Leaderboard

The only time we have a concern for running too cool is if you are not fully scavenging the lead. Avgas contains a lead scavenging agent" called ethylene dibromide. However the agent needs sufficient combustion temps (not necessarily CHT) to do its job. If combustion is too cool, it results in lead fouling of the plugs. Its true that the scavenging is most effective in the 350-400F range but so what, we hardly operate our engines to maximize lead scavenging. Most of us prefer to operate for maximum cylinder longevity which likes cooler CHTs. Although from a CHT perspective, lead deposits have shown to form with CHTs below 300F, typically we find this is only a concern with very low power ROP cruise where see both very low EGTs and CHT (CHTs of 250F and lower). But leaning to peak EGTs when operating at low power does much better and exposure to lead fouling is much less likely. Hopefully all this will be mute soon when we can run lead free avgas. This is just like the OWT that oversquare is bad for your engine! The bottom like on Mike is that all of his work is dedicated to educating the pilot community and has been for years. Its been a few years since he started Savvy to work with clients directly for fee, but his business model is all about saving clients money by educating owners on the difference between discretionary maintenance and required maintenance, saying "no" to scheduled maintenance that is neither required nor proven to be helpful - like cleaning injectors on annual schedule and giving the owner control back on their annual invoices by separating the inspection from maintenance and getting estimates for discrepancies before the work is started. He's also all about data driven maintenance rather then premature wrench turning and throwing parts at it. Of course he does not advocate all maintenance be done on condition and is a very vocal on the need to comply with timed Magneto IRAN inspection too. If that's cool aide, its the most sensible, logical and scientific reasoning I've been exposed too in the aviation world to date. All of us at Savvy are proud to be associated with him and all he has done for GA.

I appreciate all of the feedback. Thank you to those who are defending me to others questioning my motives. As a dealer/broker, I get that occasionally. That's the primary reason I don't post here often. I'm not thin skinned. I just don't need the aggravation of being thought of as less of a Mooney lover because I happen to make my living selling them. First, I work for the owner and my desire is to put the most money in his/her/their pocket. That is the case with every airplane. Secondly, I work for a percentage commission, so I have zero incentive to sell this plane for a lesser amount than is possible. So here is more of the story. Then maybe my reasoning may come to better light and the decision to proceed will be justified... The scenario presented above is not all together out of line with reality with the exception of the corrosion on the spar. There is none. But a lot of the other worst case items are there. These are these value determinants and items needing repair (partial list). *Damage History: Not one gear up, but three. Plus an off runway excursion that caused a little damage. *Useful Load: 752#. Actual Number. Just weighed. That puts it about the worst I have seen (maybe THE worst). If you have sold as many Mooneys as I have, you will know that one of the first three questions a buyer has when he or she calls on a plane is 'what is the Useful Load'. The other two are Damage History and Leaking Fuel Tanks. So we got two out of three disqualifiers for most people right up front. *#1 Com inop (it the CNX-80 that is no longer supported by Garmin) *Transponder inop (it is the Apollo remote transponder that I don't believe is supported any more). *HSI inop *Attitude Indicator inop *Paint Poor. A lot of pealing paint *Interior Poor *Fuel Gauges Intermittent That is just a partial list. For those questioning how a plane that just went through annual is a candidate for parting out.... To Don's credit, he did not fly the plane because it did not have insurance on it. It was picked up from a broker in FLA and brought to him to annual. Don told me that the pilot did not mention any of the issues on the plane. I put the aircraft on my policy and flew it home after it was completed and that was when all of the gremlins from a good flight reared their ugly heads. I have a squawk list about 20 items long, most all of which would only be discovered on a flight. I believe 100% that the aircraft is airworthy (in the sense that is is mechanically sound and will fly from point A to point B safely). I flew it and as I mentioned in original post, the engine ran like a top and was/is actually the best part of the plane. But selling a plane like this is a major challenge. I am NOT going to sugarcoat a plane to try to get more than it is worth. In the past, when I ran across a plane like this one, I called another broker that I knew and told him to come pick up the plane and sell it for the owner (after I told the owner that I did not want to market the plane and that the other broker would be beneficial to them). I don't want to lie or embellish a plane to a prospect just to get a sale and with the disclosures I would have to put into this one, I am pretty sure the list of real buyers will be zero to just a few (maybe a guy who is on a C/E/F budget and will overlook the issues to get into a newer / faster plane). I have been doing this a long time, almost 25 years. I believe this plane will sell for something in the 90-100 range AFTER it is all fixed up. If it weren't for the damage and iffy logs, that number would be 110-120. If it weren't for the Useful Load, that number would be 125-135. All the numbers includes paint and interior plus fixing all the broken stuff or replacing it with more modern stuff. We are probably talking about 4-8 months of work and a lot of out of pocket expense to get to that point and in the end, you have a plane that is all prettied up with nice equipment but a 4 time damage / pathetic U/L and the hoped for selling price may be optimistic. I think the engine/prop/cowling has value and is about half of the total 'as is' retail value of the plane (maybe more than half based on the offer I got from a guy that contacted me from this posting). I believe that the control surfaces, seats, autopilot components, speed brakes and what can be scraped up from the panel will get it to full retail equivalent - something around $50K. That will leave the wing and the tail section that are basically going to put it over the top from a value standpoint. And yes, all of this may take a long time to sell. But I was asked to do a job and I'm going to do it to the best of my ability and with the owner's best interest at hand and if I have to work a little longer and harder to get it done, that's what I will do. So, now, if anyone would like an 'airworthy' 262 conversion at something north of $60K (which is what I am shooting for on the part out - looks like I have about $40K already in line), then give me a call before we start pulling parts. Thanks for all the comments. I will keep up with this thread and add info if needed. Jimmy

