Seth

+1 - I was once told, "A go around should be expected with every landing, and if you land, then it's a surprise." I'm not sure if I agree with that, as the point of landing is to land, but I am indeed ready for that go-around. One time I did not go around early enough and should have. I'll post about that shortly. Jeff - great job deciding to go around (you too Hank!). -Seth

OR75 - That is correct, both the Missile and Rocket conversions are dead. However, Rocket Engineering still supports them. Some of thier other conversions do look amazing. Of all conversion shops, I've been very impressed with Rocket Engineering. -The fact that the Missile is a modification of the existing aircraft as opposed to factory OEM is part of the reason it is priced below an ovation. My Missile was converted in 1997 but I purchased it for 70k to 80k less than Ovations from 95 through 98, and it performs on par if not better than these Ovations due to the lighter weight and full feathering prop (glide ration safety factor). The conversion cost $99,000 or so, but as stated, can't get it anymore. It makes much more sense to purchase one that someone had done - I think there were 40 something converted (44? 47?). -For insurnace purposes, the Missile conversion is considered a safety factor as you get a better rate of climb and glide, and thus the engine out just after takeoff for the impossible turn has a shorter window (I was amazed when Parker explained to me that the Missile vs M20J stock actually was less when similar comparisons were run insurance wise - part of that is probably because of the number of aircraft converted vs the number of Missiles that have had crashes/issues). -RJBrown - I understand now - sorry about the confusion between the MSE and Missile - you have an MSE (very nice one at that) but yes, there is a difference between the 300 HP and 200 HP birds. I didn't feel like using O2 that often, hence didn't go turbo with my upgrade. However, I do plan to get a 2 place O2 system for a trip out west in May 2013 so that I can make use of tailwinds coming back or if I have to get up over certain mountains depending on the route I take. I figure the Missiel will easily make it to 15,000, even 17,999, and will get pushed a very low fuel burn at that altitude. So why not take advantage of strong tailwinds and low fuel burn. Also, I'd love to have O2 for night flights when I've cruised higher than 5000 (which you have to do to keep fuel burn a bit lower in the Missile). -I admit that I do miss the M20F when I would land after a two hour flight and find that I burned less than 17 or 18 gallons. Or after a one hour flight and find that it was 8 or 9 gallons (I used to keep the bladders full on the ground when I could). That is simply not the case with a thirsty 300 HP engine. Don't get me wrong, I love my Missile and do fly a lot of Cross Country, but for those local fun flights, I really do miss the efficiency of the 200 HP Mooney aircraft. -Seth

Just to be sure, not MSE. Missile. MSE is an M20J - 200 HP normally aspirated. The Missile was the conversion by Rocked to the M20J which hung an IO-550 300HP normally aspriated engine. The Rocket that you had was a turbo. The Missile is not. Both of them are hot rods, just the Rocket is fire breathing! For my type of flying and not using O2 often, the Missile made more sense for me (also no turbo to worry about). The MSE however is still a step up from the C and is a great plane. -Seth

