Andy95W

It’s a long shot, but maybe check to see that the reinforcing gussets from AD 75-09-08 were installed.

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/cmpages/conForFoan.php Different colors are different levels of squishiness for your posterior.

Mooneys land just fine with full flaps in a gusting crosswind. Add a few knots for the gusts just like in big planes. On a long runway, partial flaps is fine but I’ve got less than 2,000 feet usable so not many other options.

It might be antiquated, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t work. Done slowly, and methodically, it is accurate to within 1/2°. One of the biggest issues is the needle sticking. That is easily remedied by gently tapping on the needle center to make sure it is unstuck. Other than that, the design just uses math and algebra and it works.

Probably the bulb just wasn’t making good contact in the socket. If it happens again, try tapping it with your finger or knocking gently with your knuckle next to it.

https://www.oreillyauto.com/detail/c/xtra-seal/xtra-seal-powder-tire-talc/xts0/14550

Exactly (I used to own one.)

Not every anomaly is as benign as a Cessna window opening when you gave instruction. A nose cargo door opening on some light twins will render the airplane unflyable.

Shock Removal.pdf

Look for aluminum corrosion in the tail and wings. Pay special attention to the main spar (red) and stub spar (green).

After all this discussion about flaps, landings, and go arounds, I started experimenting some in my M20C with stall speeds, flap settings, etc. as well as landing practice with each. I had been landing flaps full at my home airport (2000’ available). At longer airports, like 4000’+, I would land with 15° of flap (takeoff setting). I’ve now changed my thoughts and really like 23° of flap, nicely in between takeoff and full flaps. I add 5 mph to my full flap speed and it works nicely on all runways, even my short home field. In my hydraulic-flap Mooney, it’s an even 3 pumps. Go arounds are a non event: gear up first, trim, retract flaps fully and retrim. I even did a touch and go landing and it was also a nonevent. Finally, the airplane feels really good at that flap setting and speed, and the pitch angle is really nice. Not as flat as full flaps in the flare, not nearly as nose high as 15°. Thanks to everyone for the discussion and suggestions. It got me to try something new.

Interesting article, but if this were truly viable there are a few glaring issues. That article was from 5 years ago and had numerous claims but no facts showing any of it was actually accomplished. Most significant is the statement, “certification cost requires outside investor funding and we have not found the right partner yet.” The obvious question is why didn’t we see this airplane at OSH in 2022? Or 2023, 24, or 25? The buzz would have been tremendous and certainly the “right partner” and outside investors would have been lined up ready to invest. Instead… crickets. The only answer is that putting a V-8 in a C-172 just wasn’t a viable solution (probably because the weight and balance just wouldn’t work.) Everyone loves to malign our 80 year old engine technology, but the fact remains if there was something significantly better it would have been developed and improved upon a long time ago. Our engines are optimized to produce 65-90% rated power reliably for 2000 hours. For their weight, nothing else even comes close. Any improvements to be seen (such as variable timing or better exhaust) produce only a few percentage points difference. Significant improvements simply haven’t panned out. So it isn’t government regulations or a corporate conspiracy, but instead physics, engineering, and financial sense that prevent significant changes to our engines.

Yes, with one caveat- the KX-155 is well known for its reliability. Only time will tell if the Trig (or any of the very new radios, even Garmin) will match it going forward. My gut tells me the new designs will be as good or better than the older generation. The GNS-430 is now over 25 years old and still going strong.

I replaced my KX-155 with a Trig panel mount. Best straight NAV/COM radio I’ve had.

I’d pay it willingly with a smile on my face, but I’d ask them to show the work and explain what they did (and why). Explanation is so that you can be a better informed owner and you’re learning what to look for on your own. Unspoken message is that you’re not just a check writer, you are being an active participant in the maintenance of your airplane. I don’t think 25 hours is too excessive, anything from 15-20 would be very reasonable. As an example, replacing the exhaust gaskets could be a 1 hour job that blossoms into 4 hours if the nuts are seized or an exhaust stud breaks. (Just between you and me, I do question the necessity of replacing the gaskets “to provide exhaust clearance to bottom cowl”. I’d want them to show me that.)