1980Mooney

Why do you think that he would be inclined to do this on every pre-buy? He clearly stated above that on this particular plane “After reviewing the airframe logs myself, I can confirm SB-208 has never been logged which is why I want it done as part of my prebuy.”

This is an extreme example.

Not often. But it has happened. Usually other obstructions in the landing path. Roll the dice. "The pilot decided to not continue the flight to the nearest airport; he shut down the engine and perform a forced landing to a field. During the forced landing, the airplane impacted unsuitable terrain and sustained substantial damage to the forward fuselage. " https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/383084

Her previous comments were not for pain and suffering nor punitive. She just wanted what she had replaced. That is when the insurance company should have made her replacement whole. Her home loses, although total, were extremely modest in absolute numbers compared to most that are able to own a plane. There are probably members here that have spent more on a hangar. So as pilots we wish to flip the narrative. It is not the wealthy estate, nor the insurance companies, lawyers or shareholders (private equity) that are greedy. It is the victims. It is like a fire - use whatever it takes immediately to put it out fully before it is a raging inferno. This is why these things blow up into ridiculous lawsuits and settlements.

There were 2 different approaches to this. Early designs used squat switches. Later used an air safety switch. With squat switches, if you hit a good bump while taxiing or a momentary gust while rolling on takeoff, the switches may unload and sense as if the plane was airborne. Or a switch might be defective and stuck sensing airborne all the time. With airspeed safety switches, they can be miscalibrated to a low speed or defective and stuck sensing airspeed. In either case if the lever is up while fast taxiing or in high speed roll on takeoff, the gear could collapse

I bet if they had "offered up enough to buy a new mobile home, etc" that this would have been solved a year ago without a lawyer ever getting involved by the homeowner. The accident was tragic and luckily no-one was at home or they would have likely perished also. But look at what appears to be happening - how it looks to the home-owner and also the community The estate of the late good doctor, (who was a wealthy "renowned plastic surgeon in Los Angeles", his FAA address is a spectacular Beverly Hills home that recently sold for $16 million) is hiding behind a mysterious plane co-owner named "Biplane Co" (which may turn out to be owned by the estate of the late doctor) The supposed "co-owner" is hiding behind AIG. AIG is hiding behind lawyers The home-owner is not getting replacement value after a year of dickering. She has hired a local attorney now. Remember this is New Mexico. I grew up there and have passed the vicinity of the crash site many times over the decades. A lot of residents just scrape by. In this case the homeowner is a 37 year old single mother of 2 kids. Apparently she works at local New Mexico based Century Bank. Her co-workers set up a GoFundMe page. https://www.gofundme.com/f/miquella-benavidez-and-children She owns an incredibly modest home on perpetually barren land southwest of the Santa Fe horse-track and not far from noisy Interstate 25. (only a couple hundred feet from the frontage road). Her home is (was) a double-wide mobile (manufactured) home on land adjacent to her parents. The Santa Fe County values her home at a whopping $132,000 on land valued at $102,000. You can see that the crash burned up her pickup truck also. She may not have carried much insurance on the mobile home or truck. But she did not destroy them. The pilot/owner of N5251C trespassed on her property and destroyed them. The amount of money that could come from AIG and/or the doctor's estate to make this right would not be large. I bet $200k could have fixed everything up if they had been reasonable and forthcoming early on. Yet it does not seem to be happening. If AIG will not make her whole, then she has no recourse except to sue. This gives aircraft owners and pilots a bad name. We certainly look like a bunch of wealthy entitled greedy bastards that are not responsible for our actions. And everyone wonders why community support for GA is declining. It is crap like this. As @Parker_Woodruff said above, maybe this is a fishing expedition by a less aviation experienced local attorney. But as it gets more visibility it may invite more aggressive and knowledgeable legal talent. That is how these crazy lawsuits and wild settlements get started. Remember that there will be no sympathy by local residents for the California doctor or AIG. Local long-time residents, like the homeowner and her parents, generally blame outsiders, like all the "beautiful people" that come to Santa Fe, for driving up living costs making it impossible to live close to the city center instead on these dirt lots that they can barely afford. And if AIG had made a reasonable settlement all this would never have gotten this far and would be over.