When I saw the title my first thought was "At least you get to keep them in the hangar, I know some guys whose wife's keep them in a jar on the mantle above the fireplace..."

If 6 are good, 8 is the best! Clarence

I flew the highest time 747-200 that ever existed, or maybe ever will exist, about 2 weeks before it went to the scrap yard. N748SA, (ex PH-BUH) had about 135-137,000 hours and ~26k cycles..... All the way across Africa and a couple thunderstorms. My buddy Mark was the FE on the last flight, to the boneyard at Mojave. Over AZ, the old girl wasn't done yet, they took her up to FL450 (wrong way) and set off the clacker at .92 Mach.Still had some thrust left over. It still made book speed and fuel flow...Then the long, slow, decent down to Mojave, and floated the landing, she wasnt done yet, , for one final stop. http://opennav.com/forum/airchive/5200853 http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1348429

80 knot headwind? On April 14th I was sitting on the ground at Dickson TN as a cold front moved through, bringing thunderstorm cells and lightning and some serious downpours with it. I knew if I waited a few hours, it would be gone and the only thing between me and my home base of KTRL near Dallas would be light rain, IMC, and very strong headwinds. The forecast was for 40 knot headwinds. I was not looking forward to my 2.5 hour flight turning into 3 hours, but I was willing to accept it as a necessary evil. I filed my IFR flight plan, got my clearance, and took off into the clouds, climbing to my cruising altitude of 8000 feet in mist and light rain. The ground was sort of visible below, but water streaked the windscreen. (I should mention here that I can hear you saying "you dork, why not fly at 4000 feet and take a 20 kt reduction in headwind?" My answer is that my M20A doesn't like to fly that low. It produces > 200 degree differences in EGT between cylinders because of the lousy job Lycoming did designing the intakes, and that sets off my EI engine monitor alarm. I never fly that low.) So upon reaching cruising altitude, trimming everything up, and leaning, I settled in for my 3 hour leg to KSUZ outside of Little Rock. And I started watching my ground speed to see if the 40kt predictions were correct. But instead of seeing something like 105 kts of groundspeed, I was seeing 90, then 80 knots. Then 70 knots. My GPS was telling me it would be 3 and a half hours flying time. I was getting more and more amazed at the hellacious headwinds. Then my Bitchin' Betty voice annunciator interrupted me as she spoke into my headset "Check Engine Analyzer". I quickly glanced at the engine analyzer and noticed that the #3 cylinder was running over 200 degrees richer than the rest. I tweaked the mixture control, but it didn't make much difference. "Check Engine Analyzer" she said again. At this point I looked at the manifold pressure gauge. Wow, 15 inches. The airspeed indicator said 115mph. Ground speed was down to 65mph. Hey wait a minute, I should be seeing a lot higher indicated airspeed and MP at 8000 feet. I quickly concluded there was something wrong with cylinder #3 and that was robbing my engine of power. This was not an 80 knot headwind. This was an engine problem! Many of us learned to fly in a Cessna 152. I still remember how the approach to landing power reduction was drilled into my head by my CFI, Bill Riggins, in 1983: Abeam the numbers, pull carb heat, reduce throttle to 1500 RPM, hold altitude until the airspeed drops inside the white arc, then lower one notch of flaps. Yada yada. When I started transition training in my M20A, my instructors told me I will rarely ever need carb heat during approach to landing. And indeed, in 12 years of flying, I have never needed carb heat. But I remembered someone saying, if you're having difficulty in a carbureted Mooney getting the cylinders to have a more balanced mixture, try adding carb heat. So I did. And I watched the manifold pressure climb. 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. And the airspeed climbed. And the groundspeed climbed. And the #3 cylinder EGT rose. I looked at the outside air temperature gauge. 