1980Mooney

Why would any owner deliver a plane and logs to a buyer-friendly A&P at a distant airport for pre-buy "annual"? A PPI makes obvious sense - it's only an inspection and an "opinion".... You can take it or leave it. You can fly your plane back to your home base. But you have "Buyers" here saying the pre-buy annual turned up 10-25 Airworthiness Issues in some cases. Let's say the Buyer's A&P claims an "non-airworthiness" corrosion issue. It may not be black and white - the extent or seriousness may be subject to debate by reputable A&P's. And the technique, extent and cost of the claimed "required repair" by the Buyer may also may be subject to debate by informed and reasonable parties. But you are not there to put your eyes and hands on it and neither is your A&P. If you disagree with the diagnosis, prognosis and/or demanded cost to repair then the deal is likely off. The buyer-friendly A&P buttons the plane up per the terms suggested by some above. And as required the A&P writes up your logs with the "annual" noting that the plane has non-airworthiness issues that were not repaired. Now you have a plane that is Not Airworthy at a distant airport. Your insurance is void and you will need a ferry permit to get it back. Brilliant negotiating position. I am sure it worked out well for the "Buyers" as noted above. Even if you do cave and agree to repairs you have no control over cost. If I were selling, the Buyer could conduct an "annual" on "his plane" once he owns it. If he wants to save money and combine the PPI with the Annual then the Buyer needs to agree to terms, buy and transfer title while the plane is apart with his "buyer-friendly" A&P. The Buyer can then pay for any repairs that he really thinks make economic sense.

Why?...Shouldn't every pilot be able to properly match pitch and power to the selected landing configuration in order to arrest rate of descent and control speed?...and do it in a stabilized manner without wildly racing the trim wheel up or down? What is so alarming or amazing about this video to a properly trained Mooney pilot?

No one has commented on cost. KLRDMD does no pre-buy inspection on purchased planes. gsxrpilot spends more than a week in the shop on the pre-buy inspection but thinks it's less than 40 hours. 1001001 offered to pay for 25 hours and Doc recommends 25-30 hours. With most A&P shop rates north of $100/hr in most med-large cities that means $2,500 - $4,000 for a thorough pre-buy...maybe more. Now if you are lucky enough to find a plane in your town with multiple local A&Ps that might be the extent of it. But 1001001 mentions a ferry permit to get the potential purchase to a preferred A&P for a pre-buy inspection. Potentially a lot of additional time, energy and cost if the plane is in another part of the country regardless if it has to come to you or you have to make multiple trips to it. Carusoam and 1001001 talk about rolling the pre-buy inspection into an annual while everything is still apart. Ideal if it is on your turf with your long term A&P...you can exercise some oversight and control. But if it's in another distant city with an A&P that knows he will never have your future business then there is the possibility that it will be a more "thorough" and costly pre-buy/annual than you ever imagined....but that might still be a good thing long term.

Well one thing I learned is NEVER give them more information than they request. Read the letters from the FAA very carefully. Answer strictly to the letter. For instance if they ask for: "A current history and clinical examination from your treating physcian... The report should address history and symptoms, diagnosis, treatment plan, etc... Include the results and any current testing deemed appropriate" That means the treating physician can comment on the results of any current testing that he deemed appropriate. That does not mean that you should send the results of those tests. For instance if you had an MRI or CT that does not mean you should send it and it does not mean you should send the radiologists report who read the images. Don't think you will be helpful if you provide more information than requested. If you send them then it will lead to more and more questions and time. If the FAA wants them they will specifically request them or direct your AME to request and review them.

If he winds up going the Special Issuance route, I recommend that he contact the office of the Regional Flight Surgeon. The FAA Medical Branch has panels and committees of AME's that regularly meet by specialty to discuss conditions, thresholds and potential rehabilitation related to disqualification and recertification. Ask the Regional Flight Surgeon if there is an AME on a panel specializing in blood cancers that might be nearby who would be willing to work him either directly or with his local AME on his case. Special Issuances take a lot of work which many local AME's either are not knowledgeable or not willing to make the effort. The Regional Flight Surgeon or an AME on one of the FAA Medical committees can help make your local AME knowledgeable on what it will exactly take for approval thereby streamlining the process for all involved. https://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/medical_certification/rfs/aea/ Thirteen years ago I suffered a neurological condition requiring brain surgery. It automatically disqualified my medical. I worked with the Southwest Regional Flight Surgeon and a local Neurosurgeon AME that sits on a FAA Medical Branch committee specializing in my condition. I was able to get a Special Issuance after considerable work. I continue to see my AME annually and have to provide some paperwork to the FAA annually but it is not a burden. I remain Instrument Rated in a high performance and complex single and it has not affected the cost or my ability to obtain insurance (I am now age 65).

