m20cDoug

I'd say 120mph on 65 hp. is pretty good for a plane designed in the 40's, originally it had a Crosely car engine converted for aircraft use but even though it worked it wasn't the best and Mooney recalled those planes and installed Lycoming O-145's that probably gave 55 hp. on a good day. A guy I knew had one with the Lyc. that would walk away from a C150 with one guy in each plane. Efficient I'd say.

An oh by the way, my plane was on jacks for an extended period, the original tie down points are stripped out and eyebolts with nuts and washers were in place so I went to a local hobby shop that had R/C plane supplies ( yes I fly them too) and picked up a set of machined streamlined prop nuts and attached them with bolts coming from inside the wing. They were tall enough that the jack had plenty of clearance and being made of machined aluminum were plenty strong plus they sat in the depression on top of the jack with little chance of bouncing out when I got in the plane. I also bought the LASAR jack point/tiedowns which I am using now.

Although mine wasn't that bad it resembled swiss cheese over the whole bottom. After getting a quote for a new replacement I talked to LASAR and bought a new bottom for less than a third of a new box, I removed the old bottom and riveted on the new one and gave it a good coating of battery box paint, it should last for the life of the plane.

Up till the first of the year I taught at the A&P school there, there was a mod works on the north side by the jet center but have not visited them, they are same bunch as in Robinsville. Orionflt and myself are at Quakertown.

Usually in the Navy this would start with " this is no s%^t". but if the guages are perfect, GCA on the ball it could be.

I took the door off my 65c also, the nuts and washers you removed from inside hold countersunk screws that hold the hinge to the reinforcement plate. You can pry some space in between the skin and plate to remove the screws but getting them back in will be a different story.

So I would imagine hardware store washers would also work if the quarter supply is low.

Interesting that we can't trust a tow bar to tow and should remove the tie down rings making it impossible to tie down easily.

My C is on jacks and has been for a long time, 300# of bar bell weights on the tail stand do the job. When I put my weight on the step the plane will rock back then resume it's tension on the shackle holding it to the stand. I also have a block of wood under the nose tire to take most of the pressure off the tail tie down since it was going on jacks long term. After reading the SI I believe that came about from the prop manufacturers not wanting the prop used as a jack point which would still put upward pressure on the engine mounts which is what the engine lifting eye also does.

The threads were worn out (stripped)on my tie downs and they were held in with a nut and washer. Right now the plane has been on jacks for a few years and the jackpoints are model airplane propnuts turned from aluminum with 1/4-20 bolts, I have the LASAR combo tiedown jackpoints for when I get it ready to fly but the propnuts look good in anodized blue. Pulling panels to put in tiedowns is a non starter.

I Tied down outside when I bought my "C" but after the first good snow decided that the expense of a hangar was justified. Sweeping off the snow just to work on it outside was enough anyway.

Good news, I don't care where they go as long as they are able to turn them out. I would like to think that as long as they are producing airplanes they are also able to support us who have older airplanes a whole lot easier than with a skeleton crew.