mooniac15u

I'm pretty sure all these requirements were related to the $500 rebate. With the rebate off the table there is no need to fly all of these maneuvers.

I understand. Just trying to provide some unbiased feedback for whatever it's worth. Your plane looks very nice and should be very marketable.

That is conveyed through the pictures and thorough maintenance records. One of the reasons brokers are so successful is that they remove the personal aspect of the seller.

In general when selling something like a house or an airplane it is a good idea to help a buyer see the item as theirs rather than yours. Your website is an excellent tribute to the joy that your plane has brought you but it may not be the optimal marketing tool for helping a buyer see themselves in the plane.

I think you are supposed to remove that per AD 97-26-08. http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/AOCADSearch/3663F2D3749FE48286256A8F006C5ED6?OpenDocument

And that's why I said, "One could argue that it doesn't apply because our aircraft don't have the requisite lists of commercial parts but the IPC provides a pretty good list of which commercial parts should be used." The point is that the FAA has acknowledged that there is a category of "Commercial Parts" that doesn't fit any of the other definitions of approved parts. Our aircraft are too old to have been certified with a Commercial Parts List but that doesn't mean we can't get insight into how things like light bulbs fit into the general scheme of approved parts.

I believe that by today's regulations a GE light bulb would fall under "commercial parts" per 14 CFR 21.9 (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2012-title14-vol1/pdf/CFR-2012-title14-vol1-sec21-9.pdf ). One could argue that it doesn't apply because our aircraft don't have the requisite lists of commercial parts but the IPC provides a pretty good list of which commercial parts should be used.

The TCDS certainly doesn't list all of the approved parts of an aircraft. For example, the wing spar is listed in the parts catalog but not on the TCDS. The Parts Catalog contains the full list of approved parts.

At least in some cases the Parts Catalog specifies a bulb.

Engines have type certificates like airframes. Nobody here questions the approval basis of items included in Mooney SBs or SIs as the TC holder.

It's hard to tell from the pictures but those tires look like they might be overinflated. IIRC it should be 30 PSI for all tires on an M20C. When I inflated the tires on my M20D to 30 PSI they always looked a little flatter than what I see in your pictures.

Advising a new owner to follow the regs is legal belittling?

Is your engine "loping"? http://www.donmaxwell.com/publications/MAPA_TEXT/External_Hoses/External_Hoses_Tubes.htm "Lycoming powered, fuel injected Mooney’s, share a distinctive, “loping” sound at low power settings during taxi and idle operation. The loping sound is caused by system leakage at the induction drain valve. A small amount of “lope” is normal. Excessive “lope” can be cured by removing the drain valve hose at the drain fitting and spraying the inside of the fitting with Tri-flow, corrosion X or solvent. Fuel dye and oil cause the ball to stick and not seal properly causing rough low rpm engine operation."

That makes no sense. Of course I would get better return if I just invested the $2760 because I don't have a recurring expense (ECI) to funnel away the interest gains. I also would not get any of the gains from investing in the new hub which come in the out years when you no longer have the recurring ECI expense.

See my previous post. I said 8 years to get to $3000. $2760 is what you have to invest after paying for the ECI in year one. Otherwise your outlay is $3240. Investing $2760 at 9% and spending all the interest leaves you with ~$3000 at the end of any timeframe. Realistically you can expect 7% from the market so you would need to sequester about $3030 to get $240 in return each year. At the same 7% you need 9 years to get back to $3000 with annual deposits of $240. At the end of 9 years (based on 7%) you have: a) ~$3000 in cash and a propeller (requiring additional investment in ECI each year). or b ) ~$3000 in cash and a propeller (with no additional investment needed) In neither case do you end up with $6024.

My calculation doesn't assume any particular value at 7 years. The value would be comparable between the two propellers with the new hub presumably having a higher resale value. The values I'm talking about are cash assets. $3000 spent up front on a hub with $240 savings per year put into an account vs sequestering the $3000 ($2760) and leveraging the interest. With the up front investment you finish with an AD-free hub at whatever residual value plus ~$3000 cash. With the continued ECI path you end up with a hub that will continue to need inspections for however long it lasts plus ~$3000 cash. The total invested is the same both ways (initial $3000 plus $240 per year), it is the outcome that differs. In the one case your recurring expense ends, in the other it continues as long as you own the propeller.

I forget the exact date but I think it was around 2007. My current Mooney has a McCauley prop.

Are you sure it's actually leaking from that corner or is the fuel just running down to that spot?

Everyone's scenario is different and it can extend the timeframe on the break even point. For me the cost of the hub was lower because Hartzell was offering the hub at half price if you had them do the overhaul. They are located near me so I flew my plane there and had them do the work. The economics were also different when the AD was first issued. It required an ECI at annual AND every 100 hours. If you were flying more than 100 hours per year you could end up needing two ECI inspections per year. They have since modified the AD to only the 100 hour timeframe. I also put a fairly high value on my time. It is the thing I have the hardest time getting more of.

Based on a previous listing for this aircraft I think it was a "Lean Machine" version of the 201 which had low-end avionics.

But I heard on MooneySpace that the AD is bogus...

Let's look at the investment scenario a little closer. I'm not sure where the $160 comes from but in your previous post you used a cost of $20 per month which is $240 dollars per year so I'll use that. At a cost of $3000 for the hub the cost differential in year one is $2760. In order to pay your yearly ECI cost that would have to earn about 9%. After eight years you have $2760 in the bank and a hub that still needs ECI inspections. If you pay for the hub up front and then each year put the cost of the ECI in that same account at 9% you will have just over $3000 and a hub without the recurring expense.

You don't have a clock at all or you don't have one that needs constant power?

I was generally referring to any time the prop is in the shop with the hub opened up being a time when there would be no extra cost associated with swapping the hub. That could be overhaul or any other IRAN. There is no requirement to overhaul but there may be reasons to.

The time to swap the hub is at overhaul. At that point there's no additional installation costs. Your inspection cost is on the lower end and you haven't valued your time very high if you are only at $40 for the trip to the shop. Why are you using a 7 year payback? How long do you plan to own your aircraft?