56 degrees. Couldn't be carb ice. Could it? I turned off the carb heat and watched the engine power slowly begin to drop. 19", 18", 17". OK, carb heat it is. I flew with carb heat on until I popped out of the clouds. At that point, I tested carb heat and found it wasn't needed anymore, and I continued my flight as usual. Greg Ellis reminded me of the graph showing severe carb icing possible from 25 degrees to 60 degrees with humidity levels around 75-100%. I was in probably 100% humidity at 56 degrees OAT, so very much in the danger zone. I'm not used to needing carb heat at cruise power settings, but in IMC in that temperature range, it may be worth thinking about this a lot more frequently in flight. A friend of mine crashed and burned in his Pietenpol in Florida because of carb ice. In Florida. It can happen anywhere if the conditions inside the venturi are suitable for ice formation. In this case it happened fairly slowly, but I suppose it could also be much more abrupt. "Take heed of thine airspeed, lest the ground rise up and smite thee. And take heed of thine dewpoint, lest the carb ice up and smite thee!"

Hasn't flown until today; did a 3.1 hour loop of TOA / SMO / LPC / SMO / TOA. Moved the trim a little nose up as you suggested, and made sure I was rotating at 75. With myself, another 200# passenger, and full fuel, she was a lot less of a chore to get off the ground, thanks! That, and knowing about the back pressure needed (and remembering to release it somewhat immediately) gave a very predictable takeoff with no stall horn. Definitely loving her... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Clarence, In my business I’ve had to complete a ton a failure analysis (over 40 years worth). I absolutely come unglued when one of my techs runs their mouth before proper and complete research is done. Many times, once I’ve completed my research and determined the root cause of a failure, those techs want to completely forget how foolish they looked in talking before knowing all the facts. A few of those and they now shut up until all facts are discovered and evidence is examined. A few now even enjoy the process and satisfaction of a result that is backed by facts. Seems not too long ago I saw you post thoughts on a wing that MIGHT NOT need to be replaced. I chuckled at the time, thinking why don’t people digress to those “in the know”, and making a mental note to self: “let’s see how this turns out”. (+1 Clarence). Needless to say you’ll look hard and long for any comments from me on situations where the REAL ANSWER can only be determined with much research and investigation. Been there, done that. Tom

Took a friend flying yesterday along with his daughter. She had never flown in a plane of any kind before. After some coastal flightseeing we had lunch in French Valley. After we had lunch I put her in the right seat and she got some time flying us around. If anyone is looking for a great time, find someone who hasn't flown GA before, or if you are lucky someone who has never flown before and take them up! Her First Flight

Tommy, the plane I was in, a 2018 Mooney Ultra ovation has the Garmin NXI that will show lightning strikes, along with NEXRAD ADSB and Sirus XM. That still doesn't relieve us of our duty to do a proper weather briefing, which we also did. aviationweather.gov is a site we use here as well as weathermeister.com. Some rely on a foreflight briefing, others use SKEW T charts to predict the instability that leads to wild rides. Here in the Colonies, we are charged with gathering "all available information" to insure the safe outcome of a flight. Miss one thing and we could be found "GUILTY" (Phrased in an NTSB report as "a contributing factor was the pilots failure to gain all available information ....." as we have in our culture, an insane appetite to get blame laid, even on mother natures acts of vengence. The question you asked is the topic of Bachelor's of Science degrees in thesis in meteorology, and as a pilot, we are all just freshmen when it comes to weather and lightning predictability. If you find yourself suddenly in a bad place in a cloud without on board aids, the most frightening but best way is to plow straight ahead. You will probably exit the cell faster that way

