Andy95W

The trim brake didn't get added until '63 or '64. You could increase the tension slightly on the chain that drives the system.

I said it was helpful. I also said it wasn’t essential. I’ve no doubt whatsoever that you provide excellent instruction. If I were to ever upgrade to an M20K or up, I’d probably give you a call. Your services would certInly speed the process in mastering the new airplane. But I take exception with the word essential. You’re saying that anyone who doesn’t get Mooney specific instruction is going to become a smoking hole in the ground, and I just don’t see that.

I’m with Gus. It’s an airplane. It flies like an airplane. Would a Mooney-specific CFI assist the transition to Mooney flying (and advanced avionics)? Yes. Is it essential? No. Mooney transition training, just like the Private Pilot’s License, is a license to learn.

I thought the same, but it appears to be age related like AH1 CobraPilot said above. My 91 yr old mother and 80 yr old father in law just had their second shots, but had almost no side affects. A friend who is 30 (firefighter) had his and felt like hell for 24 hours.

Cliffy- I think I probably have the exact same issue as you, I like the 6 small gauges but my fuel is getting “wonky”. I will be replacing mine with the small Mitchell modular gauges, most of which are PMA’ed for other airplanes. @Sabremech has a 337 Field approval for this modification that I bet he’d share with you. I’m planning to replace my fuel level sending units with the brand new Mitchell ones. I got quotes of $400-600 to overhaul the old style engine gauges, and $150 each to overhaul the sending units from Airparts of Lock Haven. All-in cost of brand new Mitchell gauges and all sending units is about $1100. Mitchell will mark the red/yellow/green arcs on the gauges. @hammdo now owns Sabremech’s airplane and can probably say how well those engine gauges are working after 8 years. Also, @RLCarter installed the same Mitchell modular gauges in his airplane (I’m not sure what basis for approval he used) and wrote about it in the following posts:

I would suspect your TIT probe is starting to go bad. It lives a pretty hard life where it’s at.

Newbs.

Crimpers, too. Excellent quality tools.

It’s been a few months. Good to have you back. Sorry about your friend.

Sounds like a great reason to go fly with an instructor to knock the rust off yourself as well as the camshaft.

Yes, there are stacks of small thin washers in between the plates that hold the socket. They have to be there so that the ball can "float" and not bind the shaft. You should be able to loosen the nut at least enough to brush the aluminum and clean under/around the screw heads. Definitely easier than trying to get the washers back in. Your experience with the wires is fairly common. Avionics shops make their money by selling and installing new equipment. Removing components is easy, removing the wires that connect them is a time-consuming pain. When a shop supervisor is trying to get his tech to work faster in order to bill the customer sooner, it's fastest to just cut the connector off the ends and let the next shop worry about the wires. Not right, but not uncommon.

The thing that struck me the most was a term I’d never heard in over 30 years of flying: S.L.O.J.- Sudden Loss of Judgement. It explains how a good pilot, with good judgement, faced with slowly deteriorating conditions, suddenly loses that good judgement. And the scary thing is that we’ve probably all been close to that point at some time or another. Things are great and under control until suddenly they’re not. It explains how good pilots can stall/spin turning base to final, mis-read their instruments and land at the wrong airport, or lose situational awareness when suddenly IMC like the Kobe Bryant crash. That pilot was a Check Airman and Chief Pilot and had a ton of experience. Sobering truth for all of us.

500 years later, and things really haven’t changed much.

Nearly everyone here are fans and proponents of the stand-alone 930. I certainly understand the rationale behind that. I have a 730 in my M20C (same as the 830 but without MP and rpm). I like having the redundancy to the factory instruments, and the accuracy of the digital JPI. To me, that’s the best of both worlds.

BTDT

Don’t just check the yoke shafts. Actually clean them. @donkaye is probably the most experienced Mooney pilot on this site. His yokes (also M20M, BTW) felt perfectly normal to him but his GFC500 was exhibiting the exact same problem you’re describing. Not sure his method for cleaning his, but a good start would be silicone spray lubricant applied to the shaft and wiped clean. Apply more and move the yokes in and out, and wipe clean again. Repeat a few times and go for a test flight. Good luck, please keep us posted.

I wasn’t sure how to answer. Do I use checklists and flows? Yes. Do I pull out the paper checklist? Only when someone else is in the airplane with me (possible distractions). And I use the same list for all phases of flight, but of course the action is different based upon the particular phase. This works great for simple airplanes like our Mooneys. My car is more complex than my M20C, for Pete’s sake. My checklist items: After start - R.A.I.N. R-radios A-altimeter I-instruments N-navigation Before take-off - C.A.R.T. C-controls A-autopilot R-runup T-trim All phases of flight - G.U.M.P.F.L. G-gas (including carb heat) U-undercarriage M-Mixture P-prop F-flaps (cowl and wing) L-lights (including transponder)

Agree 100%, Mike. We go through this discussion here on Mooneyspace about every 9-12 months. And the problem isn’t the FAA. The FAA has certified automobile engines for airplane use, the current crop of diesels are some, and the EPI/Orenda V-8 conversion is another. The problem is that the conversions simply aren’t financially or functionally worth doing. Put more simply: if it was such a great idea, scores of kit plane builders would be using automotive engines, instead of their preferred Lycoming IO-360/540s. The unfortunate truth is that our 1940s technology engines are extraordinarily well suited for powering our airplanes, which is why they were designed that way in the first place. You simply won’t find 200-300 horsepower engines with a comparable price, reliability, efficiency, durability, or power-to-weight ratio. EPI, Inc. had a great article on their website that talked about their V-8 conversion, and also a little about the rest of the crop of GM engines (LS-3, LS-7, LS-9). http://www.epi-eng.com/aircraft_engine_conversions/evaluating_a_conversion.htm#extbadexamp

Impressive, but 100,000 km at 200 kph is only 500 hours. I’ll be more impressed when it can do 2,000 hours.

Safety wire on the internal hex nuts is not required. Those fasteners are unique to the Lycoming narrow deck engines. The later version wide deck engines use standard nuts and are also not safety wired. Good question, though.

I wouldn't be too quick to replace your camshaft, unless it needs it. There are lots of camshafts from the 60s, 70s, and 80s that soldier on just fine through multiple overhauls- but there are also newer ones that spall after 500 hours due to bad metallurgy. I'd rather have an old, good camshaft with new DLC lifters than an unknown brand new camshaft.

Back in the 90’s, SWTA would sell parts and STCed kits from LASAR as well as their own. That way you could get the mods you wanted and only have to pay shipping once. (That’s how I modified my first Mooney from 92-97 when I lived in Texas.) I’ll bet the oversized bushing was LASAR’s purchased through SWTA.

At least you can still fly with the 730 removed. That’s actually the main reason I went with the 730 instead of the stand-alone 930. (The other reason is that I’m also cheap.)

Why not do an informal poll here, then extrapolate out for the total pilot population? Probably need 4 data points: ATP, IA, neither, and both. (I can think of 3 people on Mooneyspace who are both, but there are probably a couple more).

Used sheepskin covers... AKA “pre-farted”.