1980Mooney

This raises a few issues. Although well intentioned, would an IA ever sign off on it in an Annual? And if an owner produces such a part, and it fails in the future for the next owner (causing a crash like that E in OK), won’t the current owner (or their heirs if there is a fatality) and insurance company come after the former owner who made the OPP?

You may be right. But the OP said "I can't find any leaks nor does the reservoir loose any fluid". So it is one or the other or both.....

As Tim says it sounds like the piston seals are leaking. This is not an "external leak". It leaks past the seal as you push. Therefore it just goes back to the Reservoir. See the Service Manual Chapter 32 page 24 . I think you are right

With the relentless march of advances in avionics technology, I suspect more pilots fly this way than we realize or want to believe. He took off in VMC from Grand Prairie and then from Missouri. Only the take off in Grand Prairie was towered - his stop for fuel and destinations in WI we not - no contact with any flight control required. When so many GA planes have Synthetic Vision, FSI-B for traffic awareness, perhaps Garmin "Visual Approach Guidance" (which doesn't know if you are flying in VMC or in the clag) I bet it becomes more and more tempting to just fly on without talking to anyone - without committing to a restrictive "IFR" flight plan - and then deal with it as it comes - relying upon the onboard technology. This accident pilot has obviously flown with and trusted plenty of fancy and capable avionics. If he had landed successfully, who would have known or cared?

"Outsourcing decision making to systems....that exist outside of ourselves could be very useful in avoiding the problems from shortcomings in ....our capabilities,,," Are you suggesting that we rely more upon integrated flight automation?

I have an older X3 Conserver (green colored - current ones are blue). That is what the documentation says - you must switch to a mask and turn to "Constant" above 18,000 ft. Then you adjust the dial for altitude (18K, 20K, 22K or 25K) which adjusts the constant flow rate to a rate appropriate for that altitude. The Conserve - pulse on demand feature - only works below 18,000 ft. The Precise Flight mask provides no additional capability and does not conserve O2. Save your money.

An STC is assigned to a specific airframe serial number. As long as the STC is still supported (which it is - Griggs/O&N) then you need the consent of the STC Holder (Griggs/O&N) in order to transfer it to a new airframe/serial number. I have a hunch that they won't do it for liability reasons. Griggs Aircraft Refinishing | Mooney bladders KNR, Inc., wrote a review of bladder application/installation in Mooney's back in 2009. They said it took 55-60 manhours to install the latest 64 gallon 8 bag (4/wing) installation. (includes cutting additional hole for an access panel in each wing in order to instal the 4th bag). If your salvage bags are the 54 gallon 6 bag (3/wing) system then the installation would be 45 hours. However you need to add more hours to remove the bags from the salvage wing. 200910 Ribs Wet or Dry? (knr-inc.com) There was a topic here on MS pirepping the installation. That topic had plenty of pictures of the job in process but sadly they are gone with the switch to the current server/host. If you Google the subject and select "images" some of the pictures remain on Google The last thing is how do you know the condition of the bladder?. Also I don't know how they plumb the separate bags together inside the wing - possible damage on removal? If your salvage bladders are the 6 bag (54 gallon) system you can buy 2 add on bladders to get up to the full 64 gallon "8 bag system". It sounds like that costs about another $3,000 and 15 manhours. They have to cut another access hole in each wing. Installing a new bladder system with a 7 year warranty is one thing - it has plenty of positives. Installing a salvage bladder system - more man hours than a new system, unknown condition and most likely reduced life. - I see a lot of labor expense with questionable life/quality - The only "positive" is the free used bags. - and I am not sure that is a positive.

Required dual alternator. I think you are right.

There are no Mid-body Mooney's currently for sale with FIKI (either on Controller of Trade-A-Plane). There is one M20K 231 on Controller with TKS (inadvertent - Not FIKI). Useful Load is 829 lbs. N231DH. That is probably without the TKS tank filled. I bet UL with deice filled is around 770 lbs. This is barely a 2-person plane for the long-distance flight for which it is optimized. With partial fuel of 65 gallons that leaves 380 lbs for people, baggage, hatrack, etc. Similar dilemma to this: There is a modified M20K - Rocket 305 on Trade-A-Plane, N921Z. Rockets increase the GW 300 lbs over the 2,900 lb M20K. But with the heavier TSIO-520 and full feathering prop you lose a good bit of that. You also lose the economy of the 231 in exchange for speed. It looks like a hangar queen in partial restoration. From the pictures it looks like it has TKS but no mention in the description. Just painted. They highlight that they just installed new insulation. New interior. But "Panel is Factory, Yoke mount for iPad No ADSB.". When the interior was out was the ideal time to replace/modernize avionics, run new wiring, strip out old, install new antenna, etc - Odd, I bet they ran out of money coupled with long delays in available avionics.- got tired of the "project". If you go to an old Aircraft.com advert it does mention TKS but no mention of FIKI. - appears to be "inadvertent" only The plane has suffered two (2) botched landings - AviationDB says that it broke off the left landing gear wheel and damaged right wing in a cross controlled landing in 2001 and in 2011 it hit a runway sign on landing that sheared the nose gear off.