You don't mention the what happened to your EGT when you dialed in that fuelflow. I assume that EGT spiked to about 1525 F before the CHT rose to over 400.

When you say you “plugged in” 22”MP/2350RPM/15.7GPH FuelFlow are you saying that you adjusted mixture to achieve that fuel flow rather than adjusting for temperature either LOP or ROP?

Just don't get so focused on weight and balance that you forget something on your takeoff checklist. This would be a really bad day to forget to set your flaps for TO.....

They highlight the 182 kts cruise and 9 gph.....but you get one or the other - not both. I think you are right that consumption is about 14 gph wide open at 182 kts. At 9 gph speed drops to about 150 kts. It is a pig. The prototype DA50 SuperStar with fixed gear and IO-550 at 2007 AirVenture had an empty weight of 2,200 lbs. The DA50 RG has grown to an empty weight of 3,175 lbs without options. - gained almost half a ton. Max TO weight for the DA50 is 4,407 lbs. - that's1232 useful load is before options. A/C and FIKI will knock UL down considerably. The DA50 wing and fuselage is basically the same as the DA62, just chopped down a couple feet on each. DA62 owners on the Diamond site typically say that the options knock over 200 lbs off their UL. A DA50 with options empty weighs about the same as an Ovation at max gross. TO is really long for DA50 RG- 2,427 ft Mooney Ultra Acclaim - 2,100 ft Mooney Ultra Ovation - 1,600 ft.. Bonanza G36 - 1,913 ft. Cirrus SR22T - 1,517 ft Cirrus SR22 - 1,082 ft Quite frankly the DA-50 is probably underpowered. And to lift this bloat they have fitted massive 44 ft. wings which means you have to rent a really big T-hangar if you can find one.. Where I am based annual T-hangar cost for a DA-50 will be $2,200 more than a Mooney or Bonanza and $1,600 more than a Cirrus SR22. If you fly less than 100 hours per year that will eat up a good portion of the fuel cost savings from the diesel Diamond.

That was my thought also. The "K" factor in the JPI Fuel Scan is adjustable. Since this is a new to you Missile the calibration may be off or never accurately checked. Another way to check is fill the tanks to the lips (including outer tanks if it has Monroy's), fly it and return to the same pump and fill again. Compare the JPI totalizer to the pump. You can go into the JPI menu and adjust the K factor accordingly. I am a bit surprised at the variation in EGT's and in the CHT's excluding #6 up front considering that these are GAMI. #5 looks hot. If not the injector it could be an exhaust valve leak giving you the 90 deg. F EGT variation. My TCM factory injectors have always had a tight EGT spread. Carusoam commented on the same experience in a thread 5 years ago... Also make sure that the flexible baffle seal on the front of the engine is turned upwards into the lower cowling. If it is turned downwards, especially if you have old seal and some engine mount droop, both the sealing will be poor and the airflow pressure will push the seal further away from the lower cowl. This allows some cylinder cooling air to bypass and go directly under the engine. If the seal is turned up, the airflow pressure will push it tighter into place. I have to remind my A&P every time they decowl the engine. That said, Missile's run hot in extended hold/taxi, take-off and climb....especially in the South. It may make some uncomfortable but I have been flying my Missile 19 years without any major issue.

You appear to be flowing way too much fuel. The Missile STC has an IO-550A. There are currently 11 versions of IO-550 most with different fuel flow profiles and the profile above doesn't designate or match anything. You need to be looking at TCM service bulletin SID97-3E. As Mike Busch says it is The “gold standard” for adjusting fuel flow on fuel-injected TCM engines is a 39-page service bulletin called SID97-3E". https://www.avweb.com/ownership/the-savvy-aviator-65-whats-your-fuel-flow-at-takeoff/ Look at Table 9 on page 27 of 38. https://www.victor-aviation.com/pdf/tech-docs/SID97-3E.pdf Also the IO-550A on the Missile has an altitude compensating fuel engine driven fuel pump (Auto-lean). Look at Section 7-2.3.3. IO-550 Altitude Compensating Fuel System Flight Check in the overhaul manual. The Auto-lean fuel flow curve is the same as the leaning schedule in SID97-E (See page 7-5..it is in lbs/hr but SID97-3E has both lbs/hr and gph shown) http://www.softoutfit.com/static/refs/io550overhaul.pdf At sea level the fuel flow should be set to 25.6 gph. (at its max). At 1,000 ft. elevation where you are taking off you should be seeing 25.4 gph. You should not need to run the electric boost during climb. The Auto-lean is "set and forget" when you are in a full power climb. When you are at 8,500 ft. wide open at 2,700 RPM and full rich you should see approx. 20.3 GPH. Remember with the Missile you have the air induction which adds about 0.5 PSI to the manifold pressure when you are at speed (or about 1,000 ft. improvement when looking at engine/fuel performance curves). That also assumes that your top cowl fits tightly against the air filter box without any leakage. The factory TCM injectors that came with the engine in the Missile STC seem to be quite well balanced and uniform. With the tight cowling it is typical to fight cylinder temps of 400F or high oil temperatures during summer take offs especially here in the hot Gulf coast. You just have to balance climb, speed and temperature. - sometimes shallower climb with greater airspeed - worst case pause the climb for increased speed/engine air cooling at reduced power. Your EGT's look about 75 F high. I typically run 75 F ROP. What do you see for Peak temps? How does your EDM compare to the original factory analog temp sensor (which has to remain per STC and in my experience is very accurate and a good average to go by)? Perhaps your injectors need cleaning. That might explain some of the variation. More info on auto-lean at end of article. http://www.kellyaerospace.com/articles/ContinuousFlow.pdf

No you didn't. Look at the Quantity.... "Sold Out"

Just like 2008 was a "blip". For some a 10 year blip. Many houses lost, careers stunted, some derailed. In 2 1/2 months hundreds of thousands of airline and aviation employees will be laid off as the terms of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act expire. Folks may want to travel...but most don't really need to travel. Let's face it much of the need for business travel is hype to justify boondoggle and perk. What an interruption like this does is cause companies and businesses to recognize that they can get by just fine with less business travel. "Blips" like this accelerate permanent changes that were underway in any event both in behavior and the adoption of technology and automation to eliminate processes and employees. Working from home and remote conferencing is not and will not ever be perfect but it has advanced more in the last 3 months than in the last 30 years - both in adoption of technology and change in behavior. Vaccine or no vaccine, this "blip" will have a long term impact. Government and company debts have swollen to historically unforeseen and unsustainable levels by any measure. The stock market and economy has been sustained by Fed "liquidity" which is just another word for debt. Companies' business models don't work with the virus protection required (distancing of workers or customers, PPE, additional cleaning steps, etc.) and you will be seeing unprecedented losses reported next quarter. State and city budgets are currently being devastated and the damage will be more apparent in the coming months as revenues decline and costs rise. Universities are rethinking sports and in some cases eliminating programs. Many small businesses have been quick to fail and liquidate but replacements will be slower to build from scratch. But you are right that the effects of this "blip" will dissipate.......at some point.

