FlyingAggie

I want the one that says "My other vehicle is a Mooney and goes faster than 200 MPH"

Quote: mooneygirl * If he is slumped over on the yoke, use the strap of your purse to hold him back [by the forehead]. Us women usually have a sizable purse!

Edgar, By coincidence, me and my siginifcant other have been married for 32 yrs as well. She has activiely encouraged me to get back into flying after a 27 year hiatus,while we raised our daughters and now to buy this airplane. We decided we would rather have an airplane to tour the country in than a motorhome. So this is a interesting subject to discuss and Jolie has already provided some great information in the preceding post. Also like you mentioned in another post, I am also willing put off retirement for a few more years in order to own this airplane for a few years. My plan is for us to learn to fly as a team, with her working the Garmins for navigation and XM Wx. The ultimate would be her becoming a ppl too. Does your wife act as your copilot? Quote: edgargravel Alan: I have been wrestling with a similar dilemma in trying to make it easier for my girl (mother of my children, best friend, nearly 32 years married) to land us safely should I ever become incapacitated in the left seat. When I got my licence in 1987, she could land the Cessna 172 and the Cherokee 140 that I had learned on at the Kingston Flying Club. She took the "right seat" co-pilot course offered by the club and was reasonably proficient at landing those aircraft. Here we are 23 years later and we own a Mooney. Although I have a special checklist just for her, she has not really done any more. She may not appreciate that toe-brakes on her side might be important, but I do (that is where this new thread gets its genesis). But getting her sufficiently trained to save both our lives in an emergency is where I would like to be. My problem these days is time to fly at all, forget about time to get her up and practicing too... Oh, well....

Michael, I did discuss at length the options with the IA and he was adamant that the current setup is unacceptable and needs to be fixed or he won't sign off on the annual. And like Parker commented having those toe brake pedals flopping around isn't good. So I don't mind fixing a safety item. Someone on the email lists suggested the lowest cost approach is install regular brakeless pedals and try to sale the toe brake/rudder peddles to someone like a CFI that might want to install toe brakes on the right side. Alan Quote: mjc I'm with Jose on this. You're spending a lot of money to add weight and complexity for a feature it sounds like you won't use. I would probably go a step further and ask the IA if there's a way to make the current pedals work, by binding them in a fixed position, to save most of the $500.

Jose, I agree more systems, therefore more stuff to fail. Although from comments from some of the A&P's on the other Mooney mailing lists, master cylinders, once install and bleed, are pretty low maintenance. Since the plane had dual brake at one time all the plumbing is installed and active. They just plumbed around where the MC's had been.

RJ, On a 231 I test flew last year, I unfortunately flat spotted a tire on landing. I didn't realize how sensitive the brakes were compared to therental 172's. I felt it only right to pay for a new tire and having it changed and chalked it up as a flight lesson. After that experience, I have been extremely careful braking on Mooneys. Alan Quote: RJBrown My old plane had no brakes on the right. Tough to let someone new in the left to see what is going on. My MSE has both. I don't think it adds retail value and it will add maintenance cost later. I'd rather have them but would not pay to add them. The only advantage to not having them came when I sold my last bird. The buyer sat left seat for the flight to close the deal. There was a pretty good cross wind on landing. He kind of panicked at about 150 feet from touchdown. Threw up his hands and said TAKE IT. Landing was a little sideways and he stabbed the brakes flat spotting the right tire through most of the cords. He did not even know the tire was now square on one side. We taxied in bump bump bump and he was clueless. After we tied it down and he started away from her I showed him the tire. At first he blamed me until I pointed out that he was the only one with brakes. Points out a bad habit (for a Mooney) that those with castering nosewheels get in to. He had a Grumman that steered with brakes only. Being used to not having a steerable nose wheel he burned off a tire trying to get the plane straight. I am based at APA and usually land on a 10,000' runway. I make a point of not using the brakes unless I have a reason to. I also try to not use the nose wheel as long as possible. Now that I pay for the tires and brakes I want them to last as long as they can.