Also with the Mooney, you have the center steel tube ( of the windshield/fuselage frame ) exposed. It is easy to lean forward and grab, even with the seat all the way back or with the nose pitched up, in order to stabilize yourself or to pull the seat forward. In a Cessna, in the event of an unexpected seat slide back during take off (and nose pitch up), the only thing to grab and pull on is the yoke. The outcome is deadly.

On Beechtalk, there have been comments in the last month that the inventory of Citation jets (a lot are older) is higher than it has been in a long time. Additionally they are seeing the inventory increase in November which is a time that it historically does not increase. They said "asking" prices are staying high but they expect them to drop with the rising inventory. Also the collector car market is a lot like our nearly antique fleet of Mooney's. Per Hagerty's at the end of September: "The Hagerty Market Rating (HMR) dropped 1.2 points this month to 68.33—its lowest value in two years. Although this is not the first time that the Market Rating has decreased for 13 months out of a 15-month timeframe, the current downturn includes the steepest decline in Market Rating history. In the past year, the Market Rating has dropped 9.6 points. Before 2023, the largest single-year drop was only 6.9 points. While still in the “expanding market” range of the spectrum, it’s very likely that the Market Rating will continue to decline as prices soften across the market. The pandemic boom has clearly come to an end." "This month was the first time since August 2017 in which every single metric used to calculate the Hagerty Market Rating dropped." "Despite more than $403 million in sales at the Monterey auctions this month, the Median Sale Price metric decreased two points to its lowest score in over a decade. ... The median sale price at Monterey this year was 13 percent lower than a year ago." Prices will defy gravity only for so long. Yesterday @Steve Dawson posted in "Mooney Market": "Controller gives a pretty good idea of the market. Before Covid there were approximately 90-100 Mooneys for sale, then during Covid the demand increased and the number for sale decreased from 40-50 and the prices went up substantially for everything. This morning there's 95 for sale so the demand is lower and the prices should be going down soon. There's a few ad's showing that the plane has been listed for two years so they're probably overpriced and/or have something wrong with them. "

As Paul and John said it is all basically labor. Watch the video below. They show just part of the repair after they have already removed flight control surfaces, (in your case the flap) and removed the damaged area as well as repaired any damaged ribs. Your damage is further inboard and the skin is larger. I can see 80 shop hours - maybe more - at $120/hour plus parts and painting.

No telling what he did but it is in error. The firewall is straight at the top and then angles forward. If he used the top of the firewall then he is at least 3.68 inches in error. That gets you to 40.18 inches - still too far forward (limit is 41 inches). Your plane is not nose heavy - the W&B is screwed up.

But glad you found one. In the world of Mooney, you just won the lottery! I bet you have the last one.....

Brilliant yes but you are comparing one market that has 100's of millions of customers with our market that barely measures into a few thousand in the US. The economies of scale just don't work for us.

@wombat Your statement is correct. Take an engine operating at 2,100 RPM. Every 2 revolutions, a given valve will open, close and then spend a certain amount of time closed and against the valve seat : call it T seconds In one minute the seat and valve will touch for 1,050 x T seconds Increase RPM 20% to 2,520 and that same valve will open, close and then touch 20% more times or 1,260 times. However the amount of time that it remains closed and touching the seat will be reduced to 1/1.2 % : hence it will only touch for 0.8333 x T seconds At 2,520 RPM total time touching (excluding inertial effects of spring closing at higher velocity) will be approx. 1,260 X 0.8333 x T = 1,050 x T second : i.e. EXACTLY THE SAME total time as at 2,100 RPM Assuming that both engine RPM's are with WOT, at 2,520 RPM there will be approximately 20% more fuel/air passing through the valves with 20% more energy that has to be dissipated by shaft HP and residual heat in the 20% greater exhaust flow (i.e. higher power setting). Therefore, the valves and valve seats experience a higher "heat transfer rate to the seat" at higher RPM. Otherwise the heat will stay in the valve resulting in melting. In order to increase the transfer rate, the valve will have to get hotter. Rate of transfer (conduction rate) has nothing to do with how long it touches. "Heat transfer rate to the seat." (assuming identical physical valve and seat design and dimensions) is driven by the temperature of the valve and the thermodynamic property of the valve and seat materials". Air/fuel ratios are generally similar in a narrow range for a given operating regime ROP or LOP (not wanting to debate the merits of either right now) - that means at higher power settings exhaust valves run hotter.

