1980Mooney

I think you missed my point. You have the ideal situation. You have a partner/owner/pilot located near the shop that did the Annual. You have no need to "stay 2 weeks in timucktoo". Your partner can put his eyes, hands, ears on the plane, work and the A&P/mechanics as frequently as need be or as often as you wish/direct. Your partner can visit regularly to check progress on your punch list of squawks (and remind them if they got missed well before the plane was signed off). You said this shop has a good reputation (not "fly by night"). Sometimes people just need some reminding and nudging especially if they are completely loaded up with work. It sort of sounds like you are completely "hands on" and your partner is completely "hands off".

And this is the point that everyone misses. The long term demand for new and factory replacement (overhaul and rebuilt) Lycoming engines is flat at best in the future. The total fleet of GA piston singles and GA piston twins has been in a long term decline over the last 40 years. For the past few years and going forward it appears that the GA fleet to have flat lined with new deliveries roughly offsetting fleet loss from crash/scrap. There is no material growth projected in the GA fleet going forward. And even in a flat market Lycoming will struggle with share as it faces a market with certified Diesels (Austro and Continental. And DeltaHawk promising to deliver) and a certified Rotax. These non-Lyc's are creeping into the fleet. In the Experimental market ULPower Aero engines is growing share along with stalworth Rotax. Electrics are a wild card but for now are a novelty. Even if there is a short term backlog due to some temporary increased demand (like Covid), there is little financial incentive (cash payback) for Lycoming to build additional capacity (specialized high cost, long lead automated machine tooling) that will go idle as soon as they catch the backlog back up. Additionally they need highly skilled employees and hiring only to lay off will be costly. It is more cost (payback) effective to add overtime and work it through as long as it takes. It doesn't have anything to do with tax law or accounting. FAA shows that there were about 160K certified Piston Singles in 2022 and they estimated that only 126K were active. 20 years earlier, in 2002 they showed that there were about 182K certified Piston Singles, and they estimated that only about 143K were active. Average hours flown by certified Piston Singles dropped from about 114 hr./yr. in 2002 to about 103 hr./yr. in 2022. Another way to look at Certified Piston: Single engine piston total hours flown 2022 - 13.0 million 2002 - 16.3 million That's a 20.2% decline Twin engine piston total hours flown 2022 - 1.43 million 2002 - 2.55 million That's a 43.9% decline Yes I know everyone will say "look at the growth in Experimental". But the stats show that Experimental's on average fly a lot less hours per year than Certified and they have a lot of different engines -roughly a bit less than half the number of hours per year per aircraft that a Certified piston aircraft flies on average. The fleet of Registered Experimental's was about 30K in 2002 and about 33K in 2022. However, the percentage active was much lower than Certified (only about 60-66% for Exp. vs. about 79% for Certified Piston Singles). And the hours flown by Experimental's was significantly less at about 45 hr./yr. in 2022. Another way to look at Experimentals Total Experimental fleet - Hours flown 2022 - 1.28 million 2002 - 1.35 million Statistically not much of a change The growth in GA is in turbines. Turbojets, turboprops and turbine rotorcraft are all way up. FAA's most recent 2024-2044 Market Forecast: FAA 2022 Fleet Analysis: FAA 2002 Fleet Analysis:

It works perfectly for me when viewing it on a desktop computer. You can look at any crash detail and then go back to the map at exactly the same place and view where you picked the crash detail. You can then toggle it left/right or up/down. And you can zoom in and out. No problem like you described.

With the passing of every year, Mooney's in general become more and more bespoke. They remind me of '59 Havana Chevy's. They only resemble the day that they came from the factory, but they look great and are well maintained.

Here in the Texas Gulf Coast our whole house generator runs on natural gas, as does every other installation I know of in the Houston and Galveston areas.. Beryl knocked power out for several days during hot July resulting in the generator running continuously. We are running three 3-ton a/c units, swimming pool pump, etc. My July gas bill was only up about $60 over June and August (multiple gas hot water heaters and gas stove). Through all the hurricanes and freezes over nearly 50 years, we have never had the natural gas pressure fail. And natural gas prices remain near record lows.

" oil supply line for the turbo is not what I'd consider 'proper'" "will also be routing the turbo oil supply line to the location specified in the install instructions" So your A&P did not follow the installation instructions? This sounds a bit "Experimental"....

