PT20J

Yep. It's a loading limitation to limit the bending moment at the wing attach points.

Ron, This makes sense. I was thinking about the hinge line, but the mean chord line is more apropos. If I did the calculation correctly, a 2900 lb Mooney at 70 knots would need a CL of about 1.0 which looks to be about 7.5 deg AOA for a 632215 airfoil which might be close to the sweep of the mean chord line. (I’m making a first order assumption here that the nose up trim incidence at the tail approximately matches the wing incidence and neglecting downwash and other airflow disturbances at the vertical stabilizer location) Not clear about this -- wouldn't a spanwise flow component on the control surface reduce effectiveness either way? Skip

Might be a bit faster, because if you look at all the irregularities in the metal wing, it’s doubtful if there is any significant laminar flow. North American couldn’t get laminar flow on the P51 wing unless they bondo-ed it, and a P-51 wing has a lot less surface irregularity than the Mooney wing. The PA28 series utilizes a laminar flow airfoil, and no one claims them to be a speedsters. It turns out that true laminar flow requires a smoothness unobtainable with standard metal wing manufacturing processes. Al’s original wood wing may have been smooth enough, but clearly Harmon was concerned more with strength. The Mooney airfoils are decades old from the NACA catalog whereas I believe the Cirrus uses a modern custom airfoil designed by airfoil guru John Roncz. So, maybe a new wing could be better designed and thick enough to enclose the main wheels too. But the big problem would be weight. Composite structures are usually heavier than corresponding structures built of aluminum. Skip

Water would sink to the bottom of the float bowl. Looking at the docs @Skates97 supplied, the outlet for the main metering system and the idle system both come from the bottom of the bowl, so the water should affect both idle and higher powers. Also, you said still had idle issues after running at higher power for enough time to exhaust any water. Hard to imagine how something would get past the carb inlet finger screen, the float needle valve, the metering jet and the get stuck in the idle system and then find it’s way out again. I had a stuck float once on a Beaver and it wouldn’t idle, but would run well at higher powers. I also had a carburetor come loose on a Beaver (apparently it wasn’t torqued properly) and it created enough of an induction leak that it idled poorly but ran OK at higher powers. I would check the security of everything in carburetor/induction system before flying it just to be sure nothing’s loose. Might be worthwhile to leak check the induction tubes. Skip

The original issue had to do with concern over elevator position when trimmed for cruise, which was probably normal. However, your point is well taken. The Mooney control system has a lot of bearings and rod ends and if these are not kept well lubricated they can add friction (which increases breakout forces) and wear (which causes lost motion and a dead zone around the trim point). The aileron push-pull tubes pass through guide blocks which should also be kept lubricated to reduce friction. Lubricate the rod ends with Tri-Flow which dries to form a dry teflon coating that does not attract dirt; oil attracts and retains dirt which will cause excessive wear. Skip

Anthony, this started on the K. The extension increases elevator area and its fixed deflection creates an aerodynamic ANU force to balance the variable down spring which creates an AND force. This was a change from the trim bungees used on previous models that create an elevator up or down force depending on trim setting and was presumably the easiest fix to compensate for nose heaviness of the K. Skip

Let's rephrase: Personally, if Piper were bought by a wealthy Piper enthusiast (M. Stuart Millar) who understood and respected the brand as well as it's roots in American aviation history it would be an enormous positive for the brand. Just sayin'....

The KI 525A is purely a simple electro-mechanical device since the gyro is remote. You can open the case and see pretty quickly what's going on.

An standard 3-wire alternator with external regulator like most airplanes use does indeed need battery power to start up. This would come from the external power cart. After it starts up and is producing voltage, the external battery should no longer be needed since the alternator output will feed back through the regulator to excite the field. This should really only be an emergency procedure. It will take 3 or so flight hours to charge the battery. If you have an airplane loaded with accessories and avionics and turn everything on, it may put a strain on the alternator. Also, you should know why the battery died before attempting this so you don't take off with an electrical issue or a defective battery that might overheat. I'm not recommending this, but only trying to answer the original question about what will and will not work. Skip

I used to own a '78 J without articulating seats and now own a '94 J with them. The articulating seats are nice, BUT I have adjusted them exactly once. The original seats were not really too low (I'm 5' 6") but the original foam had deteriorated. I used a contoured back support from an orthopedic supply store in my '78 which was very comfortable. I took the seats and the support to an aviation upholsterer and had them redo the back foam in the contour of the back support and redo the seat foam about an inch thicker and then cover the seats. They were the most comfortable airplane seats I've ever had. Skip

Yep, this is another thing the FAA has made confusing. One way to think of it is that the FAA requires an AFM, and the GAMA POH format is a standardized way to meet that requirement. Over the years I've head people argue that you can't deviate from the manual (frequently checklists are the topic of discussion) because the AFM is "FAA Approved." Actually, the only part of the AFM/POH that requires FAA approval is the operating limitations. (A Mooney is Level 2 (2-6 seats), low-speed (design cruise speed <= 250 KCAS). §23.2620 Airplane flight manual. The applicant must provide an Airplane Flight Manual that must be delivered with each airplane. (a) The Airplane Flight Manual must contain the following information— (1) Airplane operating limitations; (2) Airplane operating procedures; (3) Performance information; (4) Loading information; and (5) Other information that is necessary for safe operation because of design, operating, or handling characteristics. (b) The following sections of the Airplane Flight Manual must be approved by the FAA in a manner specified by the administrator— (1) For low-speed, level 1 and 2 airplanes, those portions of the Airplane Flight Manual containing the information specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section; and (2) For high-speed level 1 and 2 airplanes and all level 3 and 4 airplanes, those portions of the Airplane Flight Manual containing the information specified in paragraphs (a)(1) thru (a)(4) of this section.

