ragedracer1977

So just a long overdue update to this post. I HAVE DME!!! When we were replacing the throttle cable, I noticed that the CDI was in fact the IDME-895. So, it should have been working. @N201MKTurbo climbed up under the panel and started poking around. He discovered that the BNC cable to the CDI was simply not plugged in. Oops. Tested it today and it works great, with one caveat. There is supposed to be a DME displayed on the CDI, but it’s not working. Not sure if it’s the LED that’s burnt out or what. The info displays properly on the radio, so that’s cool.

The mixture was replaced in 2011 or thereabouts. At least according to the label on it. Same as the prop control.

It's fixed. $417 from Lasar. I did the work, supervised by an A&P. It was not the most enjoyable thing I've ever done.

Seeing how it works, even if you twisted it, it would just spin. Shouldn't hurt the cable, but who knows. No sign of any problem. Just a clean break of the cable right where it's crimped into the knob.

That is surprising. I can put 480lbs in the front seats with full fuel and zero ballast in the back seats, luggage compartment, or hat rack. If I put 120lbs of ballast in the baggage compartment, I can put 540 lbs in the front, full fuel, and be within limits

Went to go for a flight yesterday. Just planned on refining power setting for my upcoming instrument check ride. Pumped the throttle for start and.... I don’t think this is supposed to happen.. Better to happen on the ground, I suppose.... Pushed her back in the hangar and got to work. If I never have to do that again it will be too soon. Shipping the cable off to McFarlane this am.

I did! There was definitely some gunk. I scrubbed it all out with water and rags. I cleaned everything I could get to. It’s sure a lot easier with the seats out

The shoulder straps are mounted to the bottom of the seat, come up over the top of the seat, then the lap belt threads through and buckles.

I have 4 point harnesses.

My belts are attached to the seats and identical side to side.

My kids ate chips in the back seat and made a mess. No more food in the plane lol. I pulled both seats, the back seat, lifted up the carpet and vacuumed up probably 2lbs of dust and grit and junk. I completely filled a little hand vac up with stuff. It was pretty gross actually. Behind the side panel below the door was, no joke, close to a roll of dried up crusty duct tape. It was just weird. It wasn’t taped to anything, just in there. I also ended up swapping seats left to right, mostly because the pilot side was starting to get a little worn on the seatback corner from putting hands on it getting in and out. Cleaned and lubricated the rollers and rails. There was a lot of grit and grime in the rails. First time I slid it back afterwards I almost went through the back of the plane It was an afternoon well spent.

So does mine-we should have the same service manual.

I would let Troy work on my plane any day of the week, without question.

I really like Troy. He’s a great guy. I’ve spent time turning wrenches with him. He’s gotten me out of bad spot by flying to me. I have zero doubt in his abilities and attention to detail. That said, keep in mind it won’t be Troy doing your annual. It will be other A&P’s who may not be as good and knowledgeable as he is, and you might get your plane back in worse condition than when you left it. You might find that stuff they said was done, wasn’t. You might find cut probe wires. You might find baffling not reinstalled properly and ground into the ring gear on your prop.

I’ll go with you! I’ve got the gun and radio.

If memory serves, those guys were hunting the Alaska backcountry. Left something in the plane and a bear decided he wanted it. Tore the hell out of it and they were able to patch it up with duct tape to get out and home. edit. Yup. Damage was way worse than I remembered. Bear even ate the tires! http://www.viralforest.com/this-pilots-airplane-was-attacked-by-a-bear-but-he-repaired-the-whole-thing-with-duct-tape/

I immediately thought that too! My plane originally came with visors, but they're long gone. I wonder if that's what they looked like

There's a '57 A model at my home field. It's a wood wing plane with fabric covered flaps and ailerons. It's actually in pretty good shape. The tail has been replaced with metal.

Looks like it! Found some more panel shots of 61 B here: http://moonjetgroup.com/product/vintage-mooney/

I thought a D as well, but it does have a prop control. It’s the knob just to the right of his hand. The mixture is up high near the key. My Mooney is a 63 and came from the factory with a panel mounted clock.

I think the hole in the middle is a cigarette lighter

Pretty sure the view out the windscreen is photoshopped in, but the rest of the pic screams Mooney of some sort.

Found this picture over on Reddit. We’re all trying to figure out what model it is. The mixtures control is at the top of the panel in the middle, the fuel gauge (appears to be just one) only says main. I’ve never seen a panel like it, but it sure appears to be a Mooney.

THOMAS C. RICHARDS,Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, Complainant, Docket SE-10306 v. JOHN L. HAMMERSTRAND, Respondent. 2. Absence of an installed clock. The Administrator charged that respondent operated the aircraft under IFR when he did not have the required clock installed in the instrument panel. The law judge agreed, rejecting respondent's arguments that a passenger had a watch with the same required functions (hours, minutes, and seconds), another instrument in the aircraft could substitute for the clock, and the weather was VFR. On appeal, respondent repeats the last claim, noting correctly that VFR operations do not require the clock. Respondent continues to ignore, however, the fact that the regulation requires the installed clock whenever IFR operations are conducted, and the record demonstrates that respondent obtained and used an IFR clearance when he left Gillespie Field. Tr. at 35-36, 114. 6 Whether respondent actually needed such a clearance is immaterial to the §§ 91.33(a) and 91.165 violations,as are the weather conditions at the time.7Moreover, there is unrebutted evidence that the absence of the clock made the cases cited there (a violation of an operational FAR regulation is sufficient to support a finding of a "residual" or "derivative" § 91.9 violation). It is not clear from the record whether the condition of the TC violated § 91.33(a) as well. We need not decide this question, as that violation is otherwise established. See ¶ 2, infra. 6 See also Tr. at 213-214. Respondent's testimony can be read to admit this point but it is confusing and we do not rely on it. 7 See Administrator v. Ewing, 1 NTSB 1192, 1194 (1971) ("it is well settled that the Board does not have authority to pass on the reasonableness or validity of FAA regulations"). 8 aircraft unairworthy in violation of § 91.29. Tr. at 51.8

I don't believe they are.