True all specifically designed/specific use aircraft Jacks have a spherical cup. My caution was when buying a used jack from an experimental aircraft builder, make sure it does have some sort of cup or adapter for lift points. It may be a homebuilt wing jack assembled from a braced automotive bottle jack that only has a flat (crosscut or ringed) lifting surface on the top of the jack.

You can see the silt built up inside the landing light lens. It was completely submerged. There will be flood water silt inside everything - some water may be trapped for the likely months it takes to haul the plane away. The avionics and all instruments are shot. The engine is shot. The plane will need to be gutted. You may be right that they could salvage a hollow shell of an airframe but every bearing surface, pivot point, jackscrew, etc will need to be dissembled, cleaned and lubricated. I suspect that what is left of the plane will be become a parts donor in a salvage yard.

Aircraft Spruce doesn't show the RV-7 however supposedly it is slightly bigger than the RV-6 which is shown. Ask him to measure his jacks.

You didn't say if your friend with the RV-7 had proper jacks with a wide base or homemade ones to go with his "experimental". Some Vans builders/owners use nothing more than a stack of 2x4 with a bottle jack. Some have made something that looks proper, but I question the width of the base to prevent tipping. Someone on Vans Airforce measured the height from the floor to the bottom of the wingtip on an RV-7. He said it is about 25 inches. If your friend has 24 inch jacks they may work on your Mooney per @PT20J and @EricJ "RV-7 Wing Height May 4, 2008 - Does anyone have the distance from floor to the bottom of the aft tip of the wingtip for a -7? I'm just trying to figure out some hangar space. Just measured mine 24.75" inboard aft corner of wing tip 25.25" outermost aft corner" Also make sure that the jack pad/jack point adapter on the top of the jack actually fits your jackpoints. Don't be this guy. Mooney N2585W, a 1965 M20E, fell off the jacks back in 2017 and it wound up at a salvage auction after his insurance company scrapped it. The good news is that someone did repair the plane and it is still currently flying. Top of Wing......

Freddy I just uploaded the M20R Service and Maintenance Manual P/N MAN161 Revision B: May 2014 into the "Downloads" section (1,175 pages complete). It is filed under "Airframe Manuals". Go to page 651.

Here is an example. This is how Don Maxwell moved the Predator, N20XT, to his shop. The entire empennage assembly is removed complete and then the tailcone is removed complete. The wings remain attached to main fuselage/steel frame and all are strapped on a flat bed truck. Notice that it is sitting on its landing gear.

No one has mentioned cost to acquire and maintain. The former Allison now Rolls Royce M250-B17F is used in most cases (and in that video above). TurbineAir (Darwin Conrad/Rocket Engineering in Spokane did a conversion with the PW PT6A-21). The PW PT6 has better high altitude performance than the M250 (which is basically used in helicopters that never go into the FL) but it burns even more fuel. The turbine conversions are limited to what was the yellow arc - only 167 IAS. So the only way to get speed is go higher. But most Bonanza Turbine conversion owners don't like to fly into the FL. So a PT6 Bo will fly no faster than a M250 Bo at let's say 15,000 ft but will be sucking down about 10% more fuel - probably into the 30's gph. You don't see many PT6 conversions on Bonanza's. Back to cost. Past posts said a conversion cost about $600,000 - probably more now. 15 year old posts said it cost $225,000 + to overhaul a low end M250 - probably wayyyyy more now. I saw one recent post claiming to be a new M250 costing $500,000. There are 4 Bonanaza turbine conversions on Controller. Three (3) are Allison/RR M250's and one (1) is a PW PT6 (but no listed price). One is asking $784,000 and the engine is 74% to TBO. The other two are $950-970,000 and the engines are about 50% to TBO. If you were going to spend about $1 million on a used plane, would you buy an unpressurized plane that is slower than an Acclaim and really has about the same limited useful load (no way to fill all 6 seats in the Turbine Bo)? https://www.aircraft.com/aircraft/238211755/n36np-2004-beechcraft-a36-bonanza-turboprop https://rocketengineering.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/TurbineAir_Article_5-13-03.pdf

You started this topic a year ago saying that you used the same A&P for Annual in 2023 as you used the prior year in 2022. After all your venting of frustration last year are you saying in this latest venting that you used the same A&P again this year for Annual? You also said that your partner-owner lives near that shop. That sounds like your partner should have been the ideal liaison to get things right. And you said that the shop is "nice people" which sounds like they are easy to work with. We like perfection in services but the regs state that the Owner/Operator is primarily responsible for maintaining the aircraft in an airworthy condition. Your partner should have done a thorough preflight inspection after Annual and reviewed that work was performed per your request ("the shop failed to address my squawks or inspect the fuel indicating system"). Yet he flew off with a wing inspection panel missing. It sort of sounds like your partner was not very engaged. I get it that not every pilot/owner is mechanically inclined but he could have at least verified that they addressed your squawk list before picking up the plane. Am I missing something in your description of the situation?

