TTaylor

That is grease where we accidentally put the parts back together after removal. The parts are being examined in the lab this week to see if anything can be learned about the break.

I wanted to post some details of the part failure we had recently. The "Truss Assembly, Retracting" on our 1975 F broke while the plane was being moved out of the maintenance hangar. This is the truss that is attached to the main noise gear truss. The part broke at a primary weld and where the tube is cross welded to a second arm. There is no rust in the breaks, so it is hard to tell if it was recent or long term. This area can often be dirty on many older aircraft and ours should have been cleaned better. Even though the engine was not running the damage could be potentially over $20K becasue we have a 3-blade prop and it may require an engine tear down. I would recommend that you clean all of the gear assemblies carefully each year and have your mechanic take the time to look carefully at these parts for any signs of cracks. Below is a picture of what the complete assembly looks like and the picture from our broken part.

Your best option is to be added to the new owners policy and fly his Mooney for the 5 hours. You are more likely to find an instructor who can fly a Mooney with you than finding one to rent. I believe there is an instructor in Brigham City that is qualified in Mooney's and one from Pocatello as well. You will not get a high performance endorsement for the Mooney, only complex.

I had a similar issue with the induction seals failing. Same symptoms as described.

I fly with an O2D2 system in the Mooney and an original EDS in my glider. I am biased because I am friends with the the founder of MH, but I know there is a great deal of physiology behind the MH systems. The pulse strength and duration are designed to optimize oxygen delivery. I like that you can set the MH to an altitude and it will turn on and off automatically. It also monitors if you are not breathing enough and gives you reminders.

An other option that minimizes time over mountains and is shorter than your original:

This will work, but is excessive for this time of year and for the relatively low mountains around this area (Under 10,000 feet is pretty low for the Mooney). I would likely plan direct to Ferndale (53U) from your previous fuel stop, then angle north about 10 miles short of Ferndale to Glacier as you start descending. I would fly the leg with VFR flight following climbing to 12,500 as you reach the mountains just northwest of Choteau (8,500 is plenty high until you get to the mountains). This route will put you between Schafer (8U2) and Spotted Bear (8U4) as bailouts as well as Hungry Horse Reservoir for an emergency. This should keep you in reach of a field or lake at all times that would be survivable if you have any issues. You would also spend much less total time over the mountains than your plan above. Tim

Our mechanic in Logan has worked on Mooney's for many years. I have seen B's to TLS in the shop. A few weeks ago there were two in his hangar (one of them mine for an annual and gear issues). Send me a PM and I can get you his contact information. Tim

For sole owner there is not really an advantage. If you have a partnership, it is nice because you can have partners buy in and out without re-registration and sales tax issues.

Unfortunately the worst corrosion can not be found with a traditional inspection. Most significant spar corrosion is found under tank sealant during a reseal. If you have bladders you may be able to inspect around the tanks.

There is no reason for the STC holder to provide the plexiglass as part of the package. The STC should be written to use a Mooney part number from the 20J that the user can purchase from one of the window suppliers. It just adds multiple shipping costs and mark-up to purchase the window from the STC holder.

As you can see from this thread, it is time to take very good and careful care of your Emergency Gear Crank Cable. At this time, there are no known manufactures for replacement cables. Ours broke yesterday when the gear actuator assembly was being reinstalled. The nut broke when it was tightened. Not sure if this was from over tightening or just age. I have seen many images of poorly maintained cables that have not been lubed and cleaned properly. On your next annual I would recommend spending some time with the cable to make sure it has been cleaned, lubed and inspected carefully. All 20C to 20G with electric gear have one of these cables.

Thanks, M20-112 shows the gear side, but does not include details of parts in the disconnect side.

OK, back of the envelope calcs (ignoring climbs) and using estimates of 145 knots @ 8 gph and 155 knots @11 gph. 5800 nm 145 knot cruise, 40 hours, 320 gallons of fuel. 5800 nm 155 knot cruise, 37,4 hours, 411.6 gallons of fuel. Saves 2.6 hours of flying and uses 91.6 more gallons of fuel. About $100 savings on engine depending on how much per hour you estimate and $450 more in fuel for a net of about $350 extra to go faster. If you plug in 10.5 gph rather than 11 gph it is 73 gallons extra. Either way, time spent with grandson, priceless!

