Schllc

What physically occurs in these zones that causes damage is what I meant. For example, excessive rop operations can fry a turbo if you aren’t careful, it also fouls plugs and exhaust valves. What kinds of things happen in lop? I am really curious about this, you guys have so many more years of experience with these engines and aviation than I do, and I am very eager to benefit from that experience. I have always approached the lop vs rop argument from a simple physics perspective. Engine care is about heat management, period. I think genesis of the conventional wisdom/proponents about/of rop was a combination of ignorance (not stupidity), and inability to really monitor what your engine was doing. An analog gauges that shows the temperature of the hottest probe doesn’t tell you if three probes have failed…. Most people that own planes are people of means, not wealth perhaps but means…But being wealthy doesn’t make you smart, or conscientious. I have flown with people in brand new planes that had complete unawareness of what they were doing to their engine. One idled at 1600rpm all the way from startup to the hold short and when I asked him why, he said “this engine loves fuel”.. uhhhhh ok My point is, I haven’t really found anything that tells me how running lop can damage an engine, and I really don’t understand the debate. I realize it can be done safely, but at least in my plane gaining 5-8 knots for an additional 4 gallons per hour, only to have the belly white from burnt fuel in the exhaust, fouled plugs, and 30-50deg hotter cylinder head temps isn’t worth it. Reliability and longevity are the only thing I care about with regard to engine management. I would like to know what I’m risking lop, out of the box, in the box… What happens out of the box? Please don’t take this as an argument, it’s a sincere question. I don’t understand, other than fuel exhaustion, how you can hurt the engine. I don’t care if I convince anyone of anything, just want to take care of my plane the best way I can

There are so many variables, not just related to vg’s but general plane rigging, trueness, weight, etc that drilling down that close is really difficult. I’ll tell you this though, I’ve had a few ovations, and 191kts TAS was not typical at any altitude or power setting. Alan must have one of those magic O’s. Hang on to that one!!!

What physically occurs in an engine that is damaged by less fuel than oxygen in the combustion cycle? lower power obviously, but the product of this is lower egt’s and cht’s. how can this damage the engine? Can you explain how an engine can be damaged by lop? I have only owned continental io550’s and tsio550’s and I have never had to replace a cylinder, do valve or piston work or any major engine work and I fly almost exclusively lop. I also know most of the people that bought my previous planes and they all fly lop and haven’t had issues either. I know this is a small sample so the question isn’t intended to be combative, it’s serious.

ALL ATC communications are recorded. No way this kind of interaction wouldn’t be recorded. I have not heard enough to believe this was a stunt, but no way I believe the passenger had zero experience.

It is not a stretch at all for someone willing to learn. I bought my first ovation with about 40 hours and a few weeks before I took my pp check ride. I flew dual with an instructor for about 25 hours, by myself for about 10, the. Another 20 or so with other pilots until my confidence and proficiency grew. The only thing I would do differently if I could, would be to buy it before I started training for my ppl It’s more to manage and it feels overwhelming at first, but 7 years and 1200 hours later, so is every new plane I get into.

I was reminded by another mooneyspace member, that there are approximately 420ish legacy g1000 Mooney’s. If Mooney’s portion of that was only 5k each, that would amount to over 2,000,000 in revenue and a rejuvenated interest in the airframe because it’s modernized. Not to mention if the service center did the installs, there would be all the ancillary work, and parts, around these upgrades. About 100 of the 420 have stecs, some may choose to upgrade to the gfc700, etc. If Mooney then certified the nxi for the pre ultra airframe, how much more would it take for non glass panel planes to get the retrofit? There a lot more than 420 of those! Aerostar Aircraft has stayed in business for over 40 years without making aircraft, and with a much smaller fleet. Engage, innovate, and offer a value to the existing owners. Push forward with the gross weight increase, and landing gear! Mooney owners are very fervent in their (our) love for the planes, it’s like the landcruiser and bmw groups. They go to great lengths to preserve these fine pieces of machinery. Tap into that and it would be work for years to come…

@Jonny If Mooney wanted to create some cash flow, take advantage of this market and stimulate greater interest in Mooney going forward, you would work with garmin for a path to nxi for the fleet of g1000 planes. That’s easy money and would rejuvenate the long body fleet. it would be a slam dunk for every non Waas g1000 plane out there.

