Seth

Aerospace Welding in Minneapolis does good work. They did the MissilE Exhaust R&R in 2011 and then realized they didn’t have what they needed for an Overhaul in 2020 and shipped the exhaust to Rocket for overhaul. They do good work in my experience. -Seth

If I recall Wilmar was sold off and Paul created Weep No more. Wilmar than went downhill in quality and closed. Oasis Aero was created became a new Mooney Service Center. Paul Still runs Weep No More. The two work very well together but are separate companies. I think but am not sure, that if issues are found during resealing process, Oasis often is hired to correct said problems - not sure about this. Give them a call and ask - both Eric and Paul and very accessible. You can do a reseal without any Oasis work. https://www.weepnomorellc.com/ http://oasisaero.com/ -Seth

I had two cylinder heads crack on my in 2012 about 100 hours into the overhauled engine run. That caused immense overheating of the CHT. Do figure out what's wrong. The engine monitor data is crucial here. PIlot did a smart job in making a precautionary landing. Should be commended for that. -Seth

You made the right call and it’s what I should have done. Pull the mixture. Stop the aircraft. at Oshkosh 2019 I was marshaled into a muddy area. I asked three times (one pointing, once attempting to taxi by, and once talking/yelling) over the engine I was worried about taxing through that patch. They said it would be fine and I had a prop strike in the mud on my Missile. EAA’s insurance paid the claim as I was marshalled into the bad area. But I still had numerous out of pocket expenses. They paid a ton in insurance. Next time I’ll shut down like you did. Good job. -Seth

That's a good ending to this chapter. The lifters were bad on My IO-550A at purchase as well in 2011. -Seth

I have flown my Missile to Oshkosh numerous times and have been worried every time. As long as you keep the trim up, go slow, keep the control column pulled back, and barely touched the brakes, you should be fine. I've had marshallers turn me around before and as noted by my novel of a post, I was also directed into a muddy area even after asking to not go through it. In hindsight, I should have simply pulled my mixture and held up "the line" to allow me not go through the bad patch. Happy to PM you or have a phone call about it. I was the the third to last aircraft to arrive before the field was then closed for over 24 hours. As stated, with the line of Mooneys in front of you you should be able to see where to go and where not to go. You also may need to slow down more than some other Mooney's when taxiing. It shouldn't be a problem however. Ensure your nose tire is properly inflated as well - every quarter inch counts! -Seth

I know someone's yoke broke off and they used the other side. No a control shaft failure. I personally broke the PTT switch on my yoke once, so mid flight I plugged my headset into the other side and reached over to the other side to press the PTT for communication the rest of the flight. Diverted to a trusted shop and sat there while the PTT switch was repaired. -Seth

After being on the other threads, I started thinking diesel again. Though I do want pressurized, a DA62 or a DA50 may both be good airplanes. JetA powered. Those could be alternatives, as could a Mooney with a diesel engine. Now a Mooney wing, new gear, and a composite fuselage pressurized with a diesel engine or small turbine, now that's a niche that doesn't exist right now. -Seth

This thread still makes me smile. -Seth

This is actually a question I’ve thought about a lot (as you can tell). I love my Missile and plan to add to the fleet though a shared arrangement instead of trading it in. I have access to late model Cirrus aircraft that seat 5 and are FIKI. So I could downsize to a two seat airplane like and RV-8 and take some cash out and operate it to my hearts content when it’s just me or one other on board which is 95% of flights. If I get access to and an typed in an SF50 or PC12 (insurance training) I’ll just keep my Mooney as my “RV8” and use those for family trips. I can get a PA-46 for pressurization and the extra seats for the family - a true traveling machine next step up from the Mooney. I can get an Aerostar. The RV-8 / late model Cirrus access would be the least expensive and maybe less expensive way to move forward. The PA46 would cost more to operate. The Aerostar would cost more to operate. -Seth

Yes, it's eye watering. Good point about the piston pressurized twin - understand it's a total loss that equals scrap metal going in and you're A-Okay! Just like a 20 year turboprop or jet is simply purchasing an engine or two and whatever comes with it is bonus. Maybe an Aerostar is in my future after all! -Seth

If anyone wants to flip these right side up please do!

