Andy95W

Only because it’s better Kool-Aid, at least to me. The operating systems just “fit” my brain better than Android/Microsoft. One of my happiest days was when I changed all of my electronics to Apple: iPhone, iPad, and MacBook. Everything just works. I no longer have to spend frustrating hours getting my devices to work correctly. To each their own, Hank. I’m glad you’ve found a solution that satisfies you. (Edited to remove cynical comments.)

@Gubni- I apologize if my couple of posts came across too sarcastic. I can imagine the spot you’re in. You’ve got an A&P who is willing to help and is probably a really good mechanic. You have to trust him and believe in his work, that is your half of a good mechanic/owner relationship. Mooneys aren’t magic or unique in their construction. A good A&P doesn’t need special skills to do good work on them. But Mooneys do have some systems that ARE unique, and the landing gear is one of those. (Flight control rigging is another.). Just because a guy is really good at Bonanza/Piper/TBM landing gear, doesn’t mean he knows Mooney landing gear. He really has to follow the maintenance manual. Many of those manuals are available for download right here on MooneySpace. Go up to “Browse” then “Downloads” and you’ll find the Service Manuals. Even if it’s not the exact one for your 231, it will at least give a starting place for gear rigging and show the proper way to check the preloads on the over-center links. I’m not sure where the 58” and 59” measurements came from. Maybe the height of the wingtips? One thing for your A&P to understand is that each Mooney really is hand-built, and the exact angle of each gear or height of each wingtip may differ from other Mooneys. That is very normal. What matters is the torque needed to flex the overcenter links to unlock the gear. Too tight and the pushrods will bend and eventually break the attachment fittings, leading to a gear collapse. Too loose and the gear links won’t stay over center and the gear will collapse. Both of these eventualities are well documented right here on MooneySpace. One nice thing about Mooney landing gear- it generally doesn’t change from one annual inspection to the next. So if your gear was good at the last inspection, and if nothing has been changed on the landing gear, then it is almost guaranteed to still be good. That is better than the mechanic making adjustments without having the correct gear rigging tools or the correct manuals. Good luck to you! You’ve got a really nice conversion- the best parts of the 231 with the engine of the 252, which is the engine the 231 needed all along.

Those numbers correspond to absolutely nothing in the service manual or any service bulletins on Mooney gear rigging. Good luck.

Mooney landing gear isn’t necessarily “vertical” when extended. What matters is that the pre-loads are correct by using the real Mooney gear rigging tools. If your mechanic doesn’t have the actual tool, please don’t let him go adjusting things just to make it “look right”. And if he does, then make sure he has enough insurance to pay for a new prop and engine tear down inspection when the gear collapses. Yes, this sounds extreme but it is accurate. Mooneys have been totaled by insurance companies because the mechanic didn’t have experience working on them and they thought they could rig the gear. If you have electric gear, it’s only one tool for the mains. If you have manual gear you will need both tools.

ATC might see it, but it also depends on how it was configured during the installation. Per the uAvionix manual, there is an anonymous mode when squawking 1200 but it has to be configured that way.

@Sabremech may have some insight. He’s owned both an M20C and M20 and has done extensive work on both.

My ADS-B has an “Anonymous Mode”, which I hope does exactly this. That isn’t available for 1090ES, but is for UAT if I’m squawking 1200. So the big question- does anyone know if this truly keeps my identity anonymous, or am I just kidding myself?

https://mythresults.com/episode97

I found it interesting that 3 of the sources cited by the author were from Barry Schiff, who has been writing about this topic since the ‘70s.

Thanks, will do.

A lot of guys here really like the QT Halo in-the-ear headsets. Less expensive than the Clarity Aloft, and in some ways better. Plus, the founder/owner of the company is an actual audiologist and Mooney owner.

With regard to insulation- I’ve owned 2 Mooneys, a 1967 M20C with the original fiberglass insulation and my current 1964 M20C that had been modified with 1” thick closed cell foam insulation. A previous owner had installed that stuff everywhere, even the firewall. I don’t think there is any appreciable difference in noise level. If there is, it’s 2 decibels or less. Over the past 10 years, I’ve been replacing the 1” thick with 1/2” thick, because that foam breaks down over time and makes a mess. Still no appreciable difference. On my first M20C, the original fiberglass was changed for the SB 208b insulation. If any sound reduction occurred, it was due to that exchange.

A few years back, Bob Belville got his beautiful M20E painted and he said he lost a few knots.

Hi, John. I tried to send a PM through Mooneyspace but it said you couldn’t receive messages.

Not my decision, obviously, but I really hope you leave it original. My first Mooney was a 1967 M20C. When I was shopping for my current one, I specifically looked away from anything pre-1965 just because of the windows. Now I’m glad I got my 1964 in spite of the old window shape. It’ll grow on you, I promise. If nothing else, it’s the way Al Mooney himself envisioned the airplane.

3/2 of the time I count pretty good.

I think the reason that it’s not a recommended transmission is that you may as well say the number. That way, if the winds are calm or someone just got on the frequency, they will actually know which runway is the active, and won’t have to ask. Also, “the active” is three syllables. Saying the actual number is at most only two syllables.

Do you have a part #?

Yeah, it’d be nice to have the screen space of a GTN750! On the 2” screen on the GPS175 it’s easiest doing it the way you first said. Plus, it’s most similar to the airplane I fly at work. Thanks again!

Thanks! I figured it wasn’t too difficult, but just couldn’t find it.

@midlifeflyer Hi, Mark. Thanks for posting this list. About # 5a- how do you create a waypoint for a GTN? (I have a GPS175 which uses the same buttonology, IIRC). In the past I’d just intercept a course or radial as in # 1, and then hold at a distance like it was an old VOR/DME fix. But it would be easier to actually create the waypoint. Thanks.

I have occasionally answered a “any traffic please advise” with a “What do you need advice on?”

Totally agree! I’ve always said it’s a lot more fun to thrash an underpowered car than to hold back a thoroughbred like a Ferrari. (My first car was a 1967 VW Karmann Ghia.)