Andy95W

@Htmlkid- I've never seen a Mooney factory reference that says that sump was supposed to be drained every flight. Maybe they changed the Manuals in the 1970's. I don't drain mine every flight, far from it. It's more of an every-once-in-a-while thing. The rubber seal in that thing is a pain to replace and if you pull the ring too hard, you can damage the mechanism. Besides, water is going to drain from the wing sumps first. The one time I had water in my tank I definitely drained the sump and line. Other than that time, I've never gotten water out of the gascolator. Anyway, not much liquid really comes out, unlike the stream you get from a high wing Cessna.

Your PM 1000ii is one of the best 4 place intercoms ever sold. The previous owner simply didn't pay to have the rear seats hooked up. I bet your avionics shop could do the work for less than $500, your local A&P even less. With that said, when you get around to major avionics work, that will be the best time to install a great all-in-one intercom/audio panel. EDIT- if you're willing to do the hard grunt work of removing/installing your interior and side panels, it could be downright cheap.

Fabric. Less expensive. Warmer in the winter. Cooler in the summer. Easier to take care of. Better durability, to boot.

If you just consider the sales/use tax of buying 2 airplanes instead of only 1, that might convince you. The self insurance route would save money on both.

The wire should pry apart to get it off. Be careful you don't tweak the shaft when you take it off. You might consider replacing it with a split key ring that fits the indent in the plastic. It will look nicer and make it easier to remove/install in the future.

Around 2001, I went on a tower tour in DTW. They said the exact same thing.

Me three.

Bonal, I appreciate your insights, love your artwork, and always enjoy seeing pictures of Snoopy. But I don't agree with your statement above. I don't think our economy is the life blood of America. Americans are. As long as there are decent, hard-working Americans still drawing breath, we will survive. And I think there is every possibility we will get stronger because of this. But I've always been a "glass-half-full" kind of guy.

That means it could be anything and/or everything.

Yeah, instead of the "freshman ten" it's the "quarantine fifteen".

Good thing you stopped kissing Chris. You knew the risks with that kind of behavior...

I suspect you're right, Dev, but I hope you're wrong about the 5%. Right now I've got a slight temperature (100.5°), get slightly more winded than normal climbing stairs or jogging, and feel kinda crappy. Any other year I'd figure my allergies were acting up. This year, I hope I'm one of the people having a mild reaction to the virus. And I hope it's a one-and-done sort of virus, at that. My wife feels a little worse than me and we're staying home- except I just got back from flying my Mooney by myself. (Thanks, by the way, for what you're doing for us all right now.)

I can see that. This thread has me leaning toward installing the Surefly but not enabling the spark advance.

Agreed! (But only until my SOS craps out or my left magneto needs it next 500 hour inspection. That's the day I order a Surefly.)

In this day and age, it seems most people trust the news sources that support their own opinion.

So the good news is that if you lose your prop, you'll still be in the CG range. The bad news is that you lost yer friggin' prop...

Article [X] (Amendment 10 - Reserved Powers) The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

It sounds like your Interav alternator is working just fine. I wouldn't touch it until it starts giving you a reason. And in 20+ years of working on small airplanes I've never heard of a 500 hour inspection of an alternator.

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/garmindatapowercable.php He might need to get a bare wire connector for the 696 also.

You made a claim in your original post, I asked for supporting documentation, and you don't have it. I'm not going to do your research for you. And it's not just regulations and market size that keeps our 80 year old technology prevalent. Continental has the certified CD-155, Austro has a certified diesel Mercedes Benz converted engine, and Orenda certified a big V8. The reason there aren't a ton of STCs to put those engines into airframes is that either 1.) they bring limitations with them or 2.) it's difficult to justify installing an $80,000 CD-155 into my M20C when I can overhaul my existing engine for $25,000. Again, our old technology engines are remarkable in meeting so many trade offs so effectively- which was the point of my post in the first place.

I'm completely on board with the current crop of diesels like the CD-155 and the newest Austro. I would love to put one in my M20C. But that wasn't the point of my post. My point was that I've seen over 30 years of people complaining about how crappy our engines are vs. how wonderful modern car engines are. And I made an exception for the current crop of turbocharged diesels.

No Fear, no Uncertainty, no Doubt (like many of my generation, I had to look up FUD. Interestingly, "FUD troll" popped up. Hmm.) But instead of just calling me ignorant, please post the actual load testing results that you're referencing regarding engine durability. My point this entire time is that despite 80 year old technology, our current engines are remarkable in balancing weight, fuel burn, and reliability. Please, by all means, show me an engine comparable to the Lycoming IO-360 at 75% power: 150 horsepower at 10 gallons per hour for 2000 hours weighing 300 pounds. I got my license when the Porsche Mooney PFM was being produced. I still remember a poster of it at my flight school. It didn't last. Since then, I've heard more rumors than I can count about transfer of automotive engine technology to aviation. Only 2 have even come close to fruition: the current crop of turbocharged diesels (which only recently have begun to approach- but not meet- the reliability we currently have) and the V8 Orenda conversion for the Aero Commander. That actually flew, and the engine was actually type-certified, but the resultant airplane wasn't feasible due to weight and other factors. http://www.epi-eng.com/aircraft_engine_conversions/orenda_on_aero_commander.htm Again, please post some data that actually shows: 300 pound engine, continuous 150 HP, 10 gph, 2000 hours. (And the IO-360 was actually certified to produce the full 200 HP for that 2000 hours, but at more than 10 gph).

I was thinking something more like this, mounted on the flat steel plate above the shock discs. Very thin. https://www.superbrightleds.com/moreinfo/grille-and-surface-mount-strobe-lights/low-profile-grille-and-surface-mount-led-light-head-18w/3458/

I get movement on the first pump, but more on pumps 2, 3 and 4.