1980Mooney

Alt Application Data That is the recommended Hartzell starter. See pdf above. New Starters From Hartzell Engine Tech | Aircraft Spruce ®

Agreed Everyone seems to think their engine is made out of crystal. We are talking about a Naturally Aspirated engine that isn't even making 60% of peak power at that altitude. I have been doing this for over 25 years in a mid-body with a 300HP IO-550 - and no speed brakes. - flying over the Sandia Mountains and then dropping right into KABQ. Look at the M20J Emergency Descent procedures from the 1996 POH revision. Gear Extended will give the same 2,000 fpm rate of descent as gear retracted only at a slower more controlled speed. Just reduce throttle and retard power - the only thing it says is to try to keep cylinders at 300 F.

Long ago I used Camguard and I did have the starter adapter fail. I stopped Camguard at that time when the new starter adapter was installed and have never used Camguard again. As stated above I now have 12 years on my starter adapter with no problems. Maybe a coincidence and maybe related.....

Love it! So true.

Yes it should. The starter adapter on my higher torque Cont. IO-550 has been going strong for 12 years. What starter do you have on your Continental? Is it a lightweight starter or factory original? Sorry to hear but the good news is that it failed at your home drome. If it had been at your destination or worse at an intermediate stop on the trip, you would be really screwed on a holiday weekend. - no flights/ if you do find some the price will be sky high. Then getting the plane repaired later remotely and logistics to fly it back would be a nightmare. Someone posted in the past an old aviation saying. It went something like : "Only when you have the luxury to take your time on a trip and don't have to be in a hurry to get anywhere, then that is the time to fly your own piston plane....."

Works perfect.

Personally I would be cautious in this case about advising to turn off the autopilot in the clouds and to slip in the clouds. @RescueMunchkin posted in late 2023 that he was looking for his first plane so it sounds like he is a fairly low time/low experience pilot. He is asking for advice on how to fly in his plane in clouds in a stressful environment where ATC is telling to expedite faster than he is used to or comfortable. It is just one more possible form of stress or possible disorientation. I agree with @PeteMc. There is way too much concern about shock cooling, pulling throttle and coasting against the engine and also too much concern in other posts about advancing the throttle too fast. Your engine and prop are overdesigned to handle stresses of sudden changes at SL making 200 HP. You said you are at 10.5 and 19.5 MP. You didn't say your RPM but even if you were wide open at 2,700 rpm you would only be making 120 HP (60%). @kortopates has lots of good advice to stay ahead of your plane when in busy ATC conditions. But if you need to pull the throttle, DO IT and don't obsess about hurting your engine or prop.

Everyone has missed the most impressive feature......the advances in asymmetrical propellers. First there is the "Drooping 2 Blade Prop". Plenty of slop in the thrust bearings so that the blades can "relax and droop" when sitting idle/shut down?...and maybe they straighten right out when you fire the engine up? Or maybe the asymmetry enhances thrust and efficiency with only a small "vibration" penalty. Then there is the AMAZING "2-Blade prop that looks like it is a 3-Blade" prop. This one looks really handy for changing the oil. Removing the lower cowl will be a breeze. Notice that as a "compromise" the 2 Blades are 145 degrees apart. I wonder if the 3rd Blade can be re-installed in the field if you need a greater rate of climb....

This Kawasaki "hydrogen fueled" aircraft engine story is a "nothing burger"....a waste of thought exercise. The only way to have sufficient energy density is to carry it in liquid form cryogenically. On a GA aircraft?...cryo fuel tanks? Give me a break. Weight penalty,? Inspection? Leaks? Replacement schedules? And even with the best insulating materials, evaporation is 0.5-1.0% per day. The fuel tanks have to vent or they build pressure and explode. You might have to defuel planes before storing them in a closed hangar. Otherwise you have a massive fire danger like @GeeBee highlighted. Oh - and just imagine the massive cost for airports to install cryo fuel tank farms. Every little airfield. This is a big joke.

Are you renting/leasing this plane only to yourself or to others?

