carusoam

Filter locations: One on each fuel pick up in the tank, Gascolator has a screen. Are there any others? -a-

Gale, Keep in mind, the reservoir for the brakes is probably the same reservoir for the flaps. At least it is for the 1965 M20C... With this much work ahead of you, you will want to get yourself a copy of the maintenance manual and spare parts manual. Both have pictures and info that will get you to where you want to be.... If you have already determined that you have a leak and low hydraulic level, you may find that the old rubber hose, on the supply side, gets crusty, cracks and leaks. The belly skins will be fully spread with red hydraulic fluid with a few pounds of dirt gelled in. Best regards, -a-

Ryan, The fuel gascolator has two lines in (left and right) and two lines out, fuel pump and of course the drain. When you select the L or F from the selector valve and then pull the pin, it should drain evenly out the same drain hole. It should not matter if the source of the fuel is left or right. Since the gascolator system is relying on gravity to work.... If you do not get even flow, you should be looking for things like, valve operation, tank vent blockage, fuel level in each tank, etc... The gascolator usually gets serviced during the annual. If you have not seen this done, and the plane is new to you, you may want to ask some help from your A&P. Open it up and clean it out. Access to the gascolator is only a small piece of belly skin (slightly difficult to reach because of the front gear doors). If fuel truly only flows out from one side, I would be concerned. This would indicate that fuel is not able to get to the engine from one side. Or that the fuel pump is working harder to get fuel from one side than the other... Best regards, -a-

I like George's thinking. Clear marketing genious. Somebody parked an SR22 next to my M20R yesterday. My non-pilot friend was immediately attracted to the SR-22. It is big and beautiful next to the sleek M20R. His words not mine. He noted the door(s), the side stick and of course the two large Garmin displays. Tough comparison since my machine is 15 years old. The SR22 did not list it's age. People won't usually tell you they don't like your house or your car.....but.... they will honestly tell you what they don't like when they first get into your plane..... For my next Mooney, I would like the following included: [1] Two doors. [2] Single lever control. Fadec / Modern control (unfortunately, we won't have LOP v ROP debates anymore) [3] Glass cockpit with integrated autopilot and synthetic vision. Flying IFR is difficult enough knowing where you are and where you are going all while speaking rapid fire with ATC. [4] An instrument panel designed for glass that is Cadillac spectacular. It probably costs the same to build an uncomfortable cockpit as it does to build a comfortable one. [5] An easy opening cowling, so I can admire my non-oil consuming engine. [6] Please make sure it does not lose any of it's flying qualities, speed or efficiency. Get started today, and I'll be there in about 15 years to by a second hand one.... I think there are still a few questions about the SR22 and C400 out there. [1] Is there a difference in age limit on aluminum airplanes compared to plastic ones? Is anyone leaving these outside? [2] Is there an age limit on the ballistic chute? What is the rebuild or replacement cost for that? [3] I didn't look, but I don't think big and beautiful has a good speed / efficiency rating .... -a-

A couple of threads seem to end badly also.... I copied the mess, but it does not look the same when I pasted it....... -a- </SCRIPT> <FONT style="FONT: 16pt/18pt verdana; COLOR: black">The web site you are accessing has experienced an unexpected error.<BR>Please contact the website administrator. </FