PT20J

If faced with this I would get steel plates and have tie down rings welded in the center and then stack concrete blocks on it like the Alpha Aviation portable tail weight (but without the post). 4x8x16" blocks are 30 lb each. So, the one in the picture (including the weight of the steel) is about 500#.

Best economy is always LOP. The Mooney power chart showing numbers for 25 ROP, indicates that’s an economy cruise setting. Mooney never said it was best economy. EDIT: Looks like I was mistaken. Although the power table doesn’t say best economy, the text and range charts do.

Another instructor and I used to fly together monthly and we always completed the tasks and signed each other off for an IPC afterwards.

I believe that George Braly has shown that peak pressure occurs at about peak CHT. The shape of the power curve as a function of mixture strength is not obvious. LOP it is driven by thermodynamics. ROP it is driven by combustion chemistry. What George has done is explained it in terms of peak pressure as a function of crankshaft angle which is more easily visualized. Peak EGT occurs at the stoichiometric mixture where all fuel and all oxygen molecules should combine. This never happens in a practical engine because the mixture isn't perfectly homogeneous and there isn't enough time for the reaction between the hydrocarbons and the oxygen (which actually involves a number of intermediate reactions) to complete. What does occur at this mixture is high temperature. The high temperature causes chemical dissociation of the combustion products that frees up additional oxygen. This is why a slightly richer mixture (which provides additional fuel to combine with the freed up oxygen) produces higher power and higher CHT at the max CHT mixture. Adding yet more fuel actually cools the mixture but adds more substance to the cylinder which expands during the power stroke providing more power at the max power mixture.

Every place I go there is only one fuel available at the airport, so it's effectively an monopoly now. There is nothing preventing a GAMI competitor from coming up with a competing product. GA is the last major contributor of lead in the environment. There is no established safe amount of lead exposure. But even if it was not a health issue, it is not particularly good for engines. I'm looking forward to getting rid of it. I'm familiar with RHV. I go back to when Zoe Lofgren was a council member representing that district. The airport is surrounded by low income housing with families that benefit none from the airport but are affected by the noise, fear of off airport "landings" and lead contamination. Yes, they would like the airport gone. It's the same everywhere that housing has developed near airports. Removing the lead won't make the issue moot, but it will at least remove on argument against the airport while improving the health of our engines.

The trucks are loaded from the larger storage tanks. I get it. You don't want the government to force you to pay more for an environmentally superior product when there is a cheaper alternative. That's OK. A lot of people will agree with you. But we should remember that one role of government is to moderate market forces which if left unchecked will tend to concentrate wealth to the detriment of the greater good.

Mooney used two different Whelen bulb/sockets. The original bi-pin is obsolete but there are purveyors on eBay that have new/old stock. The newer wedge base bulb is available last time I checked. So, the first thing to determine is which socket you have in your airplane.

Here's what I don't comprehend: How many FBOs have an extra tank for a second fuel? How many would pay to install one for the few years that we have two fuels available? If there were two available and the G100UL is more expensive, how many owners would pay the premium? If G100UL cuts into 100LL sales, how many refineries would stop producing it? Ditto with the one company that still makes TEL.

They are in the IPC. Air intake is 2700, cowling uses 4002. Look on the heads of the existing camlocs for the little number which specifies the length. Length can vary from IPC due to variation in thickness of the cowling.

Pretty sure they are epoxy primed steel. The thickness is specified in the SB. The hole diameter is set by the bolt and would be the same as an AN960 washer. From Vance's video in the original post the function is clear (to restrict the twisting motion of the Heim bearings) and the outer diameter can be estimated. You could probably make them by modifying some AN970 washer to reduce diameter and thickness.

Mooney had different versions of the power charts in different POH versions. Who knows why? Here’s one that shows 2500 rpm. I use 2500 most of the time. Bob Kromer (former factory test pilot) has written that the prop on the J was optimized for 2500 rpm.

Probably obvious, but make sure the fuel tanks are balanced. To be sure, I’d start with full tanks.

I know most here think a Mooney is just about perfect, but realistically it has flaws like everything else. We get mad at FBOs for damaging our poorly designed nose gear. There are at least three businesses that specialize in sealing Mooney fuel tanks and they do a booming business. The design of the wing makes the integrity of the seal strongly dependent upon the skill of the person applying it. From a process control standpoint, that’s going to introduce a lot of variation in the result.

Transitions are never completely smooth. We got the lead out of mogas decades ago. We will get the lead out of avgas. Lead is bad for people and engines. Getting rid of it eliminates an argument against GA used by groups that just don’t like little airplanes.

That’s correct. For the M20J for instance, the TCDS states 64 gal and the POH states 66.5 total, 64 usable.

OP is just reposting an item from NASA Callback summary of ASRS reports. No way to tell location because these are deidentified. Hopefully, the reporter also filed a SDR with the FAA.

Check the TCDS

Try Novus plastic polish. Micro-mesh if it's too deep for the Novus. Work a much larger area than the defect to blend repair so that you don't created a wavy spot. https://www.amazon.com/NOVUS-PK1-8OZ-PM-Plastic-Scratch-Remover-Bottles/dp/B0029B518O/ref=sr_1_5?crid=2ACXNZG8Q3I5U&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xhC6gaULd5ZtKOfVkF6ulyiuvtq03bY7QVM0_Fixf6ferCEsiVxOEt-l_I_3hc-336uyx_fTgst-lAti01_aS2PBia9s67VUGwORbrZpm37bTtCF96Qi9j_j1K3b6KYcAPwaEHFQPfWhh1eJCMLQ37UI0vzmAeaOoboDEebZ21p19dE37utUg-ARE194AqsOi4PCb8xw8LhoDfCEdOW9qh4CxLvnpvc0HxnmYp16KnOfg3VGh8AozNcvpleDAgeI079bY4dTzCkefTZRR2_qZKmNC1FXqG1787W7wTvbn8VtLIV-BZwQmy5mVAgxD4DkLeUd5UA0DE8pY4BlrDon3yze8SrfiviT3mV-ilWHNJG0ognKrfKTpY02-WC6w8Z_kXJs5b5tcsYAYFR3WC62CtKNVuCN95gQEUhyawnjA095vZ0uAePmHD6yLeO_5Fhq.S_2wUyXcF0u5aeDXwxq7k8j0mhJu4Ax_f3Ea1i0pxZ0&dib_tag=se&keywords=novus&qid=1734479554&sprefix=novus%2Caps%2C198&sr=8-5 https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/cspages/micromeshstd.php?clickkey=11681

I asked Bob Kromer and he said that his recollection was that the original M20K test pilot thought that the pitch change with flap retraction might be too much for the average pilot using 15 degrees. This makes sense. The CG is more forward in the K than the J which should increase the pitching moment as the center of lift moves with retraction. Takeoff flaps don't have much affect on the coefficient of lift: the reduction in stall speed is only about a knot from flaps up for either the J or K. The primary effect would seem to be to create a lower nose attitude. The Mooney flaps have longer span that many comparable designs, and since they affect more of the wing, they have a greater increase in lift coefficient than others -- but only when fully extended.

I mounted a Guardian CO detector there.

I'm not doubting you. But, I asked @mooniac58 and here's his reply: The person that created the thread decided to delete it apparently. The person that starts a topic "owns" that topic and can remove it if they choose to. Since you have contacted him, perhaps he can explain the discrepancy. Skip

Nice.

Craig says original thread was deleted by its creator.

Ashby makes fiberglass glare shields. Available from Aircraft Spruce. https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/appages/ashbyglareshields.php?clickkey=6153