Andy95W

Squirrely at 60-70 mph? I'm not at all surprised- lightly loaded in my M20C I start giving back pressure on the yoke at about 55-60 and It flies off the ground around 60-63 MPH or so. On landing I'm at 70-75 on final (I fly out of a VERY short field) and I touch down about 60-65. Mine is squirrely too when I'm much faster than that. (I always blame the crosswind- my wife blames my landing technique.) Check out Don Maxwell's website: http://www.donmaxwell.com/publications/publications.htm Scroll down to the article on The Eight Second Ride, SB M20-202. If yours acts like Don describes, then you have a tracking issue. Doing a rough check of airspeed accuracy by doing flaps up/ full flap stalls is a great idea. With only the pilot and fuel, you can expect indicated stall speed to be 3-5 knots below the bottom of the green and white arcs, respectively.

You would no longer use the pull ring on the inside. You would use a sampler cup directly on the curtis valve just like you do the fuel drains on the wing tanks. The curtis valve would stick out of the fairing in the same place the current drain sits.

Dcflyn, My first M20C had a Curtis valve replacement. I bought that airplane in 1992. Since I was new to Mooneys at the time, I never thought anything of it and figured that all of them were like that. My POH had been modified to note that the drain was now manipulated outside the airplane rather than inside. There was no 337 associated. I was not an IA at the time, but I never had a problem with my annuals being signed off. I guarantee that airplane is still flying with the same Curtis valve and without a 337. As for modification, it is really a tough call from an IA viewpoint. On one hand, the valve is simply a drain that is actuated by hand and uses a spring to return the valve to a closed position - exactly the same description as the Curtis valve. The Curtis valve, in fact, is preferable because it allows the use of a sampler cup to see sediment or water in the catch sample. As such, that would not constitute a major alteration, it would be a minor alteration, which would not required a 337, as long as the part had some form of approval such as MIL-SPEC. But on the other hand, one FAA checklist I have from my FSDO notes "Changes to or relocation of exterior fuel vents, fuel drains, or battery vents. (Applicable to components not attached to the basic engine.)" as requiring an "evaluation" to determine if the Field Approval process would even apply. I have known some inspectors who would agree that you are not changing the design of the system, only parts, and therefore it is a minor alteration. And there are others who would freak out and accuse you of single-handedly trying to bring down general aviation. Bottom line? I would try for a field approval based upon lack of availability of original parts, to increase safety in order to be able to use a sample cup to observe the drained fuel, and show how other aircraft manufacturers use the exact same setup. (I believe the Piper Arrow does, I am positive the Piper Aztec does.) If not that, then I would consider finding an old-school A&P, give him the Curtis valve as an owner supplied part, and ask him to replace the existing drain valve with the Curtis and do a logbook entry. Good Luck, Andy

So, how do we order the seals? Directly from Gee Bee? I couldn't find a website. Will they be available in the future? BTW, I'm in for one of each within the next 2 years.

Nels, thanks for the detailed post. I own a C model but as an A&P I work on a good number of fuel injected engines. I think you should be very confident in your work. As diligent as your work sounds, I will bet that you'll be giving your engine monitor a lot of attention your next few flights- which is probably also a good idea. And thanks also for reminding me how important it is to take my time and pay attention when I work, rather than just working fast. Good luck and thanks for sharing.

Isaac- thanks for the update. Great idea about the inspection camera. Good luck.

Wonder if you could slow down, drop the gear, and then speed back up in the descent (to 153 MPH or 132 kts.). Other airplanes have this as a difference between gear operating and gear extended speeds (Vlo vs. Vle).

Does anyone know the final outcome of this leak? Did it turn out to be the fuel pump gasket for sure? Just curious...

There may be an STC to allow removal of the doghouse, but will probably be part of a larger cowling swap. IMO, you should keep the doghouse and accept that it will require occasional (maybe every 3-5 years) sheet metal repairs. It is very capable of keeping your engine temps (CHT's) cool and is about as maintenance free as rubber baffling. Any decent mechanic can do these sheet metal repairs. Since none of it is cosmetic, it usually goes pretty quickly. It is also a good place to learn about sheet metal repairs yourself if you so desired. Good luck!

Sorry, Sean, I never denied the utility of an IFR approved GPS. And I completely agree that having a GNS-430 is much more beneficial than a new paint job from a safety perspective. My soapbox is from my position as a CFI. I have seen far too many pilots who think state-of-the-art avionics substitute for practice and recurrent training. And it's scary to watch a pilot spend more time with technology than flying the plane. From a purely safety perspective, a decent autopilot that will hold heading and altitude is my choice. P.S. You're a better man than me if you still practice NDB approaches. Kudos to you for doing partial panel work, though.

From a safety perspective, the best thing you can do is 1.) get your instrument rating in your airplane, 2.) fly a lot, and 3.) fly with an instructor regularly to maintain proficiency and continue learning. This is also cheaper than a 430. The best safety addition to an airplane is a well trained pilot. Airplanes don't crash because they don't have a GNS-430W.

Really sounds like you've done your homework. Good luck with the new paint!

One suggestion when you go for paint, if you don't have the bladder mod: have your paint shop sand/scuff the area around the fuel tanks and NOT use stripper in that area. I'm just talking about sanding the old paint, not sanding through to the aluminum. There may not be anything to it, but I've worked on a number of Mooneys that needed fuel tank work 1-3 years after getting painted. It has happened enough times that it seems like more than a coincidence, and the paint stripper will definitely dissolve fuel tank sealer.

One suggestion when you get it painted, if you don't have the bladder mod: have your paint shop sand/scuff the area around the fuel tanks and NOT use stripper in that area. There may not be anything to it, but I've worked on a number of Mooneys that needed fuel tank work 1-3 years after getting painted. It has happened enough times that it seems like more than a coincidence, and the paint stripper will definitely dissolve fuel tank sealer.

Per Bendix Service Bulletin SB 583, Ignition Switch part number 10-357210-1 is the replacement for the old 10-126680-2. BTW, Aircraft Spruce appears to sell them.

Water levels? Laser levels? Wow... I wish I hadn't reopened this topic. How about just ensure everything is rigged properly, and safely, and go fly?

I'm answering this a little late, but I'd say that if Maxwell did the shock biscuits, that is not the problem. My current M20C is just like you describe, the right wingtip is a bit lower to the ground than the left. I've worked on enough older Mooneys to say that while not common, it is not unique. Each airplane was built by hand, and I've always wondered if a combination of slight mis-alignments can all add up over the length of the gear mechanism. In fact, some airplanes appear to have main gear legs that are not the same angle to the ground, even though nothing is bent and everything is rigged perfectly by the book. I have not noticed this amount of difference in later (M20J and on) models. Perhaps fewer hours and wear and tear, or perhaps better factory jigs by that point. I'm impressed your wife could actually tell which wheel touched down first. Mine usually just chocks up all my landings to bad technique on my part.