The owner joined Mooneyspace last year. Getting service there is obviously a big problem. It’s not surprising that he is selling.

It may not be the primary cause but it chips away at and adds a bit faster rate of decline of the fleet. It's the loss at the small airports that rarely get mentioned. Here is a poor Mooney at Hendersonville Airport (0A7), NC that was submerged in 9 ft of water (video incorrectly states 3 ft. initially but it was 9 ft. of water) It floated up and pushed under the hangar door. You can see the water level in time lapsed pic in another hangar. The plane is covered inside and outside with silt. Other planes seen in the video shared the same fate.

Interesting article but it doesn’t seem to have anything to do with the OP’s question of higher observed fuel flow.

If the fuel flow is actually materially higher than you normally observe at a particular altitude/MP/throttle/speed, shouldn’t you also see a material difference in the temperatures that you normally observe? You say “cht, egt, tit, seem to be as they should.”

It appears to be at Moriarity Municipal Airport, Moriarity, New Mexico (0E0) (East of Albuquerque just off of I-40). It has great thermals and is a favorite for gliders/soaring. It flew from South Lake Tahoe to Moriarity on August 25, 2022. https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a90a4f&lat=38.027&lon=-113.028&zoom=6.3&showTrace=2022-08-25&trackLabels It flew pattern work a few times out of Moriarity Sept 25, 2022 https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a90a4f&lat=34.910&lon=-106.085&zoom=12.0&showTrace=2022-09-25&trackLabels Oct. 25, 2022 https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a90a4f&lat=34.910&lon=-106.085&zoom=12.0&showTrace=2022-10-25&trackLabels Nov. 12, 2022 https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a90a4f&lat=35.049&lon=-106.098&zoom=12.5&showTrace=2022-11-12&trackLabels Feb. 18, 2023 https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a90a4f&lat=34.982&lon=-105.982&zoom=13.4&showTrace=2023-02-18&trackLabels April 2, 2023 https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a90a4f&lat=34.982&lon=-105.982&zoom=13.4&showTrace=2023-04-02&trackLabels July 1, 2023 is the last shown flight https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a90a4f&lat=34.977&lon=-106.071&zoom=13.4&showTrace=2023-07-01&trackLabels I would call the FBO or the 2 businesses on the airport and ask around - phone numbers are listed. AirNav: 0E0 - Moriarty Municipal Airport

The video is gone. It says "Copyright claim by Lycoming Engines"

Superior filed bankruptcy in 2008. The Chinese bought them. In addition to building up Lycoming licensed engines, they also tried to bring out their own 4-cylinder engine for the Experimental market: "In March 2019 the Superior Air Parts XP-400 and Superior Air Parts XP-382 engines were withdrawn from service and all customer engines were subject to a mandatory, immediate buy-back by the company to remove them from service. The company made this decision based on detonation problems found in some XP-400 engines that could not be resolved. Due to parts commonality, the decision was made to buy-back the XP-382 engines as well." There was a news story that they paid Vans $5 million in a settlement when the crankshaft broke on an XP-400 that killed 2 people. Just about everything Superior has touched in the last 15 years has turned to crap.

I think there was an AD in 2020 that recalled all the Superior built Lycoming IO-360 and O-360 engines due to bad crankshafts. FAA finalizes Superior Air Parts crankshaft AD - AOPA Between the Superior cylinder Airworthiness Directives in 2013 and 2019 and then the crankshaft problem: "Superior = Inferior"

My bad. I can't read.....

I don't know what year MSE you have, but the first ones starting with serial number 24-3144 had the "Cigar Lighter" on the same 10 A circuit breaker as the Ignition Switch (starter solenoid) and Tach. I believe the later ones were also on a 10A breaker. The POH (at least some of the later versions) showed the breaker labelled on the circuit breaker panel as "CIG LITR". You mention a multi port adapter with 20A per port - watch your load or you will be popping the breaker. Frequent tripping of the breaker will weaken it and make it trip more easily. If the circuit breaker was dedicated to the Lighter only it would be a non-issue but since it shares the Ignition Switch and the Tach, that is why some recommend putting the USB power supply on a separate dedicated circuit and breaker. Just be prudent.