Back on topic. I know that you got plenty of recommendations to reskin or buy a used aileron, rebalance and repaint with quotes of over $3k from experiences about 8 years ago. I am sure that it will cost you much, much more now. If you have piles of money to burn then that makes great sense - I know many will say "no biggie" and "if that is an issue for you then you probably should not be owning a plane". But why make this a few $ thousand problem when it should only be a few $ hundred. I had a similar situation when I purchased my J about 25 years ago. Before it had wingtips it suffered rash on the outboard tips of the ailerons. My A&P at the time, an old-timer that started with Boeing in Wichita in the 50's, was a wizard in aluminum. He repaired/rebuilt all the cracked up aluminum gliders in Houston at the time. He straightened the tip out and put on a small doubler. Rebalanced. At the time the painting was just a touch-up. Rocket Engineering did not have a problem with it when they installed the IO-550A and wingtips. I don't baby my plane and I fly as fast as I can as often as I can - frequently at Vne. People can wring their hands over a repair like this but it is not an issue. Save your money for something that matters.

Won't a glance at the red spot immediately tell you if your tires have experienced any slippage on the wheel? I know the red dot is supposed to represent the lightest point for balancing and should be immediately adjacent the stem. No need for a picture.

Right. I think what you are inferring is that the tubes should be changed every time the tire is changed. It can get pinched during reinstallation or weakened as it flattens/spreads out a second time. It is better to have tire treads that last 2X without disturbing the expensive Airstop tube. When I was younger I used to change my own tires and tubes. I would try to reuse tubes and generally had good luck. However now I let my A&P do it. He will not re-use tubes under any circumstances due to failure rate.

Ohhh…you are really new to all of this. Just stack that spinner up in the hangar for now. Good luck.

Are you just talking about the "access panel" (#5)? Or the panel with float/pick-up (#1) and dial face (#3)?

When you say "hard to replace" - do you mean "hard to source" or "hard to install"? They are hard to source because they are Mooney OEM parts with proprietary faces manufactured by Rochester Sensors company. Mooney Corp has little cash and is slow to order anything from third parties. Installation is easy.

Those are “NOS” (new old stock) original design for the J model (you are correct that they are 880024-005). The original capsule was made with an aluminum domed back and an aluminum crimped ring holding the plastic lens in place. (Notice that they match the picture posted in 2023 regarding wing gauges). Newly manufactured wing gauges by Rochester for Mooney are all plastic case and lens bonded together (the back of the plastic version protrudes as a step rather than a smooth dome.) Both designs work the same and both fit in the receptacle on the wing interchangeably. Just be sure to dig the old RTV out before bonding in with new silicone. Anyone with a J that needs replacement wing gauges should jump on a set.

I am not sure if you are new to aircraft ownership, but you should have a separate propeller log for your complex propeller, It should show all work done to your prop over its life. If your A&P changed the spinner at any time after the prop was originally installed, then it should be entered and found in your logs. You may not always have your trusted A&P that "has known the plane for 2+ years" but you should always have your logs. And you should become knowledgeable regarding their history. I bet your A&P does not know off the top of his head and he also finds the answer in the logs.... Just my 2 cents.

It has been discussed many times here. The issue with PowerFlow on the J models is that the induction and exhaust system on the on M20J is really well optimized ("tumed" as you refer to it) in its stock form. Whether it was luck or good slide rule/LoPresti common sense engineering of the J, the gains to be rung out over the stock design are minimal. In 2020, @PT20J highlighted that the PowerFlow rep was at MooneyMax and admitted so much. Other owners like Wistarmo (who is no longer on MS) reported no improvement when bolting it onto a 1993 MSE. PowerFlow, founded in 1997, has been putzing around with this for nearly 30 years. If they can't find more power for the J, either through flow studies/testing, engineering or just plain trial and error, I doubt anyone will. They were first working on this when the J was still in production. Certainly no one else will waste time and money for a shrinking fleet. On the other hand, the PowerFlow has been reported to deliver some benefit to pre-J's because of their sub-optimal plumbing.

I suspect that the farmer feels bad too…for his field. I wonder what he will charge to allow trucks to drive in and destroy his crops.

You mention an overhaul above. How long has it been “hostage” since the O/H engine last started/got it warmed it up to operating temp/flown ?…surely not the entire 26 months. Or will this be your break-in flight?

.."there have been many gear-ups in Mooneys in the last couple of years". It is not just the last couple years. It has been all the time. A lot of people here are in denial that gear-ups are the main reason that Mooney's have high insurance rates and why they are nearly uninsurable for new pilots due to rates. You just provided the proof. You have a $200k hull Cirrus with ZERO time in MAKE & MODEL. And only $2,400/year.