See if this helps calm some fear of unseen oxidation between aluminum layers... Oxidation between layers of aluminum, when it gets to an important level, is often detectable to the eye... Aluminum oxide is a higher volume than the solid aluminum. In other words the volume increases significantly... Volume increasing between layers has a tendency to pry the layers apart, stretching and breaking the fasteners that are holding the layers together... the fasteners are designed to stretch really far before they can break in a tensile mode... It is not possible for the fasteners to keep the corrosion from expanding... the chemical expansion is a very powerful force... The oxidation can’t seep out. If it does it will leave a trace... (smoking rivet style trace) even though smoking rivets are an abrasion/wear effect and not-corrosion related... So... If you look at the spar and all the fasteners are still there... that is a good sign... On the other hand.... If you see a row of rivets, and you notice one (or two or more) is missing... that is a sign to look for what made that guy get away... or, you look and see the nice flat, straight, layers of aluminum are looking expanded enough to have a non-uniform gap or curvy layer in an area... that is worthy of closer inspection.... It is not likely to get the interlayer oxidation to occur, as something has to let the oxygen in there to begin with, and have the catalyst near by, water, relative humidity can be a catalyst as well... One may need to have an actual investigation before claiming the failure is a design flaw... There is a lot of design put into these things... with Plan Bs to each design step... Materials that are used. procedures and processes for making the parts. Assembly procedures. maintenance procedures. Documentation procedures. Serialization procedures. There is often, acceptable depth of oxidation that can be repaired and or re-used when treated properly. All of this gets done every time a plane gets built and maintained... when the rules are followed. Modern manufacturing Science has left very little to be a surprise... Computer science has made it incredibly easy to cross check serial numbers all the way back to the day each part was made, from which batch of raw materials the part was made from... and a complete record of inspection for each part... The first thing owners would want to know... does this failure possibly affect the plane I own/fly...? The second thing some owners want to know... does my maintence get done properly, down to the last documented detail...? The FAA and user groups are pretty good at narrowing down the causes of such failures, and, ruling out, the larger population on technical reasons... and unfortunately (sort of), ruling in, certain planes that have shared a common maintenance procedure or part... Is this enlightening? PP thoughts only. Not a mechanic... may have designed and or built non-flying machines in another lifetime... Best regards, -a-

https://airfactsjournal.com/2018/04/know-when-to-fold-em-how-to-avoid-tunnel-vision-in-the-cockpit/

Alright so I tackled the door seal this week. I am at my work location and secondary hangar so no electric tools. After removal of the interior panels it looked like there were 3 layers of old glue in places. It had been patched with more glue near the bottom by the guide rail attachment point and was especially thick there. Since there were no electric tools I used scrapers, both metal and plastic. I softened it with Goo Gone, but you have to keep it wet or the glue hardens again. A drill with some sort of nilon or plastic bristles would have made it much easier. Red Scotch Brite pads helped. Anyway, after two evenings of glue removal I got it down to shiny aluminum. After wiping down with rubbing alcohol I went with the M-D Weatherstrip from the Aviation Isle at Lowes and am very happy with the results.

I've been able to land my Mooney in very short distances, 800 feet or less to stopping. The problem I have is with consistency. I have to be on the top of may game. Add a gusty cross wind and no way. And for those that have never made a tail wind landing. It's amazing how fast the runway goes by and how much you use. Your roll out is much longer too. If you do this by mistake, or if the wind shifts, you will know something is wrong and off. --A good time for a go around. It could be your gear is up too.

The fracture line is through the outer 2 bolt holes on the lower spar cap. Where do you see evidence of a repair in the picture posted in the NTSB report? The opposite spar cap shares the start of the same fracture according to the NTSB report. I doubt the same exact damage or repair was made to both wings at the exact same location. There is clearly more to the story. Clarence

For one thing it's Busch. If "drinking his Kool-Aid" refers to using Savvy Aviation expertise and being grateful for @kortopatescontributions to this space then there are a great many Kool-Aid drinkers here, including me.

