1980Mooney

It shows up on FlightRadar24 with pic but no recent history. Must be a glitch on FlightAware. https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n7730m

So then it would seem that the newer Mooney's with non-WAAS G1000 without an upgrade path to NXi are also on borrowed time. Every other aircraft manufacturer that installed the G1000 over the past 20 years, as far as I know, now have an upgrade path to NXi.

Does your outlook apply to all brands/series of NAV units or just the Garmin GNS variety?

Correction - It is a rod going up the front part of the door - It is a bent rod attached to the top clamshell jaw latch. Have fun.

Before you go and disturb all these adjustments, first try to see if something caused a change in the door. This happened to me a long time ago also. Did a strong wind catch the door swinging it open hard against the stop? (will flex the door out at the top) Did anyone lean on the top of the door to steady themselves getting in or out? (heavy handed mechanics have done this before) With enough force the door and hinge will flex ( @skykrawler is right - be careful). Fitting the door is an art - the complex curves should all just line up and touch evenly. If the top of the door gets flexed it can cause misalignment of the clamshell latch at the top - it can't pull down enough for the bellcrank to fully turn to its stop. Also - lubricate everything before making any adjustments. Don't turn a simple problem into a big problem. Once you start adjusting you can screw it up worse. It may just be dry linkages inside the door. A cable runs up the front between the housing and window - it has a linkage to get to the clamshell. They are a bitch to lubricate. See the KNR article on door problems. 0-202011 Cabin Door Handle Problems Also on alignment

Did you check the boots around the rudder/brake linkage boots? The leakage could be coming from right around your feet. Even in good condition those cannot seal very well because there are two rods with the brake rod moving up and down as the entire linkage moves fore and aft. (see the first 2 pictures.) The last 2 pictures are an Ovation boot salvage at Dawson. You can see the hole in the boot where the linkages protrude forward.

This sounds like your core issue. You want everyone to have it 100% no exceptions, understand how to use it and use it 100% of the time because it is useful and effective.

@dvictory Low time pilots with similar missions have asked this question before. These might help:

Like everything else in aviation, it is a trade-off. It works but with highly restricted and unequal turning angle (11 deg. left and 13 deg. right) which results in a large turning radius and its fragility during towing operations. Per POH long body turning radius (without brakes) is 40 ft to the right and 48 ft to the left.(outer main gear radius). By comparison a Bonanza (outer main gear - no brakes) can turn in under 16 ft. either way.

Small point. The Turbo Bullet was not developed/marketed by Rocket Engineering. Indeed, Darwin Conrad, who went on to form Rocket Engineering, marketed the Turbo Bullet in a company named Aircraft Design, Incorporated (ADI) in Spokane. Prior to forming ADI, Darwin Conrad was an employee of Machen as head of R&D, American Aviation, Inc was the parent of Machen. In 1988, Darwin Conrad and his partner Gary Dilley (a former client of American Aviation) .formed Aircraft Design, Incorporated (ADI) In 1989 ADI was awarded two (2) STC's for the Turbo Bullet conversion ( STC SE4757NM and STC SA4758NM) In 1990, Machen and American Aviation sued Darwin Conrad and his partner in ADI ,Gary Dilley, for theft of Turbo Bullet design. They allege that Conrad developed it while working for Machen. The lawsuits drug on for two (2) years. In August 1993 the Airworthiness Directive limiting boost due to crankshaft failures was issued. (AD NUMBER: 93-14-15) In the meantime, Conrad formed Rocket Engineering in 1990 with a different partner. The Turbo Bullet was not part of Rocket. Machen, Inc. v. Aircraft Design, Inc., 65 Wn. App. 319 | Casetext Search + Citator Machen, Inc. v. Aircraft Design, Inc. - Washington - Case Law - VLEX 894951679

