PT20J

This may help. FWIW, I owned at '78 and enjoyed it. Now I own a '94. The later model is a little slower and a little heavier, but I enjoy the numerous small refinements. But, it's largely the same airplane. 201hist.xls

I seem to recall someone on MS posting that. They may have been using a longer tow bar than standard. If the search worked better, I would look for the post But the real point is that it's a crummy design.

I get the frustration. But I think it is useful to look at it from the FBO’s viewpoint. Most FBOs will marshall you to a parking spot by their front door. Their ramp isn’t set up to leave the plane there for a long period, and it’s not reasonable to expect them to hand tow it 100 yards or more to a parking spot. All tricycle gear planes have towing limits, and the line folks move planes all day long, 7 days a week. The Mooney design is poor in that the turning radius is smaller than most other similar airplanes, and early nose gears had no stops. People have managed to damage them even when hand towing. The problem is somewhat mitigated on later models that have incorporated stops. If you ever have a damaged truss, consider replacing it with the newer model with stops. While an improvement, the newer truss with stops is still not a terrific design. Even the DC-3 (designed in the 1930’s) has a shear pin on the tailwheel. I tend to favor the higher end FBOs at larger airports when traveling. I may pay more for gas, but I usually find more experienced line personnel, helpful staff with great negotiated rates at local hotels and nice crew cars. This may not be a perfect answer, but I think it improves my odds of getting away undamaged. The places with the cheapest gas have to make up the difference somewhere and a big cost is labor. Do you really want that minimum wage kid servicing your airplane? Skip

Couldn’t get it to fit the A3B6.

I think the bloody knuckles says it all

I don't understand this at all. Temperature range is a measure of how hot the plug runs, not the engine.

Ross, thanks for posting this. The first time I heard the term "Big Bore" was at an APS seminar in Ada back around 2007. At the time, I figured it was just Bonanza guys trying to make their engines seem big. It never made sense to me because as you point out, the Lycoming 4 banger has about the same bore as the big Continentals. But now I think I get it. APS is pretty Continental-centric (APS is an outgrowth of GAMI and the injectors were designed to fix a problem most prevalent in Continentals) and the big Continental engines do have a larger bore compared to the Continental IO-360. Or, maybe someone has a better explanation.... Skip

I'm sure a lot of you know this, but just in case some don't ... It's not really the compression ratio; that's just a proxy for BSFC (brake specific fuel consumption). The reason that LOP is efficient is that there is a minimum in the BSFC when LOP, and the reason that fuel flow can be used to determine approximate horsepower when LOP is that the this minimum is nearly constant over a fairly wide range of LOP fuel flows. So if you want the exact number you need the BSFC curve for your engine. It turns out that all these engines have similar BSFC curves with the higher compression engines being more efficient and so a further approximation can be made by using the compression ratio in the calculation since compression ratio is readily obtainable. But this is an approximation on top of an approximation, so there is no need to carry it to two or more decimal places. Skip

Assuming proper rig, I've found Bob Kromer's takeoff method to work best: Apply about 5 lb back pressure at the beginning of the takeoff roll and hold that until if flies off. After it lifts off, slowly release the back pressure as it pitches up an additional five degrees and hold that attitude. If you had the trim just right, it won't need an adjustment until you raise the flaps. Experiment with the takeoff trim setting at various loadings until you get it right. You really don't need to "rotate" a piston airplane and it's usually not the best way to perform the takeoff maneuver. VR is really a jet thing. But jets have a lot more thrust and require a lot more pitch change to get into the climb attitude. A lot of factors go into calculating VR but the key one is that the airplane has to begin rotation at VR and accelerate to V2 by 35 feet AGL. None of that really applies to us. Skip

Part 135 limit is 8 hrs flight time CFI limit is 8 hrs instruction time

Agree with Don. And, aerodynamically, a side slip and forward slip are the same. The difference is the flight path relative to a ground reference due to wind velocity. Keeping the wing loading down in descending base and final turns increases safety margin because the stall speed increase in a turn is due to load factor, not bank angle. The drag in a slip is high and the nose position is low and it’s easy to let the airspeed decay if distracted, so it’s best to keep the speed up during a slip Skip

When you replaced them, did you install the retrofit kit with the turning stops?