Update: Turns out the problem was with the tach drive cable. after removing both ends from the engine and gauge I noticed that the engine drive side was rounded and no longer engaging properly. I am going with Trailboss's suggestion of the Horizon P1000 as a permanent fix. I hanger neighbor has a used one he pulled from his Bonanza. Hopefully Horizon is willing to work with me to get the necessary paperwork and reset the limits. BTW, the tach drive covers are $90 from Lycoming, or $6 from Vans Aircraft.

Things for a PP to possibly Keep in mind.... a pair of ILSs would be better than a single ILS. In the event a display goes down or stops working for some reason... Waas approaches are really cool to go with the ILS. If you have these approaches available in your neighborhoods... For weather... keep in mind... that some type of thunderstorms are imbedded in a whole cloud system, obscuring them from view... Plowing through one can be a good idea, until you find the next one is bigger and stronger.... Some types of weather are both... regional seasonal There are two types of onboard weather avoidance we have available... Strategic/Planning: XM and ADSB, great graphics and usability, but too aged to used in real time... Tactical/avoidance: Strike detector, great to use in flight to avoid some thunderstorms... There are some limitations that come with those... Strategic Limitation: Some graphic weather info can be broadcast 15 minutes old without much detail for how old the data actually is... Tactical Limitation: Some Strike detectors can only show the storm in front, masking/shadowing the next storm behind it.... Killer weather patterns come about with things like spring cold fronts... wide spread lines of thunderstorms... that are 50 Miles deep and hundreds of miles wide... completely embedded in IMC... Anything that spawns tornadoes is something to avoid by hundreds of miles... Spring thunderstorms are pretty good at throwing large pieces of hail around... Another part of the planning for equipment comes with how far away are your alternative airports... do they exist in different types of weather patterns... near oceans, near mountains... think about your alternatives... traveling to get to VFR weather because of a single piece of piece of equipment has failed traveling to get to better/higher IMC to use a VOR approach because your ILS receiver/antenna has failed... radar approach... Got one of these? Just things to consider when deciding what to put in a panel. Have a Plan B for everything... Alternators fail vacuum pumps fail Radios fail Antennae fail (incidental grounding by ice) A PP can feel pretty alone with widespread thunderstorms and hundreds of flights requesting weather info from flight watch.... A strong weather system can really overload any ground based / voice radio delivered weather info system... PP stuff I have picked up along the way. Not a CFI or weatherman... Best regards, -a-

Every metal wing Boeing is designed the same way as our Mooneys, wet wing technology. Even 50 year old 727s have wet wings so the design style is well proven as doable. As mentioned, the difference "may" be in inspection technique and interval to find corrosion. I have always found the mind set we exhibit toward 50, sometimes 60, year old airplanes (when viewed from the position of maintenance) and how we view automobiles quite interesting. We invariably drive cars that are less than 6-10 years old (FOR RELIABILITY) yet we think nothing of jumping into a half century old airplane with lots of "deferred" maintenance or with maintenance we as amateur mechanics have done (when a lot of times we don't even work on our own cars, hangar fairies?) and fly across the country over hostile terrain. Its mind boggling. Probably needs another thread here.

I renewed 3/10 and switched from Starr to XL. 2017 - Starr - $2575: $120k hull / $1m/100k subs - New pilot w/ ~80 hours, 0 complex, 0 Mooney (required 5 hrs transition + 5 solo) 2018 - XL - $2,200: $120k hull / $1M smooth - ~250 hours w/ 160 Mooney time. I pushed really hard for a smooth policy and made that my number one ask for my broker. I had also been told an IR was required and it was my goal, but lost 2 months due to an AOG issue, so didn't get it done in time. XL was the only carrier that offered a smooth policy. BTW, did my IR checkride today, woot! On to commercial..

Glad you got it down before you lost more than a couple cylinders. This is one thing I much appreciate on the 6 cyl engine versus the 4. Besides more HP, loosing a cylinder is barely noticeable compared to loosing one of only 4.

A few good looking Mooney's sitting at Sheltair (KECP)

When TWO ASPENS ... just aren’t enough!!!

Here's a close-up of the center section I took at Paul's salvage hangar in Lakeport: