1980Mooney

Something is amiss with your plane. I fly my Missile single pilot all the time. I have no weight in the luggage compartment. My trim is generally 2/3 to 3/4 but never, ever all the way. I have an 8 lb Aerosafe Standby Vac, WX500 module and the Century Autopilot box in the tail within a foot of the baggage compartment wall. But they don’t weigh anything close to your bag of sand.

I think that the relationships with A&P's in the future will take longer be more expensive it will be harder to find good support and some may have to travel further to get it many will retire and few new will enter the market In the last 22 years I have had one A&P retire on me and the other let me go because he doesn't have the capacity to provide me service any longer. I suspect that I will be paying more with the latest one. Everyone is missing the big picture - Fixed Wing Piston is a shrinking business. Look at the latest FAA Forecast 2020-2040 for General Aviation The number of Fixed Wing Piston has been dropping steadily. About 160,000 in 2010 forecast to drop to about 120,000 in 2040. Look at the Population of A&P's per FAA Airman Certificates - it has dropped about 10% for "Mechanic" and "Repairman" categories from 2010 to current 2020 even though the number of commercial aircraft has grown. The General Aviation A&P's have a harder time competing for their share of this shrinking pool of talent/mechanics. And the ones in commercial, if going from large to small will likely stick with turbine aircraft - not piston. We are in a market that will see consolidation - manufacturing and service. It will be harder to attract capital and people.

I am not sure that I follow your point. When you say "Cirrus guys" do you mean the plane owners or Cirrus Aircraft Co.? I was paying the same shop rate as that A&P was charging Cirrus, Beech, Cessna and Piper owners for hourly repairs. He has lots of Cirrus work. He said a lot is on a maintenance contract plan and some is warranty. So the Cirrus guys (owners) are paying nothing for the work done on warranty (Cirrus Aircraft Co. pays). And I am not familiar with the pricing or structure of the maintenance plans. He has more work than mechanics so he had to make a business decision on what to cut. He decided that his future is with a company that is building and delivering the most planes and provides complete factory support. The Cirrus planes are newer on average than most other brands. There appears to be a lot of similarity amongst the Cirrus lines so there may be greater efficiency for this A&P providing services. Perhaps his profits are higher on his Cirrus work. Let's face it - 40-50 Mooney's have undergone lots of mods making each one a bit different to work on. My Missile mod is at the extreme end. I don't take it personally - like I said he made a business decision that favors Cirrus work over others including Mooney. If he wanted to do me a favor, he could have told me in February that he was not going to be able to take my plane at the end of March when the annual expired. Maybe he thought he was going to hire another mechanic by then so he held off and stalled on telling me until late April when the situation was hopeless. Then I had to find another A&P and wait to get an opening in their schedule. The new A&P asked for and got my plane this past Monday .... they are telling me that they might start on it this Friday. Let's hope.

Times change. 15-20 years ago I would do a good portion of the “owner assisted” annual with an old timer A&P at another small airport. The last 15 years I have been using one particular A&P located at my home base. During that time his Cirrus business has grown including Vision Jets. He is currently short-handed of experienced mechanics which apparently are in short supply. The schedule for my annual has slipped and my plane is now out of annual. With a large and growing backlog of Cirrus on maintenance programs and Cirrus warranty work, he has told me that he can’t do my annual and I need to find someone else.

You are correct. 26.72.03 is 28V and 26.72.23 is the 12V version

The Kissling relay comes with the spike suppression diode already installed. So that is redundant on the parts list. Yes Mooney originally designed golf cart solenoids into their planes but sometime in the 90’s they shifted to Mil Grade solenoids on all planes. The Kissling relays are dual coil, Mil Grade, waterproof and survive steam cleaning. They will probably last the remaining life of the Mooney without an issue. Higher performance (more reliable) at a higher price point. The cross-reference golf cart relays at a much lower price point (either authentic Ametek or Chinese knockoff) will probably work reliably but maybe not as long depending on each plane’s environment. That may or may not be important to every owner. I know the BPM “golf cart “ solenoids originally spec’d by Mooney on my plane failed at 20 years.