Nope. Got the number for the Comanche Fighters LLC but never got a call back. Left two messages. Though the LLC is in Houston the aircraft are tracked to all over the US as per flight aware and the aircraft registered to the LLC. Their P-47 was the one on display at Duxford believe or not for years before being crated up and shipped back to the US in 2013. It is a dual seat P-47. -Seth

So do they own an LLC and the LLC owns the Volvo and thus with the sale of the LLC the owner keeps the plates? -Seth

A friend of mine mentioned to me that should I purchase a larger airplane at some point in the future, I would want to go turbine and not piston twin. He knows I have a fascination with Aerostars. The reason, he said, is simple. If I purchase a larger airplane, pressurized, for a hopefully growing family in the next few years, I'll likely slowly spend money on that airplane over time, getting it to where I want. It would be a shame if after getting it where it's exactly how I want it, I then can't fly it as a replacement for AVGAS is not found, doesn't include my piston engine, or harms my performance and future resale value. He has a point, when the music stops on AVGAS at some point, we won't want to still hold our piston powered aircraft. The Mooney I see as different as there are too many piston singles in the fleet. A slight reduction in power ratings affecting useful load or modifications to a single engine may be needed for common engines like the IO360 or I0550 (and the turbos we run as well). But an old piston pressurized twin? A C414, Aerostar, BE58P - There are some, but not a ton, and the SE performance or useful load may really harm the aircraft ability. A SETP may be the solution there, or an older Cheyenne, or something like that. Purchase price will be more but operating costs will in the end be equal due to lower fuel prices on Jet A and maintenance on the engine. I'm not doing anything anytime soon. It was an honest good piece of advice. "Don't be caught with a large pressurized piston twin when the AVGAS music stops." What are your thoughts with this analogy/advice? -Seth

That's a great piece of aviation knowledge - I tend to remember these little facts so thank you.

That's a neat idea. I don't see why not. But likely, there needs to be an STC delete. It could be an easy STC delete dollars wise as it will be mostly paperwork, unless the shaft requires a ton of work to plug or cut. -Seth

Mine has also faded to amber. It was like that when I purchased it 10 years ago. My former F model had an actual green light on the panel. I will in time fix this to green as well. -Seth

VNE is typical M20J - 198 KIAS. FF at takeoff for the Missile is 28GPH min if you don't want cooked cylinders. FF in cruise ROP full rich at high power settings during break in was easily 20GPH + FF will be back to LOP in the 12-14 range for 170 to 180 True and 185-192 15 to 18 ROP depending on altitude. I have not had her over 4,000 feet yet and only have about 11 hours on her right now. Oil burn/useage has stabilized. I'll conduct my first oil change soon. On my next flight I'll do a LOP test to ensure the GAMI's are set up right and then send the info to GAMI for them to review. If needed we'll make an adjustment which is a 50/50 proposition evidently. We cleaned the Gamijectors and reinstalled them in place of the factory injectors. -Seth