You are working from the wrong price list. There are 2 new 2020 DA62's for sale on Controller for $1.42 million. Yes they have A/C, FIKI and O2 which you naturally want when buying a $1+ million airplane. FIKI is a $90K option alone. OK so knock a cool $ 0.25 million off the price of a DA62 and you price an optioned DA50 at $1.2 million. (using your discount the price will be $1.3 million). Let's get real - we carp about the price of SEL planes like Acclaim, G36 and SR22T being too high at $900,00 and this thing will be even $100k's more. This thing is a pig. The prototype DA50 SuperStar with fixed gear and IO-550 at 2007 AirVenture had an empty weight of 2,200 lbs. The DA50 RG has grown to an empty weight of 3,175 lbs without options. - gained almost half a ton. Max TO weight for the DA50 is 4,407 lbs and take off distances are materially longer than the competing SEL's. With normal options the DA50 empty weight is nearly the same as a Mooney Ultra at max weight. Quite frankly the DA-50 is probably underpowered. OK 4 doors is cool and so is single lever FADEC control. Claimed fuel consumption is impressive. However to lift this bloat they have fitted massive 44 ft. wings which means you have to rent a really big T-hangar if you can find one.. Where I am based annual T-hangar cost for a DA-50 will be $2,200 more than a Mooney and $1,600 more than a Cirrus SR22. If you fly less than 100 hours per year that will eat up a good portion of the fuel cost savings from the diesel Diamond. Yes the DA-50 cabin is 4 inches wider than a Cirrus. But the Cirrus has a slightly higher useful load and Jet-A is heavier than 100LL. So the real world increase in people or luggage on a DA-50 is marginal over a Cirrus SR22T. And the Cirrus has the CAPS. I don't think Cirrus needs to be too worried about loss of much market share.

https://www.niar.wichita.edu/niarworkshops/Portals/0/Jun17_0425_PaulB.pdf https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PdTNmPoY94 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nccXNJnOy7E https://www.wisconsinaviation.com/aircraft-sales/cirrus-composite-repair Wing structure and removal: http://www.inetefb.com/Documentation/Cirrus/AMM/pdf/57-10.pdf Damage Assessment manual showing fuselage and wing internal structure layout http://www.inetefb.com/Documentation/Cirrus/AMM/pdf/57-10.pdf

Exactly. Look at page 17 of Chapter 24 of the Service and Maintenance Manual - M20J regarding Left and Right Low Fuel calibration. At the end of the paragraph it notes that there is an approx. 2 second delay when pressing the Test button once the annunciator system is placed back into normal mode. http://mooney.free.fr/Manuels%20M20J/M20J/Mooney%20Service%20Manuel%20M20J%20Vol.%201%20of%202.pdf

I am puzzled by this comment: I am curious why you think the annunciator panel and specifically the low fuel warning system will not work unless you press the test button (at some unspecified time). The annunciator panel functions when power is on. As a safety feature the test button sends power to the lights in order to verify that they will illuminate when they receive a power signal from the appropriate annunciator circuit. The safe practice as noted in the POH is to test the annunciator panel before start, however there is no mention in J or K POH's that the Low Fuel level annunciator might be compromised if you did not previously press the test button. Based upon personal experience over 20 years I have experienced the Hi/Lo Vac, Hi/Lo Volt, Gear Unsafe, Gear Down and yes the Low Fuel annunciator lights on. I have not been vigilant about pressing the test light button before each flight yet the annunciator warning lights have always functioned properly. J and K Annunciator panels were the same with exception of Ram air light in the place of Alt air light. Annunciator panels changed between 1979 and 1980 model years but basically had the same functionality. Not sure what year model floridaflyer is inquiring about.

Full feathering prop. The distances are the same as a Mooney with a Rocket or Missile conversion which includes a full feathering prop.

I suspect that most pilots have lost proficiency for dead reckoning and radio navigation as they have come habitually dependent upon GPS over the past 20 years. There is always the chance that GPS could be compromised by jamming, hacking or a satellite attack resulting in our dependence upon radio nav as a backup. By the same logic above there is no reason to pay extra for anything such as GPS that is a crutch and the fastest gadget to undermine the attainment of 1960-70's era IFR proficiency (which, although a lot of work, was just fine and safe for getting from point A to point B). The introduction and adoption of new technology in aviation will continue to make flight safer and more efficient. This topic reminds me of the debate over the past 20 years regarding manual vs. automatic transmissions in sports and performance cars. The argument was that a manual transmission in the hands of a "skilled and proficient" driver was always faster than an automatic.....until it wasn't. Ferrari and Lamborghini don't even offer new cars with manual transmissions any longer. Technology in the form of automated dual clutch and other designs have passed the "proficiency" of mere mortals. I suspect in the not too distant future the best selling certified GA aircraft will come standard with fully integrated GPSS, NAV and Autoland systems, single throttle/prop control, electronic ignition/engine management controls, and BRS (all integrated together). I am sure that there will be smart ways to embrace new technology and still have a safe level of prophecy for potential system failures.