Not sure why you would think that an Acclaim is "more expensive at every turn". The Eagle, Ovation and Acclaim all have the same long body with Continental 550 cubic inch 6. Maintenance of the landing gear (gear, pucks & actuator), control surfaces, paint, glass, lighting, fuel tankage & senders, speed brakes is all the same (ok - the Eagle did not have rudder trim or speed brakes) so the cost is the same. As you move up the model chain there is a of "layering on" of hardware and options. In addition to the turbo-charged engine and built-in oxygen, an Acclaim will likely have more hardware (accessories) that will add weight and increase maintenance cost like FIKI or/and Air conditioning, fully adjustable seats, Speed brakes were an option in the Eagle. Built-in oxygen was an option on Ovations. The additional hardware (standard or option) will need maintenance - some more regular and some more expensive than others. Acclaims will have G1000 panels - 2005 Ovations and up will have G1000 also. Older Ovations and Eagles came with vacuum and "steam gauges". What each has today varies. I think the "5-10%" increased cost was related to fuel consumption. That again is related primarily to speed. For a given altitude, increased speed in general will require more horsepower and more fuel consumption as a function of a square due to drag. Acclaim owners will go higher to do better than that with less drag in thinner air. But not many passengers like oxygen cannulas up their noses and even less like masks. As a result you will see a lot flying at 10-12 K feet. An Acclaim primarily flown at 10-12 K will have higher fuel consumption and higher engine maintenance than an Ovation. You will likely need to do a top overhaul in an Acclaim before TBO. That is over $25 K today. You already mentioned turbos.

Like Groundhog day, this has been discussed before...six (6) years of discussion: https://mooneyspace.com/topic/18071-real-world-performance-differences-between-acclaim-and-ovation/

No one ever mentions when they are bucking a 70 knot headwind up high and are either screwed or need to fly down low with the 172's.....

Interesting thought but NAVBLUE is Airbus’ flight operations software subsidiary. I doubt that Airbus would want to pay Boeing a premium price of $6 billion in precious cash that they need themselves - especially for something that is not core to manufacturing and selling aircraft.

Actually it did have an intercooler. The Bullet STC was never supported by Rocket because it was in a different company with another partner - “Aircraft Specialties Inc.” Yes. Because he didn’t try to modify the engine on his next projects. He used the complete engine and prop set-up from the well established Cessna 340 and 414. The only change was the engine mount and cowl.

I think so. Aviation Consumer Mag referred to the M20 Turbos brand as Rayjay/Consolidated. But each system differs. The original Rayjay and M20 are turbo normalized. The Turbo Bullet (an early rare Darwin Conrad creation before he set up Rocket Engineering) lowered the piston compression ratios and then overboosted to 38.5 inches. It broke crankshafts and the was an AD that restricted boost. Avoid it.

There were three (3) STC turbo conversions of the J. Some turbo-normalized, some true turbocharged. Turbo Bullet, M20 and original RayJay (might be a ModWorks conversion). Which are you looking at? https://mooneyspace.com/topic/9340-original-rayjay-turbo-normalizer-v-m-20-turbo-v-turbo-bullet/

The Missile 300 conversion of a M20J uses a Continental IO-550A in place of the Lycoming. It is not turbocharged. You are probably thinking of the Rocket 305 conversion of a M20K. They use a Continental TSIO-520 in place of the TSIO-360.

You should not be surprised that Joe Brown and his family sold Hartzell to Arcline Private Equity. This is a typical dilemma for family owned companies facing transfer of ownership between generations. It is exceedingly rare today for all descendants to want to remain involved in and owning equal shares of a family business. Many times some or all the kids have no interest in the business. And the kids with “passive” ownership may not be satisfied with the slow drip of cash dividends. Siblings in a second generation transfer may hold it together “for the sake of dear departed dad” (Joe Brown’s father created the group and I think Joe had a brother in the business). But Joe Brown was facing a third generation transfer that involves equal shares of cousins. The fragile family coalition generally falls apart when when the company wants to make a bold move, make an acquisition etc and needs to borrow a lot of money. Not everyone wants more risk, deferred dividends and longer (but hoped for greater) payouts. Some family members will want to cash out now. It is easy for Private Equity to pick off a disenfranchised family member and get them to agree to “sell out for a few pieces of silver”. This creates a crisis amongst the family. The other family members usually can’t raise the cash personally to buy out the ones that want out. Like a house of cards the family ownership collapses. The easy solution is to sell the entire business out to Private Equity - everyone gets rich quick You are seeing it in all the family owned FBO’s that are selling. With the accelerating decline in integrity and ethics why would kids want to take risk and work hard when you can “get rich quick”? BTW . The same thing is going on in the services trades -HVAC,plumbing and electrical. Private equity is driving consolidation so that they can stick you with higher prices especially on urgent repairs. I have started to notice this in Houston - heavy advertising of previously little known companies with everyone driving fancy new trucks. One quoted me 3x the price of a small individual plumber driving an old truck https://sherwood.news/business/private-equity-trade-small-business-acquisitions/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2024/10/17/private-equity-taking-on-skilled-trades/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidwmccombie/2024/07/16/private-equity-is-coming-for-your-ac-repairman/