First flight! On Thursday, February 6, 2021, N1165N flew for the first time in 18 months. It had a newly overhauled engine, and a new 4 blade propeller. This was an important flight as it was both a break in flight and we had to watch the propeller to ensure the RPM’s did not overspeed due to all the adjustments made. We also watched to ensure fuel flow was high enough for the Mooney Missile to properly cool the engine on takeoff (known Missile issue). Static thrust was at 2640 on the ground as per the notes from the engine setup after physical propeller blade angle correction (which was supposed to be 2650 and okay). The max red line RPM is 2700. In retrospect, I’ve learned that the fourth blade may change the dynamics of a 50 RPM increase in motion, but I’m not sure why from a computational standpoint, or we’d see the same issue in 3 vs 2 blades which are common. Also, it is a slightly shorter propeller at 74 vs 75 inches diameter – which again, should change sound harmonics, as the tips is not moving as fast, but the RPM should be constant due to the prop governor. To say the least, there were unknowns with the propeller. In addition, during the final and flare, I’ve flown the 4 blade MT on some of the SR22T aircraft, and it acts as a giant air brake at low power prop forward. So, when flaring the Cirrus with a 4 blade tend to sit immediately when you pull power. I know the Mooney is less draggy design so I was curious how it would perform in flare. The CG was moved back just over an inch due to the 26 lbs coming off the nose, so I also was curious how that would change the heavy nose/pitch feel of the Missile – Erik has been very happy with it in his Rocket (Rakete!). I brought along one of the instructors with me at Freeway as he owns a Mooney (M20C) but also has time in mid and long body Mooney’s. I wanted him on board for the first flight or two so that if anything occurred, I’d have assistance. Also, when flying, I wanted some one really watching the temps, fuel flow, gauges, etc. I created a checklist and data sheet for him to complete so every 5 minutes we’d be writing down engine information (I can pull it later from my JPI 830, but I figured this way I could quickly see trends in temps during the flight). We had an additional issue with the initial flight – W00 is located inside the Washington, DC SFRA (Special Flight Rules Area) and also under a 1,500 foot shelf of class Bravo. While most BRAVO airspace allows VFR aircraft to fly at 200 knots below the class Bravo, in the SFRA VFR aircraft my not fly faster than 180 kias. The Missile at full power down low is faster than 180 kias. Instead of contacting the Baltimore FSDO, my plan was this: Take off, orbit the field at 1,300 feet (1,500 foot class bravo) 2-3 times to ensure everything was okay. Then fly to the 2,500 shelf toward Annapolis (ANP) and then across the Chesapeake Bay (3,500 shelf) to leave the SFRA toward Bay Bridge Airport (W29). Then turn south to Easton, MD, a towered airport, and orbit there for about 40 minutes before reversing my route and coming back to Freeway (W00). Time between airports were minimal and we were in glide distance of Baby Bridge airport or land while crossing the Chesapeake Bay. The time came for takeoff: During the takeoff roll the RPM went and passed 2700, 2710, 2730, 2780 . . . I started pulling back on the prop and got it to around 2650 when we rotated. Everything else was fine. Larry from MT/Flight Resource and Chris from Freeway MSC both specifically instructed me to watch out for prop overspeed. Fuel flew was fine. All temps were fine, all indications were fine. Afterward, I learned a 10% error was fine. Anything over that and the entire engine would have to be shipped back to Continental for a rebuild. After two trips in the pattern, we were fine. I had to pull back on manifold pressure to keep us under 180kias. I dialed back to 2500 RPM. We then started our trip. During the shallow climb I gave full MP. When level until outside the SFRA I had to pull back on MP. Once outside the SFRA, MP was WOT until it was time to renter at the end of the flight. We climbed to just under 3,000 feet. I had talked to the Easton (ESN) tower the day prior and as we approached check to make sure it was okay to orbit in their airspace and it was. Four way GPS speed runs in the Easton tower at WOT and 2500 RPM around 2,500 feet was 186 knots. In future flights I’ve been faster – we’ll get into that later. On the return to W00 I had to pull some MP in a shallow dive to stay under 180kias. Prior to entering the SFRA I was well over 180kias – actually close to VNE. We descended to about 2,000 I didn’t pull power significantly to enter the pattern until close to W00. I climbed and turned to sluff off speed to lower the gear and then get the flaps in. I then added power back. The landing was as if I hadn’t missed a day flying my Mooney. The flare was indeed shorter due to the propeller acting as a brake. The “play” I had in my pitch zone was much better than then window I used to operate in due to the lighter nose. Still a heavier overall airplane, but much closer to a J in pitch vs the former Missile setup (still not as light as a C/E). We did not go for a second flight as we wanted to de cowl, look for oil leaks, and most importantly, figure out why the propeller overspeed occurred and adjust. So the decision was made for me to come back Saturday after the prop was corrected. The decision was made to adjust the governor back to exactly where it had been set but not touch the prop blade angles. To be continued . . .