Also notice that although his track appeared to be aligned with the runway, his heading did not appear to be aligned with the centerline. Notice that he appears to be crabbing left and that when he struck the dust trail was about 30+ degrees off his fuselage. ( in the last 2 frames his rudder is actually to the right of his prop ) Perhaps he was struggling with the J-Bar or had a brain freeze - either way he was not controlling his rudder at that moment - either relaxed foot or jammed foot on one of the pedals. Also he was not flaring much if at all - he was pretty flat. He looked to be flat at the height above the runway where the wheels would have touched. It lookes like he only flared as he sunk into the pavement. If the gear had been down it would not have been pretty.

Well even "proficient" pilots can be distracted at the wrong time. But this apparently is an unfortunate case a new pilot in a newly purchased plane. Gear-up landing Incident Mooney M20E Super 21 N1230X, Thursday 27 March 2025 https://indyairsales.com/__resources/webdata/files/specsheets/1716_N1230X Info Spec Sheet Rev 2.pdf https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N1230X This is a 1964 M20E Super 21 with a J-Bar manual landing gear. The owner registered N1230X on November 12, 2024. ADSB-Exchange history shows that the plane showed up at the owner's home drome on October 30, 2024. It appears that the owner is a newly minted pilot, age 47 per the internet : Certificate: PRIVATE PILOT Date of Issue: 10/20/2024 His photo on LinkedIn shows him standing in front a C-172 holding his certificate. The owner came to MooneySpace once. On October 31, 2024 he posted a topic looking for a "Complex Mooney Instructor". He said "Recently bought a Mooney M20E, and need to find a CFI to complete my complex rating." and "My insurance requires that I have 10 hours dual time with an instructor and 10 takeoffs at landings. I've completed 4 hours and 4 takeoff and landings this past week with an instructor who helped me fly the plane home." He got some recommendations for the remaining 6 hours dual and 6 take-offs/landings and never came back to MS. His speed and glide slope/rate of descent don't look terrible. I can't find the METAR for KGAI that day but winds at Dulles were variable and not more than 5 mph. However, his Base to Final was sloppy. He busted the Final and he blew past the centerline before turning back approx. 110 degrees to Final. https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a06145&lat=39.168&lon=-77.145&zoom=14.3&showTrace=2025-03-27&trackLabels&timestamp=1743106682 Perhaps he got flustered with the mistake. (or worrying about not banking too much in the correction) Perhaps he was debating balking the landing and going around resulting in a loss of focus on the landing configuration and getting "behind the plane". Perhaps that is why he didn't have the gear down in time well before the flare but put the gear down after "kissing the tarmac" and climbing out. Perhaps his J-Bar is out of rig or bent, like some comment here, and requires tremendous force or binds which hinders his smooth operation (But you would think if that was the problem, his instructor or ferry pilot would have highlighted it as a squawk that needed immediate repair)

This may not sound nice either, but aren't blatant commercial advertisements by businesses supposed to be posted in the "Vendor Forum"? Isn't that what it is for? - Aren't those the rules of MooneySpace? This pure advertisement post has no place in the General Forum. "Vendor Forum This forum is for Mooney related businesses to interact with the community and advertise their services. This is the only forum where advertising a Mooney related business is allowed." Vendor Forum - Mooneyspace.com - A community for Mooney aircraft owners and enthusiasts

Yup, it was last summer. Yup, FAA registration shows it was sold on December 23, 2024 (actually FlightAware posted that date) to address and company name of ANK, Inc which are associated with Wentworth Aircraft in Minneapolis, MN. Odd thing is the FAA Registry says Status: "In Question". There is no "Certificate Issue Date" and no "Expiration Date" - just says "None" Not sure if Wentworth is trying to sell it as a "Rebuildable Aircraft" or if they are going to part it out. Earlier discussion....

This was from last summer. It is a 1974 M20F with electric gear. The owner was selling the plane and was landing it in front of the prospective buyer. Needless to say - "NO SALE"..... The insurance company scrapped it. Microsoft Word - Salvage Tender - N7767M

Other than the cost, inconvenience, bottles didn't seem to seal tight after opening if stored in plane, and the smell it leaves on you after you touch anything with it, I could not detect that Marvel Mystery Oil did anything other than make the satin gray exhaust deposit on a properly leaned tail pipe a slightly browner shade of gray. If it actually did something beneficial that could be documented, everyone would be using it and it would be preblended in all fuel. Perhaps that is the "Mystery "in it.....

