Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

20 Excellent

About 201Steve

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Interests
    1977 M20J
  • Reg #
  • Model

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. @carusoam you da man! Water built up about 2” in front of the drain valve
  2. Hello friends, I just had my first experience with a pitot static failure. For the first time since I’ve owned my ‘77 J, I was forced to leave it outside. :( Had a little bit of rain, etc and it hung out on the ramp for 3 days. Hopped in to take off, airspeed came alive and kind of stuck at 55knots next thing I knew I was airborne so after cleaning up the airplane and keeping a shallow climb rate to build speed, it only climbed to about 68 - 70 knots. After confirming gear was up, flaps were up, I went to GPS ground speed which read about 115 knots so felt comfortable that it was indeed not reading correctly on IAS. Climb rate was showing crazy and altitude also acting erratic. Long story short, I went to alternate static and everything stabilized. Where do I start to trouble shoot? I did not see any obvious obstructions to pitot or static port, but it seems to me like there is blockage somewhere. Thanks for any feedback
  3. Just figure out how your going to cover the extra $30k now. You’re going to do it anyway, might as well consign to it now and be looking in the correct pool. =)
  4. Just curious, does anyone around here have Serial Number “1” for any model? I have a J, would be cool to have S/N 24-001.
  5. I’ve heard of people using LLC so they can sell the airplane by way of selling the LLC instead of the a/c and therefore, offering incentive to the new buyer that there will be no registration change and depending on your local situation, no sales tax. The biggest disadvantage to this is making sure that the LLC (the airplane) does not have any debt associated with it, which is difficult to confirm absolutely. You buy the LLC and you buy the LLC’s debt, if any.
  6. I hear a lot of people say things about insurance being higher and longer training, so get a Piper/Cessna, but it’s less talked about that the acquisition costs of buying two airplanes instead of one you’ll keep indefinitely probably exceeds the higher insurance/longer training time.
  7. Good to know, thanks for the link. While I don't disagree, it's still only theory. I've been trying to find "accident rates by aircraft type" but all I can find is stats for commercial models.
  8. That's insinuating that the proportionate accident rate in a Mooney is higher than the average rate in other types of the same class, which would be news to me. This kind of highlights my point that, FLYING is dangerous. I don't know that there is any more inherent risk in flying a Mooney wing than a Piper wing. If there is data on this, I am curious. I'm not here to de-value or scoff at type specific training but it's simply not possible for the 4 people listed above to train everyone who gets in a Mooney. I know there are more than those 4, but you get the idea. What do we do with rest of them? Tell them it's too risky? Is that reasonable? Use the best training available to you, sure. For some of us, it's not available immediately.
  9. For the record, I also, would love to fly with these guys. I also value expertise. Very much so. I disregard “expert testimony” from people all the time because it isn’t type specific expertise (not just aviation). I think the easiest way to say it is, a good instructor is a good instructor- and that includes their determination of whether they are capable of the job. How you make that determination early on is a little more challenging. Scoping them out, so to speak. @carusoam I agree mostly. My thinking is a little more broad, not necessarily specific to this one post. It would be challenging for sure to add the extra performance of one of the high performance (over 200hp) Mooney’s during primary training. What really bothers me are people discouraging less experienced pilots from Mooney. I don’t think it’s there intention to guard the airplane, and I’m sure it comes from a place of safety concern, but if you read some of the rhetoric, it can be depressing! I can say this from recent experience, that it had me wondering if I shouldn’t just stick to a skyhawk. Thank god I had some people in my corner telling me to work hard at learning and go for the Mooney, because I would be stuck in a slow suv if I didn’t! Lol I absolutely love my J model and I’m glad I had people tell me It was OK. We are all terrified of screwing it up, I am for sure. I have great respect for the airplane. It’s serious business, but it’s depressing seeing the discouragement. And honestly, it’s really not one person. It’s more of of the compounded information leads you to: this is going to kill