Yooper Rocketman

I will explain in another thread at some point. I Don’t want to hi jack this one. Tom

Sorry, I’m Mooneyless right now (although I will be managing the preparation to sell a very nice E Model this spring for my best friends wife (he passed on Veterans Day). But ......... I could give you quite the tour of a couple Lancair IVP Propjets in my hangar, one completed and flying, one completely open in final stages of completion. I’m out there nearly every day trying to finish the second one. Everybody in the airport knows me and can direct you to my hangar. Tom

Sorry. That’s 500 miles out of my neighborhood but I appreciate the referral. Tom

Seriously? So the propagation continues. Only those with an A&P are credible? And how often is recurrent training required? NEVER. I know A&P’s .......... ah, never mind. I will take the high road here. Maybe a more appropriate question is how many hold a current IA, as they actually hold a certificate requiring currency. Or maybe we could avoid chest pounding and at least stay somewhere close to the OP’s topic, giving him an actual answer that is honest, explained and correct I will resist going down this road any farther. And no I don’t hold an A&P. Send me to the bottom of the barrel. Tom

Four pages on whether you can install a USB port in a certified airplane that doesn't have the FAA's blessing? And you wonder why I built my own!!! @Skates97 had a very valid point. One of the top avionics /panel builders in the country has a USB port in EVERY panel they sell. I can assure you it's not TSO or PMA approved based on what it cost me. I suspect nearly every new home built plane has a non-TSO'ed USB port and I have yet to read about one issue with them. I got so sick of ridiculous regulations and restrictions, I saw the path to satisfaction in the Experimental world. For a significant amount of time now Van's RV series home built's (yes, just one brand of home built airplane) has certified more new planes annually than the entire GA Certified Fleet COMBINED. Now, amazingly, some of the "Experimental" Avionics are being approved for "Certified" use. I did most my own work on all of my planes, under the supervision of my best friend (and A&P). He struggled with the antiquity of the FAA regs, and how ridiculously slow change came. He thought he died and went to heaven working on my Lancair with me. Common sense was permitted! He went to his grave (recently) with his proudest accomplishment (aviation wise) being his participation in my project. And the comments to ask your FSDO ........ seriously??? I'm close to a ton of A&P's / IA's on my field AND in Florida. Getting the same answer from FSDO's across the country is a joke. They've even complained about inconsistencies within a specific FSDO. A retired friend of my, former DOM for a significant FBO in the Midwest, spent hours during my visit in January telling me about these very issues (inconsistencies) as he is restoring an old rag wing and needing approvals for upgrades (and how he's found a way to get around those without a clue, by going farther up the chain). The final straw ....... since I still deal with our wonderful certified world as chair of the maintenance committee for our mercy flight org with two planes, is how many times I am cited incorrect regulations and requirements from our certified professionals. I feel bad for those that DON"T know the regs, as you will clearly pay more in a lot of cases as you are told what has to be done when the regs don't support it. Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of good mechanics and they are pretty easy to figure out once you work with them for a while. Sometimes the issue I see is the foggy line these guys develop when they deal with commercial ops AND Part 91. Tom

I saw three pages on this topic and thought ....... hey, what news do we have about Mooney. By the second and third page I was asking myself....... what's the topic again? Tom

That's it. Tom

Fuel burn lower with a propjet would be horrendous (and less safety margin if something would go wrong). Tom

My last trip home from Florida was delayed two days. First one for a significant part of Georgia below minimums (no options should an emergency arise to land) and the second day due to a pretty long line of thunderstorms. I flew over some level 1 & 2 rain showers the third day but my landing options were realistic that day. I always plan for an out before launching should problems arise during the trip. Rental car? Not a very realistic option on trips well over 1,000 nautical miles. Tom

Yep ....... that was one of the things I was looking forward to! Tom

You are correct. The Sun Country crew flew to western Dakota’s before heading south. And still hit some rough crap. Tom

So in one of the first times I remember I cancelled a long cross country for a reason other than icing, thunderstorms, high surface/winds aloft or low ceilings. I needed to attend a dealer meeting in Las Vegas, had a little weather in the central part of the trip but not that significant, with clear skies in the area of concern. I was really looking forward to the flight but started watching turbulence reports and forecasts the day before. The first thing that caught my eye the day prior was a sigmet for turbulence over the Rockies with a few severe turbulence reports. By 5 PM Monday (my scheduled departure was early Tuesday morning) it was pretty evident Tuesday would present me the same turbulence. I was going to file 28,000’, but the turbulence was forecast right up to 40k’. I went on line, found seats open on a flight out of MSP ( a mere 50 minute flight to STP vs a 6 hour drive), bought them and went spam can over the rocks. We definitely saw moderate turbulence and my Sun Country flight did a pretty serious avoidance route besides. My self imposed policy is to never regret a decision to not fly after the fact, as the decision wasn’t made in hind sight. Still ...... wondering how some of you others would have handled this? Tom https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N994PT Here’s a couple screen shots taken, while sitting in the MSP Congo line yesterday morning, of the turbulence forecasts and pireps for altitudes near my intended flight.