Stock? Probably not. However, if they started something like a “preferred service plan”, and got enough enough owners or shops to participate, I would be seriously interested. For example: $1,000 annually would give you tech support on the phone for issues, priority for scheduling service, maybe a 10% discount on parts. Perhaps even some mobile service available to members only (at market rates of course) All the service, repairs and parts would also be additional. If 1,000 owners participated in the plan it would generate $1,000,000 annually to the service/parts dept. Perhaps an initial offering of five years for $4,000 that would be transferable with the plane? Before I get flamed too bad for this suggestion …. The numbers I propose are arbitrary, perhaps different tiers would be feasible…maybe a different amount would be more attractive. It just seems to me that it’s the interest of Mooney owners to make sure their planes aren’t orphaned. This isn’t about charity, I would look at it more like an insurance policy. With residual income Mooney could actually stock parts, procure materials and forecast. it’s unconventional for sure, but it would be easy enough for them to come up with an amount needed to launch this kind of a program, solicit input and commitments and implement once the goal is achieved, or just return all the deposits if not met. it’s obvious something outside the box needs to be done, because the traditional model just isn’t viable anymore.

No argument for that, I just have not been as lucky sealing the door. I have added weather stripping, I’ve changed door seals, I’ve paid a MSC to tweak the doors. I haven’t had anyone successfully stop the minor leaking that presents in cruise. If I could solve it with the 3m I’d be extremely happy…. Only one of them leaked water when it rained on the ramp so I thought I was doing pretty well! I really think it’s either the luck of the draw, a whole lot of persistence that eliminates the drafts, or maybe both…. I wouldn’t say most of them were troublesome, just something you could hear. When you tape the doors it’s 100% effective for the noise, so on a long trip, it’s the backup plan…

Easier way to rule out the door is to tape it up from the inside using blue painters tape. I have never been in a Mooney that doesn’t have some noise from the door. some worse than others, and I’m not saying every single one, but the 20+ I’ve been in all made noise. even the two ultra’s I’ve owned (now it’s two doors to leak) I just carry a roll of tape all the time and if I’m taking a long trip I tape ‘‘em off. It’s not classy but it works!

Just this morning I ordered parts direct from Textron, via their website. This was what was explained to me when I asked Mooney the same question. Can't claim to be an expert on these things, just repeating what I was told by the factory.... Could it have to do with who makes the part or what the part is?

My understanding is that they cannot do this for liability reasons. It certainly isn't to make it difficult or frustrate owners. its to maintain traceabilty and avoid liability for unauthorized or owner repairs.

The mooney service center would be my preference for any repairs or service to my plane. The people there love mooney's, they care, and they are down to earth rock solid folks. I have nothing but good things to say, and if you need an annual or service, you are missing a great opportunity if you don't check with Mooney to see if they can fit you in. If we get enough business going in an and out we can probably find a lot of ride sharing... I will bring mine in for annual when do for sure.

the vision jet may be the ugliest plane ever designed. it looks like a big toe. the TBM would be awesome, but multiplying my ownership expense by 5x doesn't really make sense for my mission, (or my wallet).

No baron is as fast as my Mooney! buy an acclaim!

I have not, I have said if I ever have to open a wing for a fuel gauge problem I would do it while I was in there. but ive been lucky enough so far to not need that step. I have read a lot of good reviews.

Good article, even with the green hyperbole….. Attacking people for property tax forgiveness is a canard. The credits are predicated on the taxes of the developed property, not the vacant, and likely agricultural zoned land it was before development. In exchange, the recipient provides billions over the decade to the local economy. They do this through direct spending, jobs, infrastructure improvements and also spends hundreds of millions developing the property, which also goes directly into the local economy. Land values increase, the economy grows and the locals see more amenities. Municipalities literally fight over who can give more to attract these types of companies because the benefit is so great. When journalists attack the companies after by suggesting they got gifts or handouts is dishonest at best. It was a negation that always provides enormous benefits to the local economy, and more often than not in perpetuity.