Using the Court to seek relief in this case doesn't seem like a good use of time or money - even in Small Claims Court. A Judge will see, as previously highlighted, "too many cooks in the kitchen"...."Owner Assisted" Annual. Owners jacking the plane up, turning wrenches, loosening bolts, nuts, screws, removing parts/panels. tugging on things (like wires). etc. The owners already admit not installing an oil filter correctly - not finishing a simple task. Where do the Owner's faults end and where do the A&P/Shop mechanic's faults begin? How can a Judge determine exactly who did what? The idea of paying an IA (why would anyone provide an "expert evaluation" for free?) based up "hearsay claims" by the owners seems expensive and weak. How would the third party AI know whether the footwells were crushed during this particular Annual or whether they were crushed partially/mainly in some previous Annual(s) during this Mooney's 46 year life? I say "hearsay" because unless the Owners have dated photographic evidence from the day before the Annual, then it is just their word. And besides, I have never heard of an A&P or IA sticking their neck out in Small Claims Court to criticize the work another aircraft mechanic. Yes you hear about it in high profile Jury cases involving fatalities. But in Small Claims Court, maybe if you find an IA that is retired and never has to suffer the wrath of retribution from other mechanics you might find someone to take your money and give you an "opinion". The Owners claim that the bent spinner ring happened sometime during last year's Annual or between last year's Annual and this Annual. - So this is not even a fault with this year's Annual. Is the claim on this year's Annual, that the A&P didn't flag it as Not Airworthy, and for not forcing the Owners to pay even more for the cost of and installation of a new Spinner Ring? The broken wire, the scrape under the wing, missing nuts, pliers on the engine - you can't prove that it was the fault of the A&P. The Magneto shop screwed up and made it right. And the A&P that the OP wants to sue now reimbursed him to have someone else install the correct Magneto - so it shows that he is not totally unreasonable. I am sorry to hear the OP's bad luck but I don't see a Court helping them. I had to switch shops on short notice for an Annual a few years back. As it turned out, the shop hired regular auto mechanics to work under supervision of Certified A&P's in the shop. One day I went over and witnessed a mechanic in the process of completely removing all the plastic (and you know how brittle all that old Royalite is) and the insulation in my hat rack "to look for corrosion". I was incredulous and went to the shop foreman and said "WTF is going on?" Then, I had a fuel tank leak so they called in Aero Structural Services, so called tank specialists out of Hobby Airport here in Houston. I came over and these idiots were trying to seal the leak in my tank from the outside. They were gooping something on the outsides of the tank seams by way of some of the wing panels. Needless to say I still had a leak and now also a mess inside the wings. Aero Structural Services may be good at doing structural aluminum repair and welding, but they know nothing about Mooney's wet wings. I had to argue for a reduction in shop hours charged with the shop owner. They were also trying to make me eat the Aero Structural Services bill because they were a subcontractor. I refused to pay the Aero Structural bill because of the incompetence Aero Structural and of the shop that hired them in the first place. The shop signed off for the Annual complete except for the leaking fuel tank. I wound up having to Ferry my plane to another A&P to get that done. And I never went back to the shop that failed me.

I typically added it before long trips. The night before the trip I would fuel at the self serve to a total of 80 gallons on board - 40 gal per side and then pull it back to my hangar. Once I got it back in the hangar I immediately added 16 oz MMO to each side - most in the main and some in the Monroy outer tank. The MMO would seem to run to the bottom of the tank. Even after vigorously shaking the wings up and down it would not mix well in the main tank. Samples from the tank drain would be mostly MMO which I poured back in the tank. By the next morning it was better dispersed, but the tank was exposed to uneven concentrations during that time. Adding the MMO while simultaneously fueling was not ideal. Sometimes I was fueling in the dark. During the day, other planes might be waiting for the lone self serve pump and I didn't want to be diddling around measuring and adding. It was easier to do it back in the lighted hangar....but still not ideal.

That may be true. However, many years ago I used MMO routinely as a fuel additive to reduce lead deposits. I started to notice spots on my old graying wing walk getting darker - like where a screw was under the black wing walk. And the wet spot did not go away even after I discontinued using MMO. My theory is that the screw might have been leaking just a very tiny bit - so little that it would normally evaporate away the AVGAS without darkening the wing walk. But I believe that the MMO left behind and deposited some of that oil of wintergreen as it evaporated resulting in a darkening circle/spot on the grayed weathered wing walk. I stopped using MMO after that.