Immelman, Same with me: Getting to fly the left seat (all three times the owners were CFI's) was a great convincer that I wanted a Mooney. Alan Quote: Immelman That's a tough call and I'd say it would depend on the type of flying you'd like to do -- what type of flying you want to do with other pilots/pilot friends, and how long you plan to own the plane. Do you anticipate wanting to show off/share your airplane with other pilots and give them the left seat? I think you're in the clear to do so without adding them to insurance if you had the right side brakes. A friend of mine turned me on to Mooneys in his C model, and later 231, and insisted I take the left seat, and I really appreciated his generosity there. It led me to later buy a Mooney of my own

Edgar, On the flight back to Denver yestreday, I had been thinking along the same lines you suggested. I do want to get my IR, Commercial and maybe CFI using this plane. I have about 7 hrs and 6 landings in the left seat of Mooney's without right side tow brakes, so Idon't think I'll have a problem. However, my wife has expressed interest in learning to "pitch hit" in an emergency and at least land. Hopefully she'll want to get her ppl too---but probably a turbo charged high performance Mooney is not the best airframe for primary training, but she could transistion after doing the first 1/2 in a C172. The seller discounted the price in order to have the regular rudder pedals installed, so my true incremental cost for installing the master cylinder is about $1,000. Alan Quote: edgargravel Alan: My instructors at our Flying club would all like to have toe brakes on their side as I train for such things as a commercial ticket and finishing up my instrument rating. Sometimes it limits my choices. Don't know if that is worth $1,500, but if I had my druthers, I'druther have 'em.

Hello group. My name is Alan and I am an aviation addict.

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/detail.aspx?OHID=1167822

I need to make a decision about my new plane, which is currently in annual at LASAR. The a/c at one time had dual brakes and at some point someone removed the right side master cylinders, but left the toe brakes. The IA at LASAR doesn't like the toe brakes flopping around and insist we fix them. It will cost about $500 to remove the toe brake/rudder pedals and install regular rudder pedals or about $2000 to reinstall the two master cylinders. I thought it would be possible to just remove the toe brakes pedals, but the leaves a very narrow rudder pedal. I like the idea of having dual brakes and they might be useful during my transition training, but I have about 7 hrs in the left seat with Mooney's, which didn't have dual brakes, and had no problems in the five or so landings. Is it worth $1500 extra to have dual brakes? Would it add anything to the resale value? I don't think Vref, NAAA Evaluator or Jimmy Garrison's MAPALog Value Model has an "add-in" for dual brakes. Alan

Willmar does have their own interior design, but it is also pricey---just not as pricey as MAC. Given the choice between a 20K interior or a Garmin 500 on the panel, the Garmin wins, although I would like to do something to spruce up the interior of my new ride. Alan

Very nice! Who is doing the work? Quote : docket I am getting close to the end. I have not seen the plane in person but the photos make it look like they have done a very good job. One thing which really made the install look right was they made an entirely new panel, painted it to match and silk screened all of the required markings on the new panel. I hope to be flying it out of there on Friday and I will report how it performs with a new autopilot and the G500. While it was there I also had the 696 flush mounted.

Buster, This one would be a much better value for a 134K and with only 125 hrs SMOH. http://www.trade-a-plane.com/specs?clsfdnum=841369 The seller is on the Mooney Email List and mentioned the plane does have some fuel tanks leaks, but so does the one that I am in prebuy at LASAR this week. Alan

Vref cites engine costs. For a 1987 252, Vref list: Power / TBO CONT 210HP TBO 1800 Engine Model TSIO-360-GB/LB1/MB Fac. Remanufactured $50,741.00 Overhaul $39,000.00 There is another popular web site that list cost for new, fac reman and OH engines for both TCM and Lycoming. I am currently at FL390 on Delta and using my wife's computer and don't have the url, but maybe someone else will post it. I have seen KSMoonaic reference it before. Alan Quote: Buster1 Yep I'm looking at that 252 in FL for $125K with an engine at TBO. I haven't had a chance to "get serious" yet and call around to some OH places and see what it might cost for a TSIO 360 MB OH. Does anyone here have a rough idea on what could be expected? VRef on that bird was $115K. Thanks.

The reality of owning an airplane is starting to sink in as I get closer to actual ownership. My initial plan was to intially base the plane at the LMO where my instrument instructor works, since he has 1000's of hours in Mooneys and a former MAPA Safety Foundation Instructor. I thought it would be easy to gradually transition to the 262 by just resuming my IR in the new bird and taking my time getting comfortable and confident over the next twenty hours of IR dual. After the IR, I would relocate the airplane at EIK which is practically my community's next door neighbor. However, as I found out, use tax is based on where you base the airplane, not your home address. My instructor's airport has almost the highest use tax in the area. Where I base my plane can cost me thousands of dollars! Incidentally while researching use tax, I found a web site that one of the County's Tax Dept referenced saying they accept the accuracy of this web site for taxation purpose. (PM me if you would like the URL to the web site.) You input the street address including the zip+4 code and it determines your use tax rate. Here are the result for Denver area airports along with the drive time from my home: APT USE TAX TAX COMPONENTS DRIVE TIME FROM HOME FTG 3.0% S, SC 50 mins BJC 4.1% S, R, FD, SC 15 mins APA 4.35% S, Co, R, FD, SC 40 mins EIK 6.4% S, Co 5 mins FCL 6.7% S, Co, Ci 35 mins LMO 8.025% S, Co, Ci, R, FD, SC 20 mins BDU 8.16% S, Co, Ci, R, FD, SC 20 mins KEY: S=State, Co=County, Ci=City, R=RTD, FD=Football Stadium District, SC=Science and Cultural District I am leaning toward BJC because it fairly low and close. It is a tower controlled airport with parallel rwys with an ILS, but there is a lot of traffic. I was so pumped when we bought our house so close to EIK. Blasted USE TAX!!!!!! With the financial state of most state and local governments, sales and use tax are going up. No telling what it will be in the next few years. Now might be a good time to buy. Alan

When I was having trouble finding a Mooney that I wanted to buy, I flirted with Bonanza's. It took some getting used to be able to step on the flap when boarding and de-plane-ing. Bo's are nice planes and there are certainly more of them on the market than Mooneys. I can already feel the pangs about the Bo I didn't buy and I haven't even gotten to the pre-buy on the 262. Alan

KCOS is practically in my back yard, so I plan to attend even if I have to drive. This will be my first MAPA convention and it would great to meet everyone and look at each others Mooneys. Alan

RJ, Could you have the speeds reversed? According the 252 POH at 2900 lbs, Vs1 is 61 knts (not 69 knts) and Vs0 is 59 knts. The same airframe will have a higher stall speed at 3200 lbs than at 2900 lbs. An airfoil always stalls at the same angle of attack regardless of weight, but that same angle of attack occurs at a speed propotional to the square root of the weight ratio. Vs1 (3200#) = 61 * sqrt (3200/2900) = 64.1 knots I don't know much about the Rocket, but if it is the same airframe and weighs 3200 lbs, it will have a higher stall speed than a 252 at 2900 lbs. But is the Rocket airframe actually the same? Doesn't the Rocket have a much larger prop (therefore more drag at low pitch), and a heavier engine ( therefore a different CG)? Finally are the FAA design standards for Rocket STC modification the same as the certification of the original airframe? Alan Quote: RJBrown I dont think it was stall speed. The same airframe stalls at 61kts as a Rocket at 3200lbs. 69kts@ 2900lbs for the 252.

Two alternators, two vaccuum pumps, intercooler, speedbrakes, inner gear doors, six way adjustable seats, and maybe thicker glass?---- all add the pounds. My uderstanding from a former sale exec is that to be certified in the normal class, Mooney had to limit the gross weight to keep the stall speed at 61 knots are less. Quote: ehscott Why the AC empty weight is so high I am not sure. Or why they didn't certify at a higher gross is also a mystery.

Quote: Parker_Woodruff Then throw on some TKS K-Ice if you can afford it.

RJ, What is your other plane? Alan Quote: RJBrown Corrosion never sleeps. Even if it was checked you need to know it is OK today. There is no remediation, no permanent fix. The SB replaces (Correct me if I am wrong) insulation that held moisture with insulation that doesn't. This helps fight future corrosion but wont stop it. One reason both my planes were always based here in Colorado.

Isn't SB208A the inspection and SB208 the remediation. I see the entry for both in the logs. Alan

Aircraft has been tied down outside for last four years in the bay area. Before that it was in the midwest. Alan

My pre-buy inspection of the M20K is coming up in a couple of weeks at LASAR. In LASAR's standard pre-buy they normally don't pull the wings bolts to gain access so they can run a magnet down the inside of the fuselage steel tubes to look for corrosion. LASAR's rationale is they will remove the left side interior panel and inspect for corrosion on the exterior of the steel tubes and will stop there if all is clean. If they find external corrosion, they will then inspect the insides. Is this a good strategy? Should I insist (and pay extra) to have the internal inspection performed?