The relay is “26.72.03”. Open the link: https://www.te.com/content/dam/te-com/documents/industrial-and-commercial-transportation/global/kissling-documents-data-sheets/Data_Sheets_Documents_Kissling/contractors/KI-Relay26-50A-ds-a4-K1166683-en-2012.pdf

It uses the Kissling solenoids/relays which I already highlighted

Kissling is exactly what I posted above. If you read the notes in the Mooney Parts Manual it states the the RBM needs to be replaced by the Retrofit Kit 940084-501. That kit includes the Kissling 26.72.03 which is still made. And Kissling is what Mooney was using on the new planes that they built over the past 20 years. Seems like we keep circling back to what Mooney has certified. KI-Relay26-50A-ds-a4-K1166683-en-2012.pdf (te.com) I get it that owners of 40 year old planes want to substitute low cost parts. But installing parts that are not manufactured to a standard nor approved by the plane manufacturer is the difference between Experimental and Certified. It would be helpful if an A&P on this site might comment.

The original was an RBM 70-311221. The factory alternative was a Cutler-Hammer 6041H53. If you blow up your pic you can see the "RBM" stamped on the top of the can of one of the solenoids.

Well as long as you clearly log it and your A&P signs off then that sounds great. However since the "new" Mooney claims to be dedicated to supporting the legacy owners I don't even understand why this is an issue. Why don't they provide approved list of currently available substitutes at the very least if they are not going to supply? This would take the guesswork out of justifying what is comparable to "Std Parts". These are critical parts that impact safety on a large population of the fleet.

In theory. That is why I said "at the worst possible time". It doesn't always work. Here is a recent gear-up due to failure of the emergency mechanism. Another where it just doesn't work - and would be bad if he needed it. If you are experiencing solenoid sticking and having to use the emergency mechanism repeatedly there is greater likelihood that you may one time damage the gears - which could render it useless during a future need. There are other gear-ups based on user error of course where the pilot either forgot the emergency procedure or screwed it up. Landing is high stress and non-routine failures only compound possible errors. Who wants landing gear issues? Gear extension failure / gear up landing - Modern Mooney Discussion - Mooneyspace.com - A community for Mooney aircraft owners and enthusiasts Mystery with emergency gear extension - Vintage Mooneys (pre-J models) - Mooneyspace.com - A community for Mooney aircraft owners and enthusiasts Mooney 231 possible gear actuator damage - Modern Mooney Discussion - Mooneyspace.com - A community for Mooney aircraft owners and enthusiasts

Riddle me this Batman.....So if you install a pair of "golf cart" solenoids on the landing gear actuator of your J model and subsequently it has a gear up because the solenoids failed at the worst possible time, should your insurance pay or reject your claim? Just wondering hypothetically... Like I have said on other threads I hope you clearly log any "unique" solution that use golf cart or washing machine solenoids and get a Field 337 from your A&P. It will save future owners and his/her A&P's a lot of time and grief when they are trying to sort out issues. The solenoids on my J started acting up and sticking (sometimes up, sometimes down) about 19 years ago, one of the many times Mooney was in bankruptcy. Parts were hard to come by then also. The 14 V Gear Relay Retrofit Kit 940084-501, which modifies all 12 volt M20 C, D, E, F, G, J and K was either not available or crazy in price. I got the drawings for the Retrofit Kit and bought the parts directly. The Retrofit Kit uses Kissling Solenoids made in Germany and as I believe do all modern Mooney's. The difference between those and your "golf cart" solenoid is that they are double coil, Military Grade, shock and vibration proof and waterproof to IP67 & IP6K9K (can withstand steam pressure cleaning). These things are bulletproof. I bought mine straight from Germany although Mouser here does distribute some Kissling relays. The proper part is 26.72.03 and is still made. KI-Relay26-50A-ds-a4-K1166683-en-2012.pdf (te.com) All you need then is bracket 800375-1 (which you can probably fabricate), 2 Spike Suppressor Diodes 21EG11A and some nuts, bolts and rivets. BTW - with all this talk and marketing that the new Mooney management is committed to supporting legacy aircraft, why isn't this available from the factory? It fits all legacy 12V aircraft (which is a lot) and landing gear components are pretty damn critical.

You need to catch up on the news…I think the second plane was for his soon to be ex-wife Melinda. It doesn't sound like they really wanted to fly together.

A friend of mine a couple hangers over owns both a Cirrus SR22T and a C340. He told me that he really has no reason to fly the 340 anymore. He said the Cirrus does everything that he needs at a fraction of the cost and hassle of the 340.

So the hypothetical is: - have enough $$ to own and maintain a single and to support a second 6+ seater (discussion has drifted to twins) - have enough $$ to maintain insurance on 2 planes, multiple panel database subscriptions on 2 planes and 2 hangars - have the time to maintain currency and competency to fly hard IFR in both (including engine out single performance in a twin) If you have all that then why aren’t you considering a used Piper Meridian? All this concern here about reliability of a big single vs debate about difficulty of twins?…. A single turboprop solves all the issues and is pressurized as a bonus. It’s simpler and you are maintaining and competent in one plane.