Aside from when I topped off my Monroys, and by topping off, I mean going from tank to tank three or four times to let the fuel settle, I NEVER knew how much fuel I had. the reason was mostly because you don’t want to carry fuel, so you put 10 gal here, 25gal there and eventually you forget to update the totalizer until after starting, and you’re back to guessing. im always overly cautious when taking fuel (by cautious I mean I take more), so I never even come close to fuel exhaustion, but my anal retentive nature didn’t like knowing down to .1 gallons. The totalizers on all of my Mooney’s have been far more accurate than any of the gauges. It is fun reading the poh supplement regarding the LR tanks while flying tho! That being said, if you need the capacity it is an awesome upgrade, and… I think if the day ever comes that we get the UL increase with new gear, Mooney’s with LR tanks are going to be even more coveted than they currently are.

I had a pair of don’s in one of my planes. Once I acclimated to them, I like them a lot. However, I still prefer just carrying several precut pieces of static cling tint. It never gets in the way, is easy to move, and stows very quickly and easily.

Scannable Document on Mar 8, 2021 at 9_50_13 AM.pdf

I am also predominantly a flat lander, and year before last I flew my turbo all over the northwest. Most places that are paved, take into account the elevation, and have longer runways. what was a challenge for me was remembering to check the elevation of the airport to adjust my pattern altitude. I got very accustomed to the field elevation being irrelevant in planning. When I checked my atis and frequencies for landing I would write down what my 1000’ above field elevation would be so I didn’t have to look, or think about it on approach. The highest field I landed at was just below 8000 and while things “feel” a little different, in a turbo, all your critical numbers are the same so it didn’t affect me as much as I thought it would. the year before that we did much of the same trip in a NA 180 tail dragger, that was night and day different.

I have some notes at home regarding these numbers but Im pretty sure it’s right in the sweet spot, 32.8gpm at wot.

So this being the seventh long body Mooney that I have owned, I am well aware of the hot #5 challenge. All but one of my planes has had this, 730ml temps were the best. When I got that one the temps were so low and even I was convinced for hours something was wrong with it! a few of the others had a hot #5, and one of the ovations mysteriously received the pixie hole, The temp differential on that one wasn’t real bad and I don’t know if the hole made any difference to be honest. my current ride appears to be the worst one of the bunch. I really struggle to keep #5 under 400 but it isn’t possible to keep under 380 as I prefer unless I climb at less than 400fpm. it remains the hot cylinder in all phases of flight regardless of power, prop or mixture settings. it does not exceed 375 in level flight but even low power settings display a temp much hotter than I am accustomed to and would prefer. the plane is very new, 170 hours only and all baffling and cowling is tight and tidy. not sure where to start to see if I can fix this. Any suggestions , other than the pixie hole? having owned several other acclaims without this modification, and without the temperature issue so I know it’s achievable without modifying the aluminum baffle.

I have those moments too, about the turbine lancair, but it’s ironic that almost every time I have the regret and go back to look I see one that had another gear collapse. I then look at that flimsy looking set of bent paper clips, and then the side stick and I get happy about my Mooney again. I know my aversion to the side stick is irrational, but it just doesn’t feel right…. if I ever had a million or so to waste I would put a turbine on a Mooney. im still surprised that someone tinkered with a bonanza turbine mod before a Mooney…. (Not trying to open that thread again btw) I think electronic ignition on our engines will eventually be bulletproof as well, but as a few already pointed out, there just aren’t enough numbers to make it happen quickly. they probably made more Toyota gold Camrys last year than all ga piston planes ever made… as soon as one of these upstarts gets it 90% there, continental or lycoming will buy it, perfect it, and then install it standard.

So the bracket apparently is supposed to rotate like this to accommodate the arc of the throttle cable. The issue was actually a piece of rtv that broke free and got wedged on the linkage, so when I went to idle on the throttle it bound up on the sealant. I am still a little confused as to why there isn’t a bracket for the cable, but since I’m not really able to change it, and it’s on the other two acclaims I looked at today, I guess it is what it is…