Seth

I LOVED the manual gear in my 1967 F. Even though I had shoulder problems and ended up getting shoudler surgery (not due to the plane - that's another story) while I owned my F (grounded for a few months), I loved knowing if your gear was up or down, not having to worry about a motor, and just the feel of the system. The 1983 M20J Missile 300 I now fly has electic gear, and I admit it is much easier to pick up the gear or lower it with the panel switch. That being said, I sitll reach between the seats when I'm ready to lower the gear as I've trained my body to have the hand there ready to go. I also have my hand check the floor to make sure it's up and not down on base, and that's when I touch the floor indicator to visually check that the gear is down. I still do my "green over the fence" talk on final and check the panel indicators. Both are fine. The F model is a great value. It does nearly everything the J does except 10 knots slower. A modified F with no corrosion, new avionics, updated interior, a modern paint job, and tanks in good shape would be a heck of a bird to purchase. You'd get good speed, not have to worry about fixing much up, and still have the johnson bar. Take care, -Seth

First off thank you for posting your question on MooneySpace. You can see there are a lot of opinions, but it will certainly assisty your decision making process. I ended up purchasing an F model as my first Mooney. I was looking at the E or F, and decided on the F. Those 10 extra inches really do make a difference, however, as you mentioned, they are not needed for your mission. Between the C or the E, you can't go wrong with either. The C is a great airplane for your mission except the altitude. The 20 extra HP of the E make it desireable. I flew my F out West during the summer in 2010 and boy did density altitude play in a factor during climb with full tanks. It still flew just fine, but nothing like where I am based at sea level on the east coast. It just took more runway than usual and it was a healthy climb, but not the usuall 1000+ feet per minute at all. Also you have to consider IFR flying. The C model is fine for light IFR, even from time to time moderate. But with moisture in the air and carb icing, if I were to fly in a lot of weather, I'd take a fuel injected engine over carburated. Also, with the altitude of 6700, 20 extra HP, at that altitude means a lot. I don't know the charts, but 180 hp at 7000 is what, 120 HP? so 200 would be 133? That may not seem like a whole lot more, but boy you do feel the extra 20 HP - think of a 160 HP 172 vs a 180 HP 172. It's the climb. Both airplanes are good choices. I think the C is the best retract value in general avaition. Maybe the only better value in general avaition is your current airplane. If I could swing it, I'd go for the E model. Again, as others have mentioend, see if you can get one that's already been modified (but modified well!) as that costs much less to purchase one that's been modified as opposed to doing the work yourself. Make sure to ask if any work has been done that was not certified or with improper parts, as you don't want your aircraft grounded somewhere by a ramp check. Someone else worried about this on the board recently. Enjoy the search purchase process - most likely, you'll have to look at a quite a few planes before you find yours. Take care, -Seth

Just as others have said, get your first couple of hours, maybe 5-10 at least in a dedicated trainer so that hard landings or a botched anything, do not cause issues due to the airframe not designed for abuse. The C-172 is a great training platform. Once you get the basics, learn in your own airplane - get the Mooney at that point. They are great machines and if you learn in them, you're mind will be at Mooney Speed early and will consider that basic pilot speed. Take care and Good Luck, -Seth

My F Model only had the 54 gallon bladders (installed by the previous owner) which did limit my range somewhat, but then I never had to try to push it - longest flight was about 4.5 hours. In the Missile, I have 98 gallons and in the most efficient settings, I could go just over 1200 NM - with wind to my back, probably 1500 miles. However I'd need a wide mouth gatorade bottle. -Seth

Great Pic George! It was a sad day when the F-14 was retired.

My former 1967 M20F had bladders put in during the 1990s and I never had a leak issue and never had water in the tanks. I was happy to never have to worry about the leaking wing issues we have with our Mooneys. My Missile has the extended range tanks, 98 gallons and thus must be a wet wing. I know a reseal will occur at some point, and I know there was one patch job a few years ago up by "Weep No More" before they took the new name, but I do admit how often I look down under the wing to check for streaking, seeing if I smell gas in the cabin, etc . . . When I had the bladders, though they took can leak, the thought rarely crossed my mind. Now it is on the watch out list. Both have their bennefits. You can't go wrong either way. Most Mooney aircrat will need a reseal at some point and the bladders tend to fix the issue for a longer period of time. Someone may want to create a chart or take data points (a poll?) for us to fill in our experiences with leak issue with reseals vs bladders and time. Take care, -Seth

Even though a stop is the best way to reduce speed, as Jim mentioned, the biggest speed killer out there, we'll stop whenever she wants to. She got me these mini F-14 cuff links for Valentines Day!