Uh, no. The original PA28 (Cherokee) had a rectangular planform, but the PA24 has a forward sweep just like the Mooney. The Mooney and Comanche use slightly different but similar airfoils (maybe Piper didn’t measure carefully ). Later PA28s have a semi-tapered wing increasing the span and improving climb and altitude performance somewhat. Skip

Problem is, the OP said in a parallel thread on Modern Mooney Discussion that the paint shop bent the tabs rather than correct their installation mistake.So, apparently it’s not clear to him that they meet spec. now.

Given that the aileron and rudder adjustments are relative to the centerline, I’d go with that. I’d make a template accounting for the slope of the elevator skin. I think Mooney didn’t provide details because it’s supposed to be set at the factory and not adjusted further. OP’s is in question because apparently a paint shop mixed up the elevators and then instead of correcting their mistake, bent the trailing edge tab to compensate. Skip

Yep, that’s where mine is. Just try to get that out of there from the pilot’s seat - I dare you.

Perhaps a leak in the induction system? Not enough to affect high power settings, but enough to make it too lean at idle. Did the radio shop do anything in the engine compartment?

And leaky access panels over the avionics, the doghouse engine cowl and the low roll rate with heavy aileron forces. But both airplanes are too complex to manufacture cost effectively. I still marvel at the Cherokee series for its simplicity and utility. Skip

Very nice. Did he remove and paint the plastic? -- it looks new.

According to legend, Piper wanted to buy the Mooney design to quickly launch a product to compete with the Bonanza. Supposedly Mooney flew a plane to Lock Haven and while he and Piper had lunch, Piper engineers descended on the ramp with cameras and tape measures. A business deal was not struck and Piper developed the copycat Comanche but with a Thorpe stabilator. I have no idea if this is true or just an interesting fable. But, if you lay the Comanche planform on top of a Mooney it's almost an exact match. Skip

I haven't flown a K for years and don't recall looking at the tail when I did, so I'm not actually sure where the elevator trims on the K. The K's are generally nose heavy and Mooney changed the trim assist system in the K from the bungies used up through the J to the variable down spring used in the long bodies. With the heavier engines and props in the L and on, they couldn't balance it without adding moment arm to the tail by lengthening the fuselage, but it worked - barely - for the K with the F/J fuselage. So, I wouldn't be surprised if the K trimmed with the elevator slightly trailing edge up. Maybe @kortopates or @gsxrpilot can weigh in: You guys ever look behind you when you're flying? Skip

2900 lb. And, only some S/Ns qualify, so I believe there was a change in the tubular structure. The only weight limitations listed in the Limitations section of the AFM are Baggage Compartment 120 lbs, Hatrack 10 lbs, Cargo area with seats folded down 340 lbs. So you can put the rest wherever you want. Skip

There have been numerous threads speculating about the reason for the Mooney "backwards" vertical tail. Some speculations have been thoughtful and some fantastical. In one, I believe we showed that a straight fin is the most efficient (swept back being less efficient) which explains the vertical leading edge, but the rudder hinge line being swept forward is still interesting. Someone found a quote from an interview with Al Mooney where he said something about low speed handling. At a high angle of attack, the forward canted hinge line would provide less spanwise airflow over the rudder improving it's efficiency, but it always seemed to me that not nearly so much forward cant would be required to achieve this in normal flight regimes. I ran across this old April 1995 Flying magazine article by Peter Garrison that provides a plausible explanation. Check out page 55. https://books.google.bs/books/about/Flying_Magazine.html?id=Ob0MdPxhd4wC&hl=en&output=html_text Skip

From the instructions and video it appears to be a pyrotechnic device (similar to a road flare) which is probably why it only ships by ground. I doubt it would be safe to use in an enclosed area. I just had the Mooney factory-installed extinguisher from my '94 J serviced. It's the first time I had it out of it's mount on the front of the spar on the left side since I purchased the plane. That thing is so hard to get out of it's recessed mount that I'd be burned to a crisp before I ever got to it. Anybody got a better solution? Skip

It's the same in the J: The BAGGAGE COMPARTMENT is limited to 120 lbs. The CARGO AREA is the rear seat area with the seats folded down. The moment arm is the same as the rear seats.

The baggage weight limit has to do with the strength of the baggage compartment floor. Remember, it has to hold up under g load with a factor of safety. Making the floor stronger adds structural weight where you don't want it. Skip