I see where you are going, however, Mooney is not orphaned. It remains an active corporation; although it effectively is a parts manufacturer that continues to carry the legal structure, overhead costs, certified service network relationships, vendor/supplier relationships and liabilities of a company that thinks it is still in the complete aircraft manufacturing business. That is not a sustainable business structure economically - it's no wonder Pollock used the word "precarious" to describe the current company situation to @Matthew P. @Matthew P mentioned that he thinks that the MSCs are part of the issue. Of course, since they are legally bound with Mooney by reseller agreements and intellectual property agreements (the "documentation" that you highlight above that you would like shared). And historic vendors of Mooney proprietary parts remain bound to Mooney by legal agreements, both intellectual property (once again all the "documentation" that you would like shared) and reseller agreements. (like Garmin, Eaton, Rochester, etc). Proprietary parts suppliers will not (can't) deal directly with owners, and MSC's will not touch OPP. Not sure where these "group buys for OPP" will come from as long as Mooney remains an active legal entity.

I simply pointed out that modern displays/technology are not a panacea - it is not all "pros" with no "cons". Here and on other aviation sites, much of the talk is about spending up to 50% of the current value of the plane on new avionics which may not provide any additional data that you don't already get with ForeFlight on a iPad with a Stratus ". live traffic, weather information, collision alerts, obstacle and terrain alerts," - it is already there. Yes it is packaged, presented and integrated better - yes it looks really cool. And yes it might give you a VFR Glideslope for your autopilot. And if it is such a silver bullet solution, then why does it sometimes confuse and trip up so called "Pro Pilots". https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/275487 https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2024/july/pilot/what-went-wrong-obsession-with-a-waypoint http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2023/01/pilatus-pc-1247e-n79nx-fatal-accident.html

Actually you are understating the share of pilot-related accidents. Only 7.2% of accidents were attributed to mechanical issues that could be found. The cause of 28% of the accidents was designated as "Unknown" - but most likely pilot-related.

Actually it was clear. Everyone glossed over the fact that LASAR did inferior work, did not catch their mistakes and sent you a crap part that wasted you and your mechanic’s time. Everyone wants to ASSUME that this is the FAA’s fault.

What do you mean when you say that the first LASAR rebuilt nose truss had a “fitment issue” requiring you to send it back? Are you saying that LASAR got the dimensions/ jig alignment wrong during welding? Or did they send the wrong truss? Why would there be a “trial and error” fitment issue? That doesn’t sound like a bureaucratic/paperwork issue.

Of course the genesis is the characteristic of the pilot. But it is so, so much easier to just dial in and "follow a magenta line".(actually let "George" follow the magenta line) Its like playing a compute game. If you are dependent upon dialing in and finding the intersection of two VORs or finding the offset of a DME while hand flying you know much more quickly when you are not up to the task and that you will not be able to hand fly the plane if the "magenta line fails".

"@kortopates I'd echo that to say that in the era of steam gauges there was MUCH more instrument uniformity from one aircraft to the next. Modern panels have so many unique quirks that currency is minimum price of entry, but not even remotely in the realm of proficiency. How modes change, how the approach sequences, where you find the "gotchas" with equipment surprises....and I'm still surprised sometimes...and this is with an all Garmin panel...once you start mixing and matching a lot of the time the quirks rise exponentially." This is more of a problem with our 20-60 year old planes that become more and more bespoke with each modification. Newer planes like Cirrus have more uniformity. "The hard part is that you can't simulate every single issue you might run into. Sometimes it's obvious and easy...sometimes it's a head scratcher and it won't be figured out that flight. I would argue that more capable and integrated panels with a fully featured autopilot afford a WAY larger safety margin for the GA pilot. But they come at the cost of more sophistication from the panel requiring more sophistication from the pilot. .... So the level of safety afforded is only as good as the pilot." It offers way more safety margin until it stops working or the pilot cannot understand it. It allows (lulls), pilots that are actually "less sophisticated" into believing that they are more sophisticated sometimes with disastrous results. TNFLyGirl - preliminary indicates she had problems operating Century 2000 autopilot (she even posted YouTube of her struggling with it) https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/348680 https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/ntsb-report-contains-key-information-on-high-profile-accident/ https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/181528 The latest Pilatus crash - pilot told ATC of autopilot problem