I was actually looking at vintage Meyers 145 or a Meyers 200D before deciding the Mooney was for me. I always thought it would be pretty cool to have an airplane with my last name. And yes, my name is indeed Seth Meyers - I get great reservations in New York (I've even used that to my adtantage twice). I saw a Meyers 200D being refuled in Wisconsin in 2009 and the pilot let me take a look inside. They are indeed more spacious than our Mooney's with a huge instrument panel. However, I still love my Mooney. I like our M logo as well. I didn't realize it had a similar roll cage. Pretty neat. It does amaze me with the amount of Mooney crashes where the occupants walk away. The Meyers 145 is what morphed over time into the Micco - there is one for sale on controller. That would be a fun plane to fly. Take care, -Seth Meyers (not of SNL)

Thank you for ALL the suggestions. I've been looking at all noted airports - I'm thinking it will be BNL, SSI, or BQK. I may also consider MYR or CRE if the weather does not look good further into the trip and we want to slice it in half as opposed to a longer first leg and shorter second leg. BNL is the least expensive fuel I've seen in a long time and only adds four minutes to the trip. SAV and CHS are also posibilities, but mainly as alternates (though I've landed at both in the past). Also HXD - I've been there before - nice facilities. We may pack our lunch to just get a quick turnaround - again, I would just fly the full distance non-stop, but it is better to have a happy calm passenger. No joke, at each of the probably three pit stop locations, the fuel is less expensive than my home base. So I'll top off. The Floria suggestions are great, but those are all under an hour to Orlando (ISM) so I figured if we were going that far, we can get all the way in one hop. Take care and again thank you for the suggestions, -Seth

Quote: aviatoreb You sound like a materials engineer. It was me who mentioned Ti. Seems to me that the tubes of the air frame welding would be alot like a bicycle type application and not so much like a turbine or even a prop application. Yes, the material is expensive, but I wonder if it would be so very expensive since the major part of the expense of airplane stuff is the certification cost and not the marginal cost of the material. Ti bikes are not nearly as expensive as they used to be.

Maybe I'll do both, or have a black dot just in case it's needed should the future CO300 not work right or accidently be left in another plane/vehicle. -Seth

Thank you for all the suggestions and also for filling out the poll. It looks like I am WAY in the minority with only 33% of those responded not having a device. Brett - Nice "Brettvisors!" - All Smiles - No worries, the thread is back on track. Whatever I decide on, it will have digital readout as opposed to just an alarm as I want to see the changes. I do understand that preassure altitude most likley will cause some discrpancy in the readings (good input Byron), but the warning will still be there if the level gets dangerous. The AVWEB article linked above was very informative and some sort of device should let you know if saturation is heading toward the "Danger Zone" (yeah, I said Danger Zone on a pilot's online forum!!) even if it's just a signle you're in trouble and get down quick alarm. I would however like the digital readout device. Brett I may order the same unit you have and mount it in the same location. Frankly, it's nice that it is portable too if ever needed for other applications, or if you are flying in a different aircraft. Take care, -Seth

I'm flying from the DC area (KGAI) to Orlando (KISM) next week. The flight should take just over four hours, which I have the range and capability to do - however my passenger (girlfriend) I'm pretty sure can't make the four hours without a pit stop. A 2.5 to 3 hour flight is probably the best way to break up the trip, and that puts me anywhere from Charleston to Savannah, to the Florida Border. I plan to fly toward Svannah before turning south to head to Orlando (hugging the east coast). I have no problem flying a bit inland if you suggest a great stop. Priorities: 1. Nice FBO bathroom for the lady (all I need is a tree or bush). A decent bathroom is fine - It simply cannot be nasty 2. Low fuel price 3. Restaurant on the field (if she is fed, she is happy) Usually, though not always, an onfield restaurant and bathroom go hand in hand. However, I do not want the fuel price to suffer too much - usually doesn't have to. I do plan to avoid SAV and CHS at this time (though they'd be listed as alternates just in case). I'm open to suggestions. I could always pack some snacks, and just stop at the best priced airport along the way, but I'd like to know from those who know the area, where do you suggest I stop. Departure from GAI shoudl be about 8:30 on Friday morning, arriving for the pit stop around 11:00 to 11:30 EST. Thanks you in advance! -Seth