I'm paying $280/mo for a T-hangar with power and air and concrete floor in Port Townsend WA. $60/mo for a tie-down at Paine Field in Everett WA.

If there's no rise, the idle mixture is too lean. With too lean a mixture, you can get poor acceleration when you move the throttle somewhat rapidly open from idle. There's a procedure in the service manual for setting it correctly, so why not just do what the manual says? Every engine since the radials of WW II calls for a rise in rpm just before it quits. If you change the mixture, you'll find you need to adjust the idle speed, afterwards as there's an interaction. You might have to go back and forth a couple of times.

The Apsen PFD will interface to the KAP 150. You need an ACU and EA100. https://aspenavionics.com/support/evolution-approvals/

Opinions will vary, so you’ll have to decide for yourself. Here’s the definition from 14 CFR part 1.1: Preventive maintenance means simple or minor preservation operations and the replacement of small standard parts not involving complex assembly operations. I’d argue that replacing rocker cover gaskets fits the definition. However, I’d argue that replacing brake pads does not since removing and replacing rivets might be considered a complex assembly operation. Skip

My ‘78 J didn’t, but my ‘94 J has one.

Yes, but you’re logging the preventive maintenance on the brakes, not the inspection.

Legally, it’s the same thing.

I don’t think anyone knows where the fear of over square originated. 30 years or so ago I believe Kas Thomas postulated that it was a misapplication of the prohibition on radial engines to avoid operating under square. That was because low cylinder pressures can’t balance reciprocating load and the result can damage the master rod bearing. Skip

I asked Mike Busch and he pointed out that the Part 1 definition of maintenance includes inspection whereas the definition of preventive maintenance does not. Therefore, an inspection required by regulation cannot be performed as preventive maintenance (unless, in the case of an AD, it is specifically allowed as @EricJ and @M20Doc have noted). Skip

It's not about cleaning the injectors, it's about satisfying the recurrent inspection AD on the injection lines and clamps. It wouldn't be an issue if it recurred annually (because it gets checked every annual) but it recurs every 110 hours. So if I fly 115 hours between annuals, the airplane is unairworthy for the last 5 unless I bother my mechanic to stop what he's doing, look at the lines and sign the logbook. Skip

Well, to add more confusion to it, I just found the attached document which states in the Introduction that "This pamphlet provides information on authorized preventive maintenance." Later it includes a section titled Sample Checklists that are apparently items that fall under preventive maintenance. Many say "check" in a manner obviously synonymous with "inspect." One item listed is, "Check condition of fuel lines for leaks (fuel stains) and security." So, according to this pamphlet, I can check the fuel lines as preventative maintenance, and if I do preventive maintenance I have to log it, and if the preventive maintenance just so happens to satisfy an AD....??? Skip FAA P-8740-15 Maintenance Aspects of Owning Your Own Aircraft [hi-res] branded.pdf

The latest incarnation of the Lycoming fuel injection line AD 2015-19-07 requires repetitive inspections every 110 hours. FAR 1 says "Preventive Maintenance means simple or minor preservation operations and the replacement of small standard parts not involving complex assembly operations." FAR 43 App A lists an example preventive maintenance task as "Replacing prefabricated fuel lines." We know that under a FAA legal interpretation (Coleal 2009) that this list is not considered to be exhaustive, but illustrative. FAR 43.3 (g) states in pertinent part "The holder of a pilot certificate...may perform preventive maintenance on any aircraft owned or operated by that pilot..." FAR 43.9 says in pertinent part "Each person who... performs preventive maintenance ... shall make an entry in the maintenance record..." So, is there is any regulation that prevents me as a pilot owner from performing the simple inspection required by the AD and entering it in the logbook as preventive maintenance? Skip

Mooney originally used the trim piece but at some point just stopped -- probably to save a couple of bucks. Underneath it's the same. The references in the earlier 337 are interesting. Mooney doesn't list a retrofit kit for this. The part number listed is just the part number for the landing/taxi light assy from the J IPC. The wiring reference listed is a service manual section that doesn't have any wiring info at all. Skip