The damaged/smashed intake duct on N5895Q, a 1965 M20E, was identified as the cause of the engine loss of power crash landing in Oklahoma in 2022. This same "lack of Mooney part source" issue was discussed in September. Group prebuying was suggested. It doesn't appear anything has happened since then to improve the dire situation.

Here is a recent (2022) repair of wing leading edge damage using a landing light (with pics before and after).

Similar wing damage was discussed in 2015. (actually 2 MS members said they had damage in basically the same place - one hit a tug, the other a guy wire). The pics are gone due to changes in the MS server but one person also suggested adding the landing light in the damage location. If you do consider reskinning proceed with caution. A former MS member, Clarence M20Doc, who owns the respected MSC in Ontario Canada said the "it is not a repair that our shop would consider". His point was that, unless the shop specializes in aircraft aluminum repair, most shops will overpromise and underdeliver.

It sounds like you are at Falcon Field where they unfortunately had the Sept. micro-burst. If so, that is a City of Mesa owned covered tie down. And also if so your tie-down lease already releases the City of Mesa from any liability whatsoever. That is why they said to go through your own insurance. This is typical with most hangars and tie-downs. In fact most require the Tenant/Lessee to carry insurance and name the City or Hangar Owner as an "additional insured". https://www.falconfieldairport.com/home/showpublisheddocument/14800/635780112878670000 7. INDEMNIFICATION. To the fullest extent permitted by law, TENANT agrees to release CITY, its officials, departments, employees, and agents, for, from, and against any and all loss, injury, damage to persons or property, or other liability of any nature occasioned by, but not limited to, fire, theft, vandalism, rain, flood, windstorm, hail, earthquake, collision or from any other cause, whether such cause be a direct, indirect, or merely a contributing factor in producing said loss, injury, damage or liability, except for any injuries or damages resulting from negligent acts or omissions of the CITY, its officials, departments, employees, or agents. All aircraft and other personal property stored at the Airport shall be stored at the TENANT’s sole risk. CITY assumes no liability for loss or injury to persons or property while TENANT is using the Airport facilities.

Another reason, rarely discussed here, why that makes great sense - reduced wing loading. Mooney hangar/shop talk is usually all about "power loading" like here. Generally, about how to get more power - like with a turbo. But every Mooney since 1961 flies on the same wing. Steady flight/state lift decreases about 2-3% per thousand feet. Depending on the temperature at the 8,000 ft DA airport, you will have lost about 20% of your wing lift at takeoff as compared to what you are accustomed to at sea-level. How do we compensate for loss of lift - especially on take-off? Greater speed ( get more power loading and/or longer runway). Greater AOA - too much and we stall Reduce Wing Loading Stay well below MGW Don't fill seats Don't fill tanks But MGW is just a number on the same wing for all models. Just like the "FAA average passenger weight" has risen since 1961, our Mooney's have also gotten "fatter". As @Shadrach recommends, a TN'ed M20E at 2,575 lbs. or a TN'ed M20F at 2,740 lbs. will stack up well compared to a 3,380 lb Acclaim on high DA takeoff. Although the power loading is less, the wing loading is also less.

Don’t forget - the Lycoming IO-360 compression ratio is 8.7 vs 7.5 for the Continental TSIO-360. That’s 16% greater compression pressure immediately and greater peak combustion pressure during initial acceleration. Until the turbo over boosts about 16% compared to the Lycoming manifold pressure, the Continental is playing “catch-up”.

There are a few additional issues and costs to be aware of with an A3B6 conversion :

Here are two that seem to be available. https://azairsalvage.com/product/lycoming-io-360-a3b6d-1173-smoh-wide-deck-200-h-p-mooney-m20j-201/ https://www.aviatorsmarket.com/detail/aircraft-engines-for-sale/lycoming-io-360-a3b6d-engine/3660

The Missile 300 also by Rocket Engineering has the same bulge on the pilot side for the IO-550 vs the TSIO-520 in the Rocket 305. I think the 520 and 550 Continental's have the same dimensions. As noted by Aviation Consumer "Missile Mod includes a new eight-point engine mount canted 2.3 degrees to the right to counteract torque". You would think the bulge would be on the right (copilot side). Perhaps when under full power, the engine is twisting counterclockwise (viewed from cockpit) and canting to the left just a fraction in the Lord/Barry isolating mounts and needs a little extra space. Call Darwin Conrad.....