Because Decalin is not approved for any Certified Aircraft Engine. From the Decalin Chemicals web page https://decalinchemicals.com/products/decalin-runup-fuel-additive/ "Decalin RunUp is not approved for use in the engines of certified aircraft but it has the same active ingredient, Tri Cresyl Phosphate as our previous product." Perhaps the comment came from an Experimental Aircraft owner. Decalin states "Lycoming clone users have reported very good results when using this product." It is not approved by Rotax either but some people use it. Same thing with Techron. Some Experimentals may experiment with it but it is not approved for any aircraft application. The only approved Fuel Lead Scavenger Additive is Alcor TCP - and that is only approved for Non-Turbocharged engines from Lycoming, Continental and Franklin. TCP Fuel Treatment | Alcor, Incorporated On some of the Experimental Owners sites, owners comment that they prefer Decalin over Alcor TCP for price but also because they complain of the harsh chemicals in Alcor TCP. That sounds like a "red flag" for use in our tender Mooney wet wing fuel tanks......

No-one has mentioned it so I am going to state what may seem obvious to current Mooney owners but many not be to someone new to Mooney's. Although the owner may claim that the plane has been in a heated hangar its whole life in the NE, you still need to have a thorough inspection for corrosion by a Mooney expert. Another MooneySpace member bought a Mooney in the NE in 2022 (from another MooneySpace member) and he shared his sad story with us. The Buyer (located in Texas) had a pre-buy inspection done by a Mooney Service Center (MSC) in the North East. Everything looked good so he purchased it. It needed an Annual before going to Texas, so the Buyer had the MSC continue the Pre-Buy and turn it into an Annual. During the Annual, the MSC (yes the same one that did the Pre-Buy) found heavy intergranular defoliation corrosion on the lower cap on RH wing stub spar assembly inside inspection panel area directly behind RH gear wheel well. Metal had flaked away. I can't find all the posted detail now, but the Buyer said that the corrosion was not easily visible from the inspection ports. A pro needs to know where to look and to use mirrors on an extension or a borescope. The plane was now Not Airworthy. It had to be ferried to Don Maxwell in Longview for major repair. He posted that the repair cost was $27.5k and took 1 year. That doesn't include the cost of the useless Annual done by the shop that missed the corrosion to begin with, the cost of the Ferry, the Buyer's fixed costs, the Buyer could not stay current without renting a plane and by the time the wing was repaired it needed another Annual. I bet he spent another $10k+ in the meantime. The Buyer had to pay it - the Seller and the MSC had no liability since the sale had already closed. A PreBuy is not a guarantee. It is just an opinion.

Here is another perspective from Aviation Consumer. Note the discussion of overall safety record. They could not find any incidence of gear up landings. https://aviationconsumer.com/used-aircraft-guide/meyers-200-2/

I think it was a relic of historic design practice. Other articles point out that the Meyers was virtually handmade without jigs.

The Meyers 200 shared one other similarity with Mooney: " The company could not produce the design economically......." Isn't @A64Pilot the expert on the Meyers? He previously posted: " I prefer metal myself due to its damage tolerences and ease of repair and it’s very well known fatigue rates. However having said that I like the 4130 tube structure around me, the Meyers 200 carried that much further than Mooney, even the wings out past the gear were 4130, however this meant it was extremely labor intensive to build, Aero Commander learned that they couldn’t break even on it, it just took too many hours to build. However I believe it is the only complex airplane that has never had an airframe AD, and it’s known for its survivability, even more than Mooney. ”Spam Can” construction like Cessna, Beech, Piper etc is less labor intensive and therefore cheaper to build, composite even moreso, however it’s possibly not better as in crashworthiness. Pic of the Aero Commander line in Albany Ga probably about 1966 or so, you can see the tube steel structure and size of the tubing."

The LoPresti Fury (aka SwiftFury based upon the Globe Swift) is semi-monocoque design and construction. And a 2 seater. So not like Mooney..... I vote Meyers 200 also