Make one. It has been discussed here before. Rocket and Missile Battery Boards are identical.

There is no "70 pound weight in the baggage compartment" in the STC. Mooney Missiles are modified by the following STC's SA00081SE Engine, Prop SA00472SE Weight SA00260SE Cowling SA4443NM Gap Seals and Speed Fairings SE00223SE Oil Drain Valve They say nothing about 70 lbs. in the baggage compartment. Your plane, however depending on configuration and/or alteration, may have a weight and balance issue that requires it. My plane has Monroy Long Range Tanks and a standby vacuum pump in the tail which add weight behind the CG. Also the Monroy tanks allow some fuel to distribute aft of the main tanks. My Serial Number is close to yours and I have no problem with Single Pilot CG and I do not fly with extra weight in the baggage area.

That Garmin Autopilot assembly will absolutely interfere with the placement of the battery board. The batteries are in a box that is aft of those servos in the picture. The box with 2 batteries weighs about 70 lbs. You have to take the entire box out - the individual batteries are not accessible. A 3 ft. battery board spans the distance from the edge of the shelf holding the box to span holding the autopilot assembly in your pic. You or your A&P have to crawl into the tail laying on the board in order to unbolt the box and then slide it forward on the board. That Garmin Autopilot assembly looks flimsy enough that it will bend over if you put the Battery Board on top of it. It is possible that someone installed a GFC500 in a Missile/Rocket without thinking about the battery box. The only time I need to get to the batteries is to replace them about every 5 years or more. It just means that they have to remove that Garmin Autopilot Assembly in the pic in order to access the batteries. And that means more shop hours, time, money and potential problems due to disturbing everything.

I assume you know the plane geared-up in ‘06 and porpoised into the runway in ‘09.

A couple comments and questions: I see some pics of your plane online. SARLTaylor-N4262H-64.jpg | Sport Air Racing League (sportairrace.org) KGYI-MooneyM20-N4262H-71.jpg | Sport Air Racing League (sportairrace.org) Your cowling doesn't have the ram air found on most Missile conversions like this: Do you have extended range Monroy tanks? I assume you do not since your A&P used 64 gal in his calculation. Where did your A&P get the Arms? The POH says the wheelbase is 5 ft. 11 9/16 inches or 71 9/16 inches. The nose wheel center should be 5 inches in front of the Reference Datum (service manual says should be within 0.06 inches of plumb line from nose gear trunnion which is station -5. See 32-50-02). That means the Main Gear Arm is 66 9/16. Your A&P used 64. Are your nose gear discs collapsed and the nose wheel displaced back? My Missile was weighed by Rocket. 2,169 lbs empty and CG 41.63 inches. I have a standby vac in the tail which adds weight. It is inconceivable that your Mooney is that far out of forward balance. However I see all these pics of it racing. Do you think someone took the weights out of the tail for some sort of speed mod? Regarding Rocket - mine was one of the last Missile conversions. It was done in 2001. They hadn't done any in a while at the time and they actually made a mistake setting up the IO-550. They had to get the Continental Rep out to help remind them - I was there when it happened. Their focus even in 2001 had almost entirely shifted to turboprop conversions of Piper Malibu's. There are some threads here saying Rocket committed to support the STC for 17 years - not sure from when but the last Missile or Rocket was done 20 years ago. They support as a curtesy now but let's be realistic - they haven't worked on a Mooney or internal combustion engine in 20 years. There probably are few if any employees still there that actually turned a wrench on a Mooney. Darwin Conrad is in his 70's. Whoever is helping you has to go dig in the files.

There is no confusion. It is 3,200 lbs. Rocket Engineering holds the Missile STC’s under 2 names. From the FAA STC Database which you can search online STC/Mooney Limited, 6427 E. Rutter Road, Felts Field Spokane WA 99212 United States SA00081SE Installation of Continental IO-550A engine and Hartzell PHC-C3YF-2UF/ FC7382 propeller. Reissued 05/20/1994 SA00260SE Installation of engine cowling. Issued 12/20/1995 SA00472SE Gross weight increase as modified per STC SA00081SE. Rocket Engineering Corporation, 6427 E. Rutter Rd, Felts Field Spokane WA 99212 United States SE00223SE Installation of Auto-Valve Inc oil drain valve