Quote: Bnicolette Hey guys, I've been following this thread and never really gave much thought to the battery that's installed in the airplane. I mean I haven't had any problems with it yet. Let me ask you this: My G-35 was installed in January 2010. Like I said, so far so good, but my annual is due this month. Should I replace the Gill now with the Concorde, or would you guys suggest waiting until the Gill starts going t-ts up? What is your recomendation? It evidentially is still very strong as there are times when I dont fly for two weeks and come take the plane out and there are no issues with starting even in this cold wx here near Pittsburgh? Thanks for any insight. B~

Due to importance, I'm copying and pasting what was on the other thread posted earlier today under Miscellaneous Avaition Talk - maybe should have been under Mondern Mooney Discussions. Regardless, here is the MOONEY AD for Ovation and Acclaim http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.cfm?mainaction=posts&forumid=4&threadid=4420 DATE: February 10, 2012 Background This emergency AD was prompted by a report of an incident on a Mooney Model M20TN airplane regarding the tail pitch trim assembly. In this report, the affected airplane experienced an un-commanded significant pitch up attitude within seconds after takeoff and during the climb. The pilot then pushed the yoke forward and the aircraft still maintained a nose-up attitude. The pilot stated that the "forces acting on the control column were so large that single pilot wasn't able to handle that for more than just a few minutes." The pilot and copilot had to use their knees to hold forward pressure on the flight controls to aid in preventing a departure from controlled flight. They had to maintain between 80 to 100 percent power to keep the aircraft at about 90 knots indicated airspeed to prevent the airplane from stalling. The only way they were able to descend was to introduce a series of turns. On Mooney Models M20TN and M20R airplanes, the pitch trim is adjusted by rotating the entire tail assembly. The actuating arm pushes on a hinge fixed to the empennage forward bulkhead. The hinge attaches to the bulkhead using 10 Huck Bolt fasteners with swaged collars. This aircraft was immediately inspected, and all 10 swaged collars that hold the tail trim assembly together had become unattached. Mooney inspected several other aircraft and found that on one airplane the filler plate was incorrectly installed. The filler plate was not correctly installed between the aft side of the hinge and the bulkhead. Instead, the filler plate was located on the forward side of the hinge between the hinge and trim fitting. It was then noted the incident aircraft had the same issue, as shown in the upper circle of figure 1. Because the hinge has a lip on the bottom, on the side toward the bulkhead (as shown in the bottom circle of figure 1), if the filler plate is not installed correctly, the hinge will not fit flush against the bulkhead, the Huck Bolt fasteners will not fit perpendicular to the bulkhead, and the collars will not swage properly. The condition also causes excessive tension pre-load on the Huck Bolts. Emergency Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012-03-52 is sent to owners and operators of Mooney Aviation Company, Inc. (Mooney) Models M20TN and M20R airplanes. AD #: 2012-03-52

I'm looking to add a Carbon Monoxide Detector. I plan to use one that is not the "spot" type, as those work for a limited period of time, and I plan to invest for the long haul. The poll is kind of werid, but I figured it would help give us a sampling of what our fellow Mooney pilots use. The AV Web article I read has some good information: http://www.avweb.com/news/aeromed/186016-1.html Also, I'm looking at these two products: http://www.aeromedix.com/Carbon_Monoxide_Detectors Does anyone have one? PIREPS and thoughts would be appreicated. Thanks, and happy flying, -Seth

DATE: February 10, 2012 AD #: 2012-03-52 Emergency Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012-03-52 is sent to owners and operators of Mooney Aviation Company, Inc. (Mooney) Models M20TN and M20R airplanes. Background This emergency AD was prompted by a report of an incident on a Mooney Model M20TN airplane regarding the tail pitch trim assembly. In this report, the affected airplane experienced an un-commanded significant pitch up attitude within seconds after takeoff and during the climb. The pilot then pushed the yoke forward and the aircraft still maintained a nose-up attitude. The pilot stated that the "forces acting on the control column were so large that single pilot wasn't able to handle that for more than just a few minutes." The pilot and copilot had to use their knees to hold forward pressure on the flight controls to aid in preventing a departure from controlled flight. They had to maintain between 80 to 100 percent power to keep the aircraft at about 90 knots indicated airspeed to prevent the airplane from stalling. The only way they were able to descend was to introduce a series of turns. On Mooney Models M20TN and M20R airplanes, the pitch trim is adjusted by rotating the entire tail assembly. The actuating arm pushes on a hinge fixed to the empennage forward bulkhead. The hinge attaches to the bulkhead using 10 Huck Bolt fasteners with swaged collars. This aircraft was immediately inspected, and all 10 swaged collars that hold the tail trim assembly together had become unattached. Mooney inspected several other aircraft and found that on one airplane the filler plate was incorrectly installed. The filler plate was not correctly installed between the aft side of the hinge and the bulkhead. Instead, the filler plate was located on the forward side of the hinge between the hinge and trim fitting. It was then noted the incident aircraft had the same issue, as shown in the upper circle of figure 1. Because the hinge has a lip on the bottom, on the side toward the bulkhead (as shown in the bottom circle of figure 1), if the filler plate is not installed correctly, the hinge will not fit flush against the bulkhead, the Huck Bolt fasteners will not fit perpendicular to the bulkhead, and the collars will not swage properly. The condition also causes excessive tension pre-load on the Huck Bolts.