I indeed will chime in and apologize for the late reply. First off, happy new year to everyone! I wish you all a great 2013. I used to own a 1967 M20F - Great airplane did everything the J did but 10 knots slower and substatially less expensive. However, I am still amazed at the number of small imporvements outside of just aerodynamics that were made between 1967 and 1983 when my new bird rolled off the line. I concur with pretty much everything Bob and Brandon have stated above. The Missile is a great airplane and you should think of it as a baby ovation that is the medium length body, and thus a few pounds lighter on 300 HP. Remember, each Mooney is hand made (you know) and each. The good -Speed - My oh my, 175 knots all day, 180 easy, 185+ if you want to burn up the engine. That's zero wind. Into headwinds you still are in the 150-160 range and with a good tailwind, 220, 230 ground speed. -Avionics - unless you have updated your avionics I am amazed a the difference between the Missile and my F model just in the panel alone. Auto pilot (amazing to have an autopilot after only having a wing leveler in the F), much better Nav functions, the backup radio is a KX165 (vs my primary KX155 in the F) and a Garmin 430W in the panel. Just to update those avionics in the F model would be north of $25,000. I also installed an JPI 830 and have been quite impressed with it at purchase (I overhauled my engine at purchase). I also put an aera 560 with XM weather into the panel interconnected to the 430 as a backup and for weather in flight. It is a great little machine. Avionics differences are amazing. -Gross Weight increase - My F had a useful load of 1017 pounds - now I have 1068 pounds -Long Range Tanks - I have the Monroy long range tanks and can fill 98 gallons of fuel. Full Fuel sill leave me with nearly 600 lbs in the cabin. -Aquisition cost - best bang for speed in the normally aspirated world on the market -Great engineering - Rocket is a great company - they are very nice when you need help and again, they put a lot of time into the STC. They did the Rocket conversion first, and the Missile was an add on, but still took a lot of hours of testing. The engine mount is a thing of beauty and the way it is mounted counteracts the tourque even better than some ovations. Less right rudder needed but no rudder trip as some of the newer Mooney Aircraft have. -Full feathering prop - better glide distance, fantastic climb, great top speed -Aerodynamic clean up - it really is amazing how much it's cleaned up over the E/F. the clamshell gear doors, cowl, air intake for cabin air in the tail, windsheild - everything great like the E just more streamlined. Negatives: -Fuel Burn - It is much more than your E model and you start thinking per hour what the cost will be, until you realize the distance traveled is greater, so the actualy trip costs are only slightly more. That being said, if you power back, which you normally wouldn't do on a long cross country (unless you had a heck of a tail wind) because why go slow in a Missile, you can get better fuel burn and higher MPG. -Weight - the plane is just heavy compared to your E. Especially the nose and you'll notice that on landings and manuvering. It's not bad, but just not as light on the controls as the F or E are. Anyone with a six cylinder engine in a Mooney and flew the four cylinder engines know the difference in nose weight. It just means epsecially during landings to have better "touch" for the final flare. I'd be worried flying into a grass strip in most Mooney's but especially the Missile. I would be less worried about my old F (gear doors have better clearance and the nose as stated was lighter). -Cost - the IO-550 is more expensive to maintain than an IO-360, has six cylinders vs four, and a slightly shorter TBO, though it should make it past TBO as part of that was for certification purposes (other aircraft with the IO-550 have 1800 and 2000 hour TBO yet the Missile is 1700). Toss up: -Manual gear - I did love my manual gear but now I don't worry about my shoulder (I've had it surgically repaired for other issues) or wires/people/fingers geting caught in the Johnson bar - I did love the manual gear. -Speed is great, but you need to plan ahead even more, makes you a better pilot but can get you into trouble. Yellow arc is the same as the J, so you cruise right up along it and can easily be in the yello arch during decent unless you really power down. -Auto lean mechanism - It's nice to have this feature for a given altitude, but it's also something you want more control of sometimes. -Speed brakes - I had them on the F (really - former owner put them in) and do not have them on the Missile - it just makes me plan a bit more. Sometimes they'd be nice to have, as the Missile really is slippery, and speeds up as all Mooney's do when going downhill, but planning is the best solution. -Bladders vs reseal. I had bladders previously installed in my F - never an issue - great peace of mind. I now have wet wings and do have the uncertainty in the back of my mind that a reseal of all four tanks will be on the horizon at some point in the next 5 (wishful thinking) to 25 years. I do admit that at some point I'm probably going to get a share of some smaller tail dragger (citabria) or LSA just to be able to putter around at a low fuel burn, but for my mission, the Mooney Missile really filled the shoes quite well. When I added up paint, unknown probable corrosion repairs (you find when painting), a few speed mods, panel update (GPS in panel, auto pilot, engine analyzer) to my F, I relized even with the money, I'd go maybe 155-160 knots (my F was fast at 147-148 all day, sometimes 150 knots) but still have a 1967 F model value wise. So I sold the F, and use the difference that I was going to spend over the next 3-4 years and that's pretty much about what the Missile cost me. It's a great airplane and I'm always amazed what those extra 35-45 knots do to a long cross country. The fuel tanks make it possilbe to have long range, and also to tank cheap fuel if you find it anywhere. Let me know if I can answer any other personal questions. If Brandon's airplane has not yet sold, get in touch with him. The missile is a great plane. Another possibility would be a Mooney M20S Screaming Eagle conversion with the 310 STC on the engine. -Seth

I've flown in this Mooney and can answer questions about it. The new owner will get a great value in general avaition. -Seth Edit: Jan 2013 - It's in annual right now according to the owner.

I built one just like this for my older F model. My Missile has a plug in Tannis heater. I've considered using the old system to heat up the cabin if it were a really cold day (have the air under the footwell to warm up the avionics, but I have never used it that way. It's just sitting on a shelf in my hanger at this time. I did use it a handful of times with my F and it seemed to work well even though I never actually tested it with metrics and temperature guages. I would let it run on cold days for 30 minutes (which probably did very little) to about three hours before starting the airplane. I did not trust the unit to be left alone, so I'd have it set up, but only turn it on upon my arrival to the airport. I would leave my cowl plugs in and have the vent hose enter through the lower cowl flaps. so the air would rise into the engine compartment. It did get nice a toasty in there and the engine block was warm to the touch after a few hours. The engine started much easier in the cooler winter days when I used my pre-heat option. I didn't often fly below 40 degrees back then and only used this device once I had a hanger. When I had the airplane tied down outside or on the ramp, I'd ask the FBO for a pre-heat which was a hot air system blown into the cowling for about 15 minutes (very hot air). I'm much more happy with the plug in system on my Missile today. The small home made heater option however worked well and I'm sure would work in the current aircraft if for some reason the tannis system stopped working. It too cost me between $25 and $35 to create. Be careful if you use that dryer ducting as it gets hot to the touch - if I had to use it again I'd get scat tubing or some sort of insulated duct. -Seth

I have a friend in the DC area that just purchased an M20K 231 and his M20C is now for sale. He has both based at KGAI but they are both in annual right now. I'm sure he'd be happy to take you up in his C model. There is also an Mooney Service Center at W00 (freeway) near Bowie (on Rt. 50 just east of DC) where they have many models of Mooneys and I'm sure could arrange a flight for you as well. PM me if you want the contact information for my friend with the 1970 M20C model. Separately, it's listed here on MooneySpace too - and here's the link in the add - He's asking $33,000. http://www.treborav8.com/Treborav8/My_Sales_Albums/Pages/1970_Mooney_Ranger_M20C.html And welcome to MooneySpace! Always nice to have another flyer in the area. I also know that there is a half share of a J availalbe to be based at FDK or GAI (currently based at FDK). It's in the for sale section of this board. -Seth

Happy Holidays and here's to a great 2013. -Seth

I saw this over on "Red Board" and figured it was worth posting here. Do you think this is a feasable option at your home airport base if there is no car now? I know we had someone talking about a network of airport cars in the past on here. -Seth "Could this be the solution to having an airport car that others could use? I know there was a similar program a few years ago for just airport cars, but if this caught on in the larger cities, there's no reason it couldn't work for small rural airports too... http://finance.yahoo.com/news/rent-c...163953841.html Car owners who register on the website set the price for their vehicles. The average rate is around $8 an hour or $40 a day, which is approximately 40 percent cheaper than Zipcar and 20 percent cheaper than a traditional car rental like Hertz or Enterprise. While the car is rented out, RelayRides covers the insurance, providing comprehensive and collision coverage up to the actual cash value of the car, plus a $1 million liability insurance policy that protects the owner against claims for third-party injuries and property damage. For car renters, the company adds $300,000 of liability coverage to the driver's existing insurance policy." https://relayrides.com/