Also a Missile is “KISS” - Keep It Simple Stupid. It is simple, strong and forgiving. Engine management is elementary. You can power your way out of many conditions that a smaller engine can’t. You dial the engine back if you want efficiency or push it to the firewall you want speed, climb like a bat out of hell or to lift a full useful load. It also has the Monroy long range tanks (100 gal). Fuel management is simple too because the outboard tanks flow into the inboard ones. There are only 2 fuel selector positions even with the extra extended tanks. Its either “Right” or “Left”. None of the complex nonsense like on Bonanzas or Cessna 310s with tip tanks. I had my J converted to a Missile nearly 20 years ago. When the family was younger our trips were with all four seats filled. As commented above, family flights are best appreciated below 12,500 without O2. I think it’s important to look at real world performance rather than just flat out level speed. Our frequent trips between Sugar Land and Albuquerque (633 nm direct although few more around military and Restricted areas) are generally about 4 hours (curiously generally either way). Other frequent trips clear across Texas, from Texas Tech in Lubbock to Sugar Land, (400 nm direct) were about 2.5 hours. I recall one trip where another local father in a Cirrus SR22 was also flying his daughter back to.Sugar Land at the same altitude ( I think 9,500). I took off after him and passed him midway. I avoid grass or dirt fields There is too much weight on the front gear and not a lot of prop clearance. A bumpy surface or rut can make the plane pitch and bounce enough to nick the tips. Also if the ground is moist or soft, you will need help or a tug to move it. Check the prop carefully - it is full feathering used only on 3 planes. Check the engine mounts for droop and the landing gear Lord disks for compression. Both will reduce prop clearance. I recently had excessive wear on the lower two-thirds portion of the 2 piece spinner right under the big center nut that holds it to the low pitch stop on the piston chamber. Think of it as a large curved aluminum salad bowl with a big hole in the center of the flat base. Hartzell charges a cool $2,000 for that one piece of aluminum and it took them 6 weeks to make it. The full spinner (2 nose pieces plus backing plate) is $4,000. None existed in the US. For some reason corrosion in the tail pipe (a Rocket Engineering specific design) is a problem in Missiles. (No corrosion in the heater however - zero problem there). I know of one Missile owner in Houston who lost the tail piece while flying. The IO550A is tightly cowled and tends to run a bit hot. You have to watch cylinder temperature when climbing out on hot summer days in Texas (especially if idling or taxiing an extended time at a busy Class C or B airport waiting for clearance). I just shallow out or level my climb at slightly reduced rpm to stabilize temps before resuming. The Continental fuel injection nozzles are quite well balanced and temps are even. i do not have speed brakes and don’t really see the need. I have flown considerable times into Class B (Houston, Dallas) and some Class C where they ask for speed to stay ahead of the jets and then drop you in to land. I just reduce power, pitch up rather aggressively, drop the gear and add half flaps to kill speed and then lose altitude. The same is true when crossing the Monzano or Sandia Mountains anywhere from 10,500 - 12, 500 ft. and then quickly dropping into the Albuquerque Sunport at 5,300 ft. I will admit that I have dropped gear and flaps at speeds above those recommended or posted in the POH at times in the past; however over 20 years it does not seemed to have caused any problems. I have not needed to source anything from Rocket Engineering which is a good thing since they no longer support the Missile or Rocket. My A&P is able to find alternate suppliers or repair shops for the few Rocket Engineering unique parts. Make sure that it has the plywood battery board that Rocket Engineering originally cut for the plane. It is an odd shape and you need it to slide the battery box from the tail. (2 batteries in box). Good luck

FIKI or A/C adds about 50-70 lbs each. This brings the Useful Load of an Acclaim down to 850-860 lbs. (barely 800 with both). With full fuel (89 gal) payload is about 320 lbs with one of the desired options, 260-270 lbs with both. That makes it basically a two people with baggage airplane. Looking at the pictures online of the new Acclaim Ultras, I haven't seen any with FIKI. I suspect that for $800-900 K the new buyers optioned A/C at the very least leaving little useful load to sacrifice. https://www.aviationconsumer.com/industry-news/editorial/mooney-acclaim-ultra-tops-in-raw-speed/