Paul Thomas

As we take to the skies in the new year, let’s remember that every mile flown is a mile well spent—especially if it's burning that sweet, sweet 100LL. Here’s hoping that in 2025, your engines run smooth, your skies stay clear, and your fuel tank stays full. May your approaches be as smooth as your Mooney’s wings, and your landings as soft as your favorite chair after a long day in the cockpit. Fly safe, fly fast, and let’s keep the Mooney spirit soaring high in the new year! Clear skies and tailwinds to you all in 2025!

I fill mine to the absolute brim and try to do so after every flight. The only time I wouldn't do that is if I planned a flight where the W&B wouldn't work on the next flight. That has forced me to burn some fuel off... also know as a great chance to go shoot some IFR approaches or polish off some other skills.

That is a huge piece of information. I would have understood withdrawing based on philosophical disagreement but there is no way I'd continue with being a member of a group if I believe a member of that group is stealing my confidential information. Based on what I had read, I always thought that the STC was because GAMI couldn't meet the requirements imposed by the ASTM specification.

I bought my airplane this year. It's an 84 on original tanks. I didn't look at bladder airplanes. Bladders add weight and require a modification that is very expensive to undo if you ever want to go back to a wet tank. Bladders also mean a weight penalty. Both will eventually leak but I don't want to be in a situation where I can't get a replacement bladder. I've built 4 tanks for RV airplanes. While I wouldn't want to get in my tanks, I'm comfortable doing a reseal if I ever have to (I hope I won't). I'm honestly much more worried about cleaning and prepping the tanks than applying the sealant.

Would ceramic coating provide effective protection for paint against the effects of G100UL? At least the staining that's been reported? While it's important to know the potential drawbacks, let's also talk about solutions. Lots of people were, and still are, against ethanol in mogas but it's been introduced and is here to stay. For the most part, we have adapted to it. If G100UL becomes the prevalent fuel, it would be good to find solutions to the issues that are being presented. I suspect many people would still be willing to adopt G100UL even under the worst case scenarios that are being presented here.

Schllc stated in another thread that he has gears made for something else in Columbia. The price was reasonable. I don't buy that these gears have to be expensive... but I do believe that they will be!

Sadly AOPA is often worthless and if they offer an opinion, I think it would be in support G100UL. I often question why I belong to AOPA... I don't read the magazine and they've refused to even send an email to members in a State to let them know a group of hangar owners/lessee were taking a fight all the way to that state's Supreme Court. So much for power in numbers.

I do hope that some members who attend have technical knowledge, are inquisitive, and represent the group well.

The theory of putting loading the flight plan in the data card without flight stream is nice but is it practical? It would mean restarting the GNS with the new cards, waiting for it to acquire satellites and then retrieving the flight plan. If you want to get going quickly, it's easier to load the some of the waypoints... my experience is that I rarely fly the cleared route. That's where having something like FlightStream shines, especially when you get a random T-routing in busy airspace.

I'm missing one so I fly without mine. I'd like to find a set and buy it as the one I have would need some work.

Netjet had one developed for Ocean Reef. The approach is not public and only NetJet is allowed to fly it... it may be worth contacting either Ocean Reef or NetJet and seeing who they hired to do theirs.

I'm surprised this airplane has not sold. When I looked at a C- registered airplane earlier this year, the total cost involved to get a N number was $7-10k (not including paint).

It's not deleted, access has been restricted. https://mooneyspace.com/topic/50135-g100ul-fuel-leak/?do=getNewComment

I'm unfortunately grounded for a while (pro-tip: don't fall off a ladder) so I'm been doing some chair flying. I've always used the exhaust as a grounding point to refuel my Mooney but it doesn't look to be a good idea. What do you all use?

Here is my trick to adding oil. I always seem to have empty water bottles at the hangar and in the airplane when travelling. If I need to add oil, I cut a bottle in half to use as a funnel so that I don't have to keep an oily funnel in the airplane/hangar.

The ones I see move quickly are in the low 3,000, high 2,000. The market is someone looking for a replacement or a guy installing it himself in an experimental (will need tray, antenna, etc). With the cost involved for a fresh 430 install in one of our airplane, you may as well get Garmin's newest products.

Picking an airplane for someone else is difficult. We can say that some airplanes won't work for some missions. With your missions, most planes will work. On shorter flights, speed and efficiency don't matter as much. You should look at a few aircrafts to decide what you like. I like the Mooney but there are people I can't fly with because they can't get in/out when they could in a Cardinal. Why did you sell the 235? It seems it would have worked for your mission.

A bad crank and bad case can still be a good value. They are great to use when building an airplane; you can build the cowl just right with that "dummy" engine. It easier to get the space between the spinner to cowl and perfect.

If you have other parts available, I am interested in for a set for lower gear doors.

You can shoot a wet rivet without enlarging the hole; most of the product ends up oozing out and very little is left in the hole. The make dimple dies that are a little bigger and I've tried them when building fuel tanks but they are not necessary. If you are going to shoot them wet, make sure the product you use will be ok with the paint and pre-paint work.

Re-bucking is really limited to whether or not to shop head will still be in spec.

That would be a better story. He was in a hurry and forgot to remove his car from the hangar

10+ years ago, a friend of mine backed up his airplane into his car. His broker would him the $15,000 claim would have no impact at renewal time because the value was below a certain threshold. Sure enough, his airplane insurance decreased the following year. He also had a make a claim for his car and that policy did go up.

Anecdotally, there was a guy in IL with a Pawnee and a twin. If I recall correctly, he'd (ab)use the Pawnee during spraying season and park it. Maintenance would be done at the beginning of the season. He said he had less engine issues with it than the twin he took great care of. Without a large scale study, it's hard to know why some things are working and others are not. If my airplane was going to sit for months, I'd hope that I would have been able to take some steps to mitigate potential damage. The reality is that for most of us, those kind of downtimes are unexpected. I try to run the engine for a minimum of 45 minutes at operating temperature weekly based on the research I've done. Generac programs my air cooled generator to only run 10 minutes each week; I'd imagine they've studied this a lot more than most of us.

How does the FAA view fuel for mapping purposes? How will people react if they expect 100LL and find UL, especially those without the STC? I wonder if doing away with STC may be in UL's best interest. I hope we get to watch it form afar while things get worked out. Fuel is $4.4x at my home field.