mooniac15u

Do you have flexibility in your travel/meeting schedule? Having a rigid schedule with no alternative travel method is not compatible with general aviation. Many pilots have lost their lives because they were in a hurry to get somewhere and launched into poor conditions. An instrument rating will help a lot but there are still times when the right decision is not to go.

When flying IFR you often don't get to determine your own descent profile. You are often kept higher than you would like for longer than you would like and then asked to descend at the last minute. Under those circumstances just pushing the nose over and picking up speed on the descent will not accomplish what you've been asked to do. Increasing drag can help achieve the best angle of descent.

They will still give weather updates and help you with filing IFR in the air. They just don't use the Flight Watch frequency anymore. Apparently there wasn't much demand with all the in-cockpit weather options. I'm guessing they aren't all that busy.

Youngest probably goes to either @M20FanJesse or @Raptor05121. They both look like they're about 15.

Flight Watch is mostly silent because they shut it down in 2015.

There has been much discussion about the gear speeds on MS. I don't believe there is a difference in gear speeds between the manual and electric gear for the same model. It was really just an observation that manual gear is only available in models with lower gear speeds. So, if manual gear is important enough to you then you are stuck with the lower speed. If you are ok with electric gear you have some options.

If simplicity is your lone criterion then that would drive your personal preference. My manual gear Mooney had a lower gear speed than my current Mooney. That was not better. I found that dealing with the manual gear extension during an instrument approach represented more of a distraction including more physical movement that could lead to spatial disorientation. That was not better. We have seen some cases of manual gear Mooneys experiencing gear collapses. I’m not sure why or whether that is an actual trend but if I still owned my M20D I would be very concerned about what happened with N6XM. Was there a final determination on what happened with that?

I understand the issues and how lubrication functions. It is the source of the pock marks that I have an issue with. There is no reason to expect oxidation to occur on the hardened cam lobes over any other surface. Hardened steel is typically more resistant to corrosion than non-hardened surfaces. Clearly once the hardened surface is compromised the loss of metal can happen quickly. I think we have been quick to assume that corrosion is the first step in the process but I'm not sure we have data to support that. I believe we see cases of cam failure in engines that are run fairly regularly. There is a temptation to look at the outcome (cam failure) and then go hunting for a cause. If the population of engines that have sat for some time is higher than the population that haven't then it is likely to drive a false conclusion that the two are related. The scientific approach would be to look at the total population of engines and see whether cam failure occurs more often in engines that sit than engines that don't.

Overall it looks like a nice plane. I wasn't trying to scare you away with my engine comment. Buying planes is about assessing value and managing financial risk. There are no certainties with engines but it is easier to assess the risk of needing an overhaul with some engines than others. This engine hasn't been overhauled since 1972 but most of the key components have been repaired or replaced in a piecemeal fashion over the years. What that means for longevity potential is anyone's guess. If I were buying this aircraft I would make sure I could afford an overhaul in the near future. I'm not saying that it won't run a good long time, there are just too many unknowns to not be prepared in this case. Are you getting it for a price that leaves you with the resources for an overhaul?

I'm not convinced that corrosion from sitting is the primary factor in cam and lifter failure. In all the pictures I've seen of cams with bad lobes the rest of the metal on the camshaft is bright and shiny. What factors would cause localized corrosion on the lobes and leave no trace of corrosion anywhere else? Lycoming cams that are left sitting on hangar shelves do not show signs of spontaneous corrosion. Lycoming's solution to this issue was to add roller tappets. How would roller tappets solve a corrosion problem? Since the damage is typically localized to the cam lobes and lifters where they make physical contact it seems that mechanical wear is the more significant factor. Perhaps mechanical forces are causing localized heavy wear at the surfaces which then make them prone to corrosion? If that's the case then simply sitting wouldn't be a problem for a cam that doesn't already have surface wear.

I owned a manual gear M20D for 8 years. I'm just as happy with my electric gear M20J now. The manual gear has achieved something akin to cult status around here but it's really just a personal preference.

That engine has an interesting history. According to the logbook it has less than an hour of tach time since 2014.

Ritalin is actually methylphenidate which is a different class of drug. It is is an NRDI as opposed to amphetamines which are TAAR1 agonists. The overall effects are similar.

Not the most favorable reviews:

Did you find a step? There is one on ebay now. http://www.ebay.com/itm/MOONEY-M-20-J-K-STEP-ASSY-/311817842519?hash=item4899caaf57:g:W9gAAOSwCU1YsJOl&vxp=mtr I have no personal knowledge of, or affiliation with, this. I just saw it listed and recalled that someone here was looking.

It's all covered in the thread I linked to earlier. The specific information on the tubing change is here:

Those HP increases are over what is actually produced with a stock Mooney exhaust and air filter. They do not increase HP above the rated value. Remember the engine was certified at 200 HP independent of the airframe. It did not have the Mooney induction system and exhaust to contend with. Both of those things you list just reduce the effects of the airframe-specific limitations and get you closer to the rated HP. They do not allow the IO-360 to produce over 200 HP.

Evaporating fuel will only contribute to the pressure in the tank up to the fuel's vapor pressure which is less than 1 atm.

There's one on ebay right now: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mooney-Metal-Aircraft-Control-Yoke-3-4-Shaft-8869-/121750213090?hash=item1c58e0d1e2:g:8tAAAOxycmBS3vH1&vxp=mtr

No, it is based on serial numbers not model years. The eligible serial numbers go back as far as 1987 but there are other J's from 1987 and 1988 that are not included.

Power Flow exhaust doesn't increase the HP of the engine it only allows you to take advantage of a higher percentage of the horsepower. The IO-390 is a different engine. Swapping out the engine is not a modification of the IO-360. Switching to the IO-390 is fundamentally no different than doing the Missile conversion. It requires an STC and makes it a high performance aircraft.

What sort of modification would make our IO-360's produce more than 200HP?

Is that a magnetic chip detector light? If so, you should probably take that seriously.

I think G-Force is still around but I don't recall seeing them on the most recent MSC list. In a completely unrelated thread @gsxrpilot mentioned having a PPI done in New Philadelphia, OH which is very close to Akron.