0TreeLemur

Very clever. I've been thinking about a solution on the J model. I like this, but on the J there is no drain hole. I was thinking about something like an engine hoist, but not so heavy.

It's gotta be a known shop. That's the rub.

I agree with this. From experience, a pre-buy that turns into an annual performed by a neutral A&P/IA is the way to go. As airworthiness items arise, the selling price can be adjusted. A pre-buy that doesn't look in enough detail for those winds up costing the buyer money.

Thank you for sharing. Fantastic Mooney trip!

If you use google to search this site using prompts like: "prebuy site:mooneyspace.com" you will read some very nice stories, and some horror stories. Usually the horror stories start out just like your original post, followed by a bunch of warnings. Sometimes it all works out. It is a fact that wood wings present a unique set of challenges. It is hard today to find shops/mechanics that know much about Mooney's, much less the challenges presented by wood and fabric. Most of them are retired, about to retire, or gone. It is also a fact that a 64 year old airplane with only 2600 hours total time has sat for extended periods. After about 500 hours of sitting idle (3 weeks), the thin film of protective oil on important engine parts such as the camshaft dissipates, exposing metal to air and potentially water vapor. Corrosion can result. It's best to run the engine every two-three weeks, or install an engine dehumidifier. Unless you are independently wealthy and have money to spend on fixing up an outdated antique aircraft, and will enjoy doing so, you will probably not enjoy owning an airplane that you cannot afford to own. If you have the resources and need reliable transportation for regular use, spend as much as you can to get the aircraft you need. We don't buy airplanes to save money. We buy airplanes to save time.

Thanks for your reply Rob. There were a few strikes within 50 NM, but not many. I was mostly surprised because IIRC the WX10A stores strike range & azimuth for the last 256 strikes in memory and re-scales depending on the max. range setting. At both 50 NM and 25 NM ranges, the display showed nothing. I powered it off/on at the 50 NM range and it gave me kind of a funny "+" shaped display on the CRT that faded away. It seemed to work fine at 100 or 200 NM ranges all day. At 100 and 200 NM ranges everything looked fine. Maybe I just don't worry about it? I did have Nexrad up on my iPad, and everything made sense that I was seeing. The controller was Johnny on the spot with some suggested headings to avoid the heavy precip. He sent me towards some nasty looking wx on the iPad that had moved/or died out since the last refresh, which was usually less than 5 minutes. It was a fun trip.

Howdy all. On an IFR trip last week the WX10A stormscope indicated an issue. I was using it to help avoid embedded convection in a broad region of stratiform rain from just west of the Mississippi River and over most of Arkansas. The Stormscope seemed to work fine at 100 and 200 NM range settings, and generally agreed with what I was seeing on FIS-B. However at 50 and 25 NM range it displayed no lightning. There were some strikes within 50 miles according to what I saw at 100 mile range. I'm wondering if this is most likely a problem with the display or the processor? I'm guessing that it is probably the processor. Anyone have any experience with this? The ZME controller I was talking to was extremely helpful in avoidance based on his radar info.

TCL is on the list. I'm based at TCL, and have never (yet) received a bill. Either they don't charge for light GA, or they are saving up the charges to send me a new years present!

The person who posted the video believes that under hist test conditions, intermittent wetting and evaporation of G100UL seems to concentrate the component of the fuel that is more aggressive towards paint. Sadly, that's a Mooney with a leaky tank.

I agree that it is weird to have to ask ATC for clarification. Standard phrases should be the only thing that comes out of their mouths when giving us direction. It's their job! The use of non-standard phrases creates all kinds of uncertainty. After a handoff last Saturday from Ft. Worth Center to Memphis Center, a controller said to me "3514 Greenville Altimeter 3024". That left me in a lurch, puzzling over what the heck than meant... I should have spoken up with something- I'm still at a loss. Maybe "repeat last message"? A minute later he asked me if I was squawking 3514. I think he forgot to key the mic at the beginning where he said "Reset transponder..."

This morning I saw an article on AvWeb saying that the FBO in Tupelo, MS, has received a shipment of G100UL. That's about 1 Mooney hour from my home field and the first outside California. I'm G100UL curious, but the left tank in my J leaks when over about 15 gallons and in that condition I'm unwilling to think about putting it in until this potential compatibility issue is resolved. I don't want to be an experiment... BTW I've contacted the company that resealed the tanks in 2018 about getting it patched, but haven't had a chance to get the aircraft to them.

Low flow in the Mississippi River seen this evening. An upstream moving tow dodging many exposed river training works under a cold sky.

I don't know about legality- but it will fly and I'd bet you won't be able to tell the difference. BTW, I've heard tell from an anonymous source that a M20J will fly without the belly panels, and its hard to tell except for the increased noise. It wasn't me.

Agree. Lycoming documentation is inconsistent over LOP ops. The power table that @PT20J posted for the M20J says that best economy occurs 25F ROP, while the O-360 chart he provided in his last post shows the best economy range LOP. Aside from fuel injection, they are in many ways the same engine, right? I'd wager that nobody would recommend running an engine 25F ROP except at MPs that result in less than about 70% power.

I find it surprising here that this data sheet says that best economy is 25F ROP. I'd wager that at MP>23" for a NA IO-360 that's in the red box. I recall reading somewhere that to stay out of the red box for ROP ops, you need to be at least 80F ROP at 75% power?