It’s a pipe dream for a different reason. I suspect going forward there is going to be a major effort to NOT provide anything for “free”. I wouldn’t be surprised to hear a proposal for ATC User Fees (again).

If a new buyer of Jepp raises prices significantly in order to earn a return on an inflated price that they pay Boeing, I hope you don’t seriously believe that Garmin will just sit on their hands and hold prices steady. Monopoly or duopoly -there is no competition. I would expect Garmin to do the same thing. If you look at McCullough propeller prices you will find that they have increased just as much as Hartzell. When Arcline//Hartzell jammed through big price increases, they “raised the umbrella” for everyone else to raise prices.

I am with @A64Pilot. This entire classification criteria seems ridiculous. “Greater than 3/16 inch” is a “chunk”. That means a piece 3/16 inch even is a “chip”. So if your engine is making metal and you only find a single “chip”, less than 5 metal particles on EVERY panel/pleat of your oil filter or less than a 1/4 teaspoon of metal the you are “OK” …. Remember that these will be the pieces that you find - what about the ones that you don’t find. - the ones that gravity traps and are lodged in the case.

BTW - The NTSB has indicated that it will investigate. Preliminary Report number: ERA24LA317 https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/194743/pdf Also: https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=ab3366&lat=41.086&lon=-71.913&zoom=14.2&showTrace=2024-07-14&trackLabels&timestamp=1720982044

Accident Mooney M20J N8201R, Sunday 14 July 2024 (flightsafety.org) Aircraft landed hard and departed side of runway and into bushes. If you look at ADSBExchange, it was quite slow on Final. His last recorded Groundspeed was 57 kts flying into a 10/16 kts 60 degree crosswind. The aircraft sustained damage to the engine and propeller from the blade strikes and will require an engine teardown inspection. Additionally, damage was sustained to the empennage, both main landing gear, the wing on both sides, the step, and belly skins. If you look at the pictures, both main landing gear have been punched through the wings. It could be a stall a few feet above the runway followed by departure or shearing forces on the main landing gear after sliding off the runway. Sadly (or interestingly to a buyer especially in this Lycoming starved environment): The engine only had 66 hours on it since Overhaul. The nose gear did not collapse, and the blades don't look bent in the pics so the prop strike might have just been with bushes rather than runway. The airframe only had 1,910 hours on it although it is much more mangled. Microsoft Word - Nasso - AIRCRAFT SALVAGE Sheet (tmhcc.com) Bids Due Nov. 15

Torque Capital acquired Cablecraft and a couple other companies in 2021 and combined them. Torque's "investment criteria" is clear - "Typically control equity investments where we can actively partner with management to maximize returns". Partner with?...post Private Equity acquisition, the former company management is just a dog on a leash. http://torquecap.com/investment-criteria Vance Street Capital acquired McFarlane and a number of other aircraft part suppliers. When they acquired McFarlane they also announced that they were "partnering with" their target - complete BS - more like slavemaster and slave "partnership". https://vancestreetcapital.com/news/2021/10/vance-street-capital-partners-with-leading-general-aviation-pma-manufacturer-mcfarlane-aviation/ They formed Victor Sierra Aviation Holdings LLC (“VS Aviation”) to market them. They have 14 companies so far. https://victor-sierra.com/news-insights/