I alway wanted to fly for the Air Force. With my asthma, I knew that would never happen. So as soon as I could I earned my PPL. It's slowly grown from there. -Seth

You are not crazy. It's okay to pick an airplane outside of the Mooney Family. Many people move from Cirrus to TBM (more are now moving to SF50) but the TBM is the next step for many high performance piston single owners. The Cirrus has a larger cabin (some would say more comfortable, some would say not - The pilot seat is less comfortable for me, others like it more). It also has 5 seats. I often transporta family with three young kids, so that six souls on board a Cirrus as the youngest is still lap age. The Cirrus has a parachute. Which is huge as it's a reason for some non-flying family members to feel more safe, and frankly, it's an extra arrow in the quiver in case it's a tool ever needed. The FIKI via TKS systems allow flight into certain icing conditions - it also allows for flights when icing may be a threat but never materializes. Those are flights I wouldn't go for in my Mooney as I don't have icing protection. So that's a big plus if you get a model with FIKI or TKS. There are downsides as well, they've all been listed. Personally, I love my Mooney. I think it handles better. And if my family grows, until I decide what I'm doing I'll have access to a 5 seat airplane on those few occasions a year I'll need the extra seat until I get a bigger aircraft. George Perry loves Mooney's. He owned an M20F and also an M20S. He now is a partner in a Cirrus. Do what's best for you. PM me and I can communicate more about the pros and cons as I have close to 500 hours now in the SR22, SR22T, and SR20. -Seth

In the G5 and G6 Cirrus aircraft I fly for the 135 operator, the aircraft have a Hobbs and a Flight Time - Both look like side by side hobbs gauges. The Hobbs measures time the engine is on. The Flight Timer measures time the aircraft is flying. No tach, but actual time in air and time engine running. The Flight Time is the what maintenance revolves around, kind of like Tach time. Similar to Tach Time, depending on how much time is spent on the ground, there is a larger or smaller discrepancy between the two. Normally the Tach and always the Flight time are less than the Hobbs time. -Seth

Prop Setup: It was time to properly set up the engine. The instructions from Continental though standard were vague. We got in touch with Continental to find out exactly what they had done at the factory so we would put no more additional time on the engine getting it set up. The prop was on, the checks were made, she came to life, everything was looking good . . . except . . . the prop would not go past about 2550 RPM static. It needed to be 2650 RPM static on the ground run. So, we contacted MT. Larry of Flight Resource was my main contact at this point and he told us to make changes to the prop governor which we did. We still could not get the prop to spin up to the correct RPM. One of the projects at the MSC a while back was a 182 (yes, they work on other airplanes too, including the flight school at Freeway) with a new prop and IO550 - and the STC prop was set up wrong from the factory blade angle wise. It turns out this was the problem here as well. I’m not sure if this was a Rackete (Rocket) vs Rackete (Missile) thing or just an oversight, but after conferring with Larry again we adjusted the blade angle on the prop itself, and achieved the required static thrust. We then double checked paperwork at that point preparing for the first flight (mid-January) to find that in the STC documents, which we should have checked carefully earlier (we did go over them to an extent), unfortunately had a typo. The engine in the propeller STC paperwork was incorrect. So, we reached out to Larry at MT/Fight Resource again and found that his copy had the correct engine listed. But the one in our hand was the wrong engine listed. We have an IO550A in the Missile, not an IO550M as was indicated on the paperwork. Larry said he’d send new paperwork. However, due to the relationship with the FSDO he used, he’s not allowed to fax or email paperwork, it has to be sent via mail. He said he’d get it in the mail that day – which was the 15th or 16thth of January. We all know where this is going. Post office mail delays. The paperwork arrived January 26th. By that point, we had a string of not great weather and were days from February. We decided to wait until February to complete sign offs as that would give an extra “month” until the next annual window wise if needed, and we had to wait for a good weather day anyway. What’s 5 more days after 18 months? First flight . . . to be continued . . .