear and saliant list of what the issues are and how they plan to overcome them. Don't hold your breathe for that. Neither Mooney nor LASAR seem to have that ability or experience. OK, this has been fun. I need to focus on the M&A deals that actually make me money. Oh, and if someone gets the Private Placement Memorandum, please do NOT share it or a summary of it. Again, that's MNPI. William Rutkowski

The factory has records of what has been ordered over the last 30 years. There does not need to be a generation or model specific priority. First, it should actually be based on what has been ordered, because that is the actual demand. For example… Im sure main, and nose gear doors, steps, belly pans and lower cowlings are pretty popular given the number of gear up landings. Nose gear trusses from towing damage or engine baffles, and so on. I don’t think defining what would get attention would be difficult, controversial, nor alienating to anyone. If you select the top 50 parts being ordered to start, you’re going to make most of the fleet pretty happy. Step two would perhaps identify the next tier, something like top 50 AOG parts like the intake boot I’ve read about, or the gear actuator, or the back spring. They could also do a survey of the top 10 parts concerns of Mooney owners. This would be tricky because of participation, but you have to start somewhere. Asking MSC”s for their wish list is another source. If you can find out what people actually need and focus there first it would be much easier to separate people from their money. Im refraining from criticizing them at this juncture because they appear to be the only option and I’d like to be optimistic. The only real sin so far seems to be poor planning, and communication. They can still salvage the faith if they figure it out soon…

And thank god for that! Do you really want MORE rules and laws? Remember, not all of them are going to be ones that YOU agree with! Be careful what you ask for is never a caution to forget when dealing with the Federal government!

Agree. I’m thankful that folks have the brass ones big enough to try it in this uncertainty….economy, not knowing where 100LL is headed, insurance, legality, etc. if someone has a better idea, the resources and the courage to take the step then please do…..at least you would create competition….if not let’s hope this works out for the sake of all our Mooneys.