I'd have to say, this is amazing. Watching the aircraft actually take off! That's quite a design. -Seth

Flyboy0681 - You are very much correct. I should have labled it "I love GA" except with a slower aircraft, it would have taken longer. A faster aircraft would have been more expensive. Mooneys really do hit a sweet spot. But yes, I love GA is what I should have labled it. -Seth

The seating rings is what I'm worried about, as I'm 10 hours into the break in. And yes, I have a JPI 830 - it's a fantastic engine monitor. My number 2 cylinder is the warmest currently. What cylinder usually is the warmest in the six cylinder engines? -Seth

As many of you know I have recently replaced all six cylinders on my Mooney Missile. It has an IO-550. I've noticed that cylinder number 5 is slow to warm up. It lags behind the other cylinders by 75 degrees or so until a few minutes into the flight and then catches up to a much more forgiving spread. It is still one of my cooler running cylinders. Obviously, during a break in you want to keep your ground time to a minimum before the flight, but I just wanted to know what others may think of this slow to warm cylinder. It's been about 10 hours now on the clyinders and it is still performing its slow to warm routine. It's cylinder number 5. I'll ask my MSC at Freeway the same question soon, but I'd like your collective wisdom. EGT is in line with the rest of the cylinders, just the CHT being about 75 degrees low and then once during climb and early in cruise it slowly creeps up to the acceptable spread world. Thanks, -Seth

Today I flew with my cousin, his girlfriend, and another friend up to Cleveland for the Washington Redskins game. It was an easy flight up (weather was much better than expected) and an easy flight home. The Washington Redskins won and now sit atop the NFC East. BKL is located literally next door to the Cleveland Stadium. We landed, walked to the game, and afterward, walked back faster than it takes to get out of the parking lot at the Washington Redskins home Fedex Field. We did the same thing two years ago to the Detroit game where McNabb was benched. That was a neat trip, but this one was great. Mooneys are just simply efficient aircraft that make it so easy to take trips. We are all very fortunate to be able to fly and especially to fly Mooney's. -Seth

Yes - IO 550 with the full feathering prop - though I may be wrong, I thought it was the only prop/engine combo for the missile. The Rocket had a few different HP models. -Seth

I can attest the Missile is a heck of an airplane. You get Ovation power with a lighter airframe. Useful load is fantastic - mine has 1068 lbs useful load. I know another local pilot who stepped up from a Missile. He jumped up to a tubine power in a 2007 Piper Meridian. Good luck with your new plane, and good luck with the sale. -Seh

My cowl has two par 36 lights. When the time comes, I'm going to finally replace the lights with two LEDs - one landing and one tax. the issue, is that I want to know if the par 36 light is bright enough. I know people are happy with the Par 46 lights, but those have more LED didodes. Separately, I'm looking into the modification Bennet had done on his wingtips. With LED recognition lights on the wingtips that may actually throw some light, I think that in combination with an LED landing and Taxi lights would be fine. I love his setup with the boom beam landing light and wingtip configuration. It is for recognition, but to be able to wig wag or have all lights be on for land is indeed nice. Dave, do let us know if turning the beam 90 degrees helps with the taxi situation. Also, where are you based? Separately, I know we've mentioned this before, but your F model and my former F model were two of the four produced in 1966. -Seth