What did you buy Ed! Tom

Well, two flights today pretty much blew away any validation to anything FLTPLAN.com is doing with my filed speeds. They were 57 MPH’s off (low) to my speed they “adjusted” BEFORE considering the 25 knot headwind (was actually off by 80 MPH). The return flight 6 hours later pretty much validated my “filed speeds” were right on the money. Guess time to inquire with FLTPLAN.com what’s going on or find a different flight planning program. Tom

We flew back from Spruce Creek (Daytona Beach, FL) this morning to the U.P., nonstop ....... with significant headwinds. I loved my Rocket, but could never have done that with 40-60 knot headwinds. Not with headwinds for sure (absent ferry tanks). So ....... wondering a couple things. It seems pretty consistent headwind forecasts on FLTPLAN.com are higher than forecasted. My flight should have been 4:05 hours and I gained 15 minutes of flight time based on much higher actual headwind component? Second item; my filed speed through FLTPLAN.com was 300 knots and Flight Aware shows it was 307 MPH (267 Knots)???? Evidenced by my screen shot of my filed plan with them and the Flight Aware data. Anyone know what’s going on there?? And no, I’m not complaining!!!! Just wondering what’s going on? Tom https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N994PT/history/20200219/1310Z/7FL6/KIMT

Jim, you showed up AFTER the photo shoot. As far as a get together, there was a memorial gathering the evening of the fatality. There MAY be another but at this time I’m not aware of one. Tom

These folks are in my backyard. They do a great job and are truly committed to making a great product for a really fair price. Tom

I’m really struggling holding back my thoughts. I spent considerable time talking with Bonney at the Mooney gathering at Spruce Creek in January. Being really busy, I neglected to post a story and a picture, MY FRIEND that attended the gathering, took at that event (with Bonney kneeling right beside me) of the whole group. I talked with her at length and she was proud to share that she owned the RV and her husband owned the Mooney. They were an Aviation loving couple living on one of the most amazing Airparks in the world. They epitomized US! I don’t disagree many of you have the right to discuss “what could have happened”. But the community down here at Spruce, (yes, I’m here now and knew about this before the first post), is devastated. Dennis was on the Association Board. I suggest we take speculations to the cause, supposedly done to “help us learn”, to a new topic and pay our sympathies and respects to their loss on this thread. How would you like your loved ones, left behind in YOUR FATAL ACCIDENT, seeing all this speculation to the loss of their family/friends in the light of some of these posts? I simply do not agree this thread deserves these posts! Tom

I bought my first Mooney with 1900 hours on the engine, for a deal. My mentor/flight instructor told me my best deal would be buy one with high engine time, don't pay for engine time YOU THINK you're going to get, and then not get it. We did a pre-purchase inspection. It looked pretty good and the compression's were decent. I immediately started my IFR training in it, lost no time to maintenance issues, and flew if for a few years before finding metal in the filter at exactly 2400 hours. I got 500 hours of engine time for free. I sold that plane with 850 hours on a Lycoming factory OH, and had I changed out the engine at time of purchase, the new engine would have been at 1350 hours (past the half way point to TBO). Don't be afraid of a high time engine. Just make sure you are not paying for useful engine time in the price either. And if you do buy with low to medium engine time...... cross your fingers you're not paying for engine life you may not get. Tom

EAA currently has a significant scholarship program as well. Tom

Not too bad for liability. Don’t even ask on full Hull coverage. Tom

Not in the least if you’re referring to me. All good! Tom

tmo, You keep this up you’re going to end up on my “I owe him a ride” List. Where you located? Tom

Actually at altitude I’m speed limited by Mach number. .57 to be precise. That fuel burn was high that trip. I normally am around 30 GPH at 300 knots TAS. I was at just under 20 GPH on my Rocket at 200 knots, plus I have much more range in the Lancair. Tom

My worst in my Mooney was coming back from Orlando to the U.P. about 15 years ago. Had decent tailwinds going down, knocked the trip out in 5 hours. Coming back I even delayed one day waiting for more friendly winds but they didn’t come. Saw 80 knots on the nose most the trip at 12k. What little we could gain going lower I would have lost in TAS anyway. Stopped for our SECOND fuel stop (never had to that before or after again) and the line guy asked how was your flight? I said it sucked with the headwinds. He says “what you complaining about, I was watching you on Flight Aware and you had 10 knots on the Pilatus that just stopped before you “. Took us well over 10 hours to get home.