Concorde RG35AXC -That's what I replaced in my F when the Gill went bad. As noted above, it's sealed, it has extra cranking power for hot starts, and it is not terribly more expensive. I think that's what newer Mooney Aircraft left the factory with in the 2000s - though I am not 100% sure on that. I do know that the Missile has two batteries on a rack located further aft to help with the CG due to the heavier engine. However, those two batteries are indeed Gil - So far so good, but hopefully when the time comes, I'll be able to replace them with Concorde sealed batteries. I'm not sure if that is possible due to the STC. Go Concorde as suggested by everyone so far. As an A&P I know said, Gills are POS. I wouldn't say that, but he did. -Seth

Yes - I've seen one of these - in an aircraft with a bad engine for sale. It was at W00 - Freeway Airport, in Maryland maybe an year and a half to two years ago - on either an F or J model - I forget which. -Seth

Quote: PilotDerek You forgot Bladders vs Reseal

As noted, I'm now sumping after refuel, as well as prior to any engine start. When in the hanger or out on a ramp, I sump first to ensure that any water/debis that may come out is at the sump point. After refill, how long a wait is enough? 30 seconds (I'm kidding) a few minutes, 5 minutes, 10 minutes, 30 minutes? Thoughts? And besides your thoughts, what is your actual practice. As in - "you should wait 10 minutes, but I sump right after I get my reciept/retract the hose/truck drives away." So - thoughts and then what you actually do. They can of course differ. -Seth

No the T-38 was not the Nasa paint scheme and it was odd to me that it was white with green stripes. But, I did like the comment on the sunglasses Unfortunately, I was not wearing any at the time. It was great, it just taxied by (I was on the 7th floor looking down) held short, canopies lowered, took the active, and zoomed away. There's an outfit in Chicago, Gauntlet Warbirds, that gives training in either an L-29 or L-39, you can look up the website and figure it out. They also let you fly a T-6 and other warbirds. That would be a fun but costly operation to set up. Take care, -Seth

Quote: NotarPilot You must be staying at the Holiday Inn.

Quote: Parker_Woodruff Can't say I've seen a civilian T-38 either.

I don't have a good answer for you and did not reply to the poll because it would be speculation, but do indeed want to contribute. My former 1967 F had some issues in the first 100 hours, and I took care of some deffered maintenance of other systems from the previous owner at the first annual. I then had a good run of no problems. During the last 150 hours of ownership - the last year I had it, I felt that on every trip something else that was more than minor but less than major had an issue. This was everything from a tachometer to a solonoid to a aux fuel pump to a replaced nose tire (it was time), and other isssues. I felt that for the hours I flew that plane in three years, I was luck the first 350 and then had to pay for some wear items the next 150. I admit that did have some play in the decision making process to sell and get a newer airframe. I figured it was time to upgrade certain parts, and I decided to get the newer Mooney with more capable equipment that was indeed faster. So far in about 40 hours of flying the new Mooney, I've overhauled the engine (part of the purchase deal) put some panel upgrades in (again at purchase), and have had a small oil leak that was covered by the overhaul shop (vacum pump was the locaition of the leak and it ended up being a bad seal), and now that I've flown it for a bit, i'm going to send off the engine data to Gami to try to level out the fuel distribution. So far I'm lucky, but I do try to keep some cash ready, as owning an airplane means something can break anytime. I did ask my MSC if with the F those last 150 hours if the plane was tired or if it was normal to have something break on every long trip, but they assured me the airframe was in good condition and that I simply had a few parts wear out. Other parts I proactivly replaced before this sort of thing would happen, and again, I knock on wood, have only been stranded by weather or other factors, my aircraft has been good dispatch reliability wise on all occasions thus far. Take care, -Seth