Is there a diagram of the parts in the ITT or Dukes landing gear actuator available? The manuals I have seen only show them as a complete unit, but no details of internal parts.

https://www.reacomp.com/

Actually I agree with you. I am just trying to say that comparing speeds at different fuel flows does not identify how all the things that you point out have helped. I agree that rigging, modifications, clean-up, etc. all make a difference, but someone saying that they can fly at 150 knots without saying what the fuel flow was does not help us understand if the plane is well set-up or they are just burning lots of fuel to get the speed. I know the the 201 windshield helps a great deal. I would love to know if there is consensus on the best set-up for rigging. Is there a good aerodynamic fairing we can use on fixed steps to help with them? I look forward to seeing real world numbers at fuel flows around 9.0 gph for close to stock air-frames.

It mostly comes down to altitude and fuel flow. Most of what you see here is apples to oranges. Unless they are reporting fuel flow it is pretty meaningless. Unless you are running more than 100 ROP, horsepower is pretty much a function of fuel flow (above that you are just using fuel to cool the engine). For a Lycoming the thermal efficiency number is pretty close to 0.46 lbs/hr/hp. So at 9 gph or 9 gph * 6.01 lbs/gal = 54.09 lbs/hr. This gives about 117.6 hp or 59% power for an IO-360 or 65% power for a O-360. At 10.5 gph you get 137.2 hp or 69% power for an IO-360 or 76% power for a O-360. For that extra 20 hp and 1.5 gph most will get 5 to 7 knots increase in speed. Most Mooney pilots are CB's so the number that is import is what can you cruise at efficiently, not just throwing fuel away. You can cruise at Carson speeds, but in general the hourly operating costs make this less efficient, plus total time of flight gets pretty long. The optimal curve is usually about 60% power for the IO-360 aircraft. It is hard to get the O-360 under about 69% power with WOT. My 0$0.02 worth

9500 feet, WOT, 8.9 gph, 2500 rpm, 3 blade prop, mostly stock airframe, usually close to gross: 139 knots Go read http://www.mooneypilots.com/mapalog/M20F Evaluation/M20F_Evaluation_Report.html He is running 50 ROP and likely burning 10.5 or more gph. If you want 150 knots go lower and burn more fuel. I consider 150 knots at 9 gph my dream, to get there I need a new windshield and cowl, otherwise the 20F at about 9 gph is a 140 knot airplane.

The longest flight I did in a 63C with 48 gallon tanks was 528 NM. It was comfortable and there was plenty of reserve. My standard procedure was to run 2500 rpm and lean until rough and then just enrich until smooth. That was usually about 9.5 gph at 8500 feet average fuel flow. I would run on one tank for an hour, then switch tanks and run that tank until dry. You would have a pretty good idea how long you had left on the first tank from the second tank time minus one hour. With my F, I have a Fuel Scan 450 which make me much more confident of how much fuel I have on board. With 54 gallons I have closer to 5:45 minutes fuel or about 695 nm range with reserve. A 52 gallon C at average of 9.5 gph and 135 knots with 45 minute reserve should be good for a no wind 640 nm flight of 4:45 minutes. The flight you planned should take 4:00 hours, so you should have 1:30 reserve. Looks very doable, but as always have alternates planed and make sure your reserve can reach an airport with fuel and good weather. One last thought, why not fuel up at the closest airport rather than plan from Seattle area? I assume you can get closer to 510 nm from some of the airports near the boarder.

Incorrect group

Incorrect group

I have posted in the parts forum, but wanted post here as well. Looking for an ITT Landing Gear Disengage Unit, part 125182A or 40609A. I am open to what others have done if there is an alternative solution such as switching to a Dukes Unit or is there an alternative from the 20J. The ITT units are becoming extremely rare from what I can tell. Tim