As stated before, there are many reasons to lean in the climb. Provided that you have an engine monitor that displays EGT and CHT for each cylinder, there is very little risk. On the other hand, not leaning and running way rich invites creation of carbon deposits that can glow and act like little spark plugs and cause pre-ignition. Notice your EGTs the next time you take off. That's the full power EGT target. Mine is 1270F. As you climb, slowly lean once every couple of minutes to re-establish that EGT target. Watch your CHT's. If your engine has good cooling air distribution they will stay below 400F. In my J they only climb to about 390F in the summer and 350F in the winter while leaning in the climb this way. If your CHTs start to reach or exceed 400F, then richen it up a bit. By maintaining the EGT target, you are still running quite far ROP. In my J, 1270F is about 200F ROP because my cruise max. power EGT's up high tend to be about 1470F.

That's what I do. My takeoff EGT (full power, mixture rich, ff~19 gph) is 1270F. I lean in the climb several times to re-establish that target. Probably saves a gallon of fuel on a climb up to 10,000 from sea level. Why not?

I just love the reflection on the wing in this shot taken somewhere over Arkansas today flying through the tops after passing through a cold front on my way west to New Mexico.

Noctilucent chemtrails?

I've been doing a deep dive on this very topic lately. Today on a 7-1/2 hour cross country I experimented with some of my notions. I've learned that: 1. Propeller technology is mature. Since WWII all constant speed propellers in wide use have efficiencies that vary from about 81-85% over the RPM range from 2200-2700 rpm. The efficiency doesn't vary that much. From 2300-2600 RPM it varies only from about 83-85% 2. There are three ways to change the amount of power that an IO-360 produces: RPM, MP, FF. Lycoming engine manuals vary the heck out of RPM and MP, but only provide data at maximum power mixture, which is not where we usually run them. 3. Pumping loss within the engine at high rpm are significant. Running an engine at high rpm has a cost. More energy is lost in the induction and exhaust systems with higher mass flow rates, probably proportional to mass flow rate squared. 4. At higher altitudes for normally-aspirated (NA) engines, you must increase RPM to increase engine power because of the reduction in MP with altitude. I had several legs today, and here's what I tried, with the notion that 65% power (130 HP) offers a nice compromise on speed and fuel consumption when running LOP: Leg 1- 4000 ft. Set MP at 24". Did the big mixture pull (back to about 8.5 gph)- at this point with 24" MP the engine is pretty deep LOP. Reduced rpm to get about 60% power indication on the JPI (I know, it's not perfect, but hey- it is an indication). That resulted in about 2360 rpm. Used the Lean Find function on the JPI to operate at peak EGT (ff=8.7 gpm). That increased the power indication on the JPI to about 64%. Leg 2 - 6500 ft. WOT. Pulled mixture back to a ff of about 8 gph. Set RPM to 60% power on JPI- about 2450 RPM, then used LF to set to max EGT (ff=8.6 gph). Resulting power indication on JPI 65%. Leg 3 - 8500 ft. WOT. Pulled mixture back to ff=7.6 gph. Set RPM to 60% power on JPI, about 2550 RPM. Used LF to set max EGT (ff=8.4 gph). Resulting power indication: 63% (ish). increased RPM to about 2580 and that made JPI indicated power about 65%. This last result means that it won't be possible to use RPM to adjust to 65% running at peak EGT much above 8500 ft because I don't think cruising with RPM above 2600 makes much sense because of the increased pumping loss, and the fact that at the high end of the rpm range the efficiency starts to drop off pretty rapidly. At no point during these settings did the cylinder head temps do anything unusual. Typ. 340-360F with cowl flaps closed. OAT ranged from 11 to 3 C. Oddly enough flying west from Alabama to New Mexico I had a tailwind for all but the first two hours. Averaged about 17 MPG.

If you can feel a scratch with your fingernail, you cannot polish it out without altering the optics of your windshield. Auto detailers removing deep scratches in plexiglas windows will use a random orbital sander with sandpaper to remove material over the entire window to the depth of the scratch, then use successively finer polishes/pads to clear the window up. There is a good video on youtube that shows exactly how to do it. The problem with this is approach is that it makes the window thinner, probably not good for an aircraft windshield. I did use this approach to remove a couple of deep scratches from one of my side windows and it worked like a charm. It took guts to apply sandpaper to the window and it looked like holy hell after I went over it. But the Novus polish system cleared it using a finishing pad on the random orbital. After that I used the Novus system and finishing pad to polish all my windows, including the windshield. Aside from that one deep scratch it looks new. Luckily that deep scratch is on the co-pilot's side and easy for me to ignore.

I believe it was Mooney test pilot Bill Wheat who wrote (somewhere) to the effect of "The takeoff trim setting requires the pilot to just slightly pull back on the yoke to lift off." That's the way it was designed. One could speculate that this is safer, because it requires pilot input to become airborne, which will happen when the pilot determines that the ship has enough forward speed to safely take to the air. Makes sense, no?

The wisdom of what these folks have written in response to your question is priceless. This is the value of MooneySpace. A lot of experience here. Take advantage of it.

I've seen videos on Reddit where counter-drone technology involving a drone that drops a net on another drone. The US Military can't even do that as part of CONUS force protection?! The way drones have changed warfare suggests that the US Military needs to completely reevaluate their weapons acquisition programs. When a $1000 drone can take out a $35,000,000 fighter on the ramp, that's some mighty asymmetric warfare.

I didn't watch the video and saved minutes of my life to do something else! Unpainted metal is the requirement. I too use the tow-bar hole in the nose gear.