me. I guess I’d just like to see a little more encouragement amongst our own. The media does just fine on its own making aviation seem like a death sentence. As for MAINTENANCE, I’m still guilty of Mooney expert fever. I hired a guy to diagnose and repair an ignition issue in my Jeep CJ. A very good and knowledgeable general mechanic. I just didn’t have time to fool with it. He just ended up swapping out the distributor. A couple weeks later, when I had more time, I took the distributor off playing with the timing, and realized the drive gear on the distributor he installed was a hardened steel gear. He’s a good general mechanic, but he had no idea that the gear on the Camshaft was iron and is cast into the cam itself. Hardened steel on soft iron trying to turn together, well you know what’ll happen. I changed the gears, but I only knew it was problematic bc I’m more knowledgeable about my 258 i6 than he is. A way better mechanic no doubt but he didn’t know. (As I type I feel like I’m making a case against myself on the instruction part ). Well, I enjoy the conversation. Let’s be encouraging. =)
  10. I can’t figure out why there are so many Mooney drivers that act like a Mooney is an SR-71. “Make sure he’s an expert in Mooney instruction” “if he’s not a Mooney master, you’ll probably die” “Ensure that his soul has been christened by Al Mooney”. Ok, relax... I’m just being dramatic. I’m way less experienced than most people and I accept my position in the dish pit. I equally love the passion, but I am finding it very over the top that so many people are consistently making a persons situation more difficult by insinuating these scenarios that somehow an instructor in Idaho who also happens to train tail wheel is too far removed from the ability to fly a Mooney. It’s an airplane. It has its own characteristics. They all do. I would hope that any CFI would know that. If he didn’t, god help us. A well rounded instructor that has flown various aircraft Should not be type limited because they don’t have 2,000 hours in a Mooney. I say this from experience. I felt like people were making me think if the instructor didn’t have a Mooney tattoo on their forearm, I was doomed. I ended up doing my complex endorsement when I got my J with a CFI that had about 2 hours of Mooney time because there was no Mooney god available to me within reason. We went up in the airplane, learned it’s habits, and whaddya know, we were able to fly the airplane! I was shocked based on what I’d read. ****It would have been nice to use someone with a Mooney tattoo, and I actually look forward to the opportunity, but it’s a process of fine tuning...which is true of anything you fly. I’ve also done a lot of homework on my own. Asked questions, sought out other owners.... but for crying out loud, it’s a complex airplane not a skunk works developed rocket ship. I’ll probably draw eyebrows from this, just know that I respect you, this is just my position.
  11. Whoever/whatever you use for help, it goes a long way in being part of the process by doing lots and lots of reading.
  12. +1 for getting it now. +2 for the username.
  13. @PT20J no and it’s happened on 3 flights. So, new data. I just ran up the airplane. I left it running at idle and got out to inspect the hose for signs of dripping while the engine is running. I applied tip of finger to hose and it was producing suction/vacuum. If I kept it plugged, it boggles down the engine power just like it would fiddling with any other vacuum line. Let off the line again and it comes back up to power. All of that said, I don’t think it’s supposed to be producing a vacuum from this line if the explanation from @M20Doc is correct, the sniffle valve should be “pulled” shut during operation and therefore, should not be producing any movement of air. Can you clarify? Also, I’m still not totally understanding where the fuel after shutdown is coming from since the sniffle valve should in fact be open, and I know it is because fuel is escaping from it, but doesn’t explain why the fuel is coming out. Maybe the sniffle valve is partially opening and partially closing? Creating suction bypass during operation (not totally closed) and after shutdown, not fully opening, but since it is still pressurized it’s “blowing past” the “shut” valve? i am away from home in a small mountain airstrip, supposed to be leaving tomorrow; just looking for opinion that it should be OK at least until I get home to fool with.
  14. So the valve is open anytime the engine is not running, but what is happening different now that fuel is building in the plenum? I don’t see how replacing the sniffle valve would resolve this issue, IF what I’m understanding is correct, that it’s indeed supposed to be draining after shutdown, but where and why the excess fuel is coming from seems more relevant