Dave- There is a kit available to modify the landing light on our Mooney aircraft 90 degrees in order to assist with the filament being vertical instead of horizontal. Some doccumentation insists that the vibration from our engines, and the impact of inertia on landing will cause the filament to last longer when vertical vs when horizontal. Your aircraft must have had this modification for the landing light. As for proper installation of the Whelen, I cannot see why 90 degrees different on an LED would make any difference, except potentially the light pattern from the bulb (horizontal vs vertal throw of light) but if the spread is equal to 10 degrees wide and 10 degress high, then there is no real difference, even though techincally, it is not installed correctly. If the horizontal throw of light is something in the range of 15 degrees but the vertical only 10 degrees, then now you have a horizontal 10 degrees and a vertical 15 degrees. This may be an issue - I don't know the particual numbers. Congratualtions on the updgrade and good luck! Take care, -Seth

You are correct - however, as noted, it is my understanding that it is better to keep the inside of the engine coated with oil to stop corrosion. In order to get moisture out of the oil, you need to run it around 180 degrees (oil) for an extended period of time. This is what I have been told. Unfortunatly, my oil tends to run in teh 160 to 170 degree range often. The extended period of time means once it's hot for around an hour, but I'm sure 40 mintues is probably just fine. Maybe even 20 as suggested by an earlier post. I try to make the extended time go for between 40 and 60 minutes. However, sometime it is less than that. -Seth

Great answer. I used to be able to fly on company busienss but that is not allowed any longer through my salaried position. All my business flights are my own firm 10-99 income flights. I have a salaried position and also have my own firm where I am the boss. -Seth

I happen to agree - and it kills me that my engine sat so long during the Top OH due to the cracked cylinder and then cylinder replacement when I had it flying every week since I picked it up after the full overhaul last year. I would agree, run it EVERY week if possible, even if just on the ground, but do try to get her in the air if you can. I absolutely hate it when she sits there not moving for two weeks. Rarely happens. -Seth

I try to fly as much as I can personally. Sometimes it is only one time per week, sometimes I have to wait two or three. Lately, due to the Top Overhaul and then Annual, it's been less than I want. I feel the list above does not give a more varried range. Sometimes it's 2-3 times per week, other times its 1 time per week. So 1-3 would have been a better choice for me. Most of my business flights are very pleasurable, but it's still business and thus I can't count it in your survey. -Seth

Any engine monitor is better than no engine monitor. In August 2011, I added an JPI EDM 830 to my Mooney Missile and have been very pleased with it. The information is AMAZING and now when I fly airplanes without an engine monitor, I admit my mind starts playing tricks on me even though I flew for over 500 hours in my former F model without one. If I had to do it again, I'd probably put the same 830 in there. However, I'm not sure which model it is but one is STCed to replace all your other gauges so if any of you other instrumentation fails, you won't have to repair it or even better, remove it and clean up your panel. The 730 is simply a different display but gives much of the same information. I love the RPM and Manifold Pressure display on my 830 as well as the fact that you can mount it horizontally or vertically depending on what makes sense to you. It is a very clean install and really looks nice as well. If I were closer to TN I'd let you test it out first hand. I'll be down that way in May, and if you are anywhere near the Mid-Atlantic, let me know and you can see one first hand. I'm sure someone near you may have one to let you view it. Also, see if JPI will give you the Oshkosh discount. They did that for me even though the dicount had ended a few weeks prior. Take care, -Seth

That is a good idea. I will do that as soon as I get my logbooks back from the annual. I did that for my F model, but not yet for the Missile. Speaking of which, my F model did not have the very first log book. It was a 1966 F, one of the four 1966 F models, and the first logbook unfortunatly did not carry itself to my aircraft. At purchase, I'd say I bought it about 25 to 30 percent below market value in summer - just before the market crashed. The seller wanted out and I think needed the sale as well, but that's what we agreed upon. When I sold it in Summer 2011, and I did put a lot into that aicraft, 500 hours later and after the drop in aircraft values as a whole, I sold it for $3000 less than what I bought it for, which I think was fair. The logs were complete for 30-35 years after that first book (late 70s to present) but the first 10 years were missing. Basically, make sure you buy it knowing that when you sell it there will be a discount invovled - factor that in now. The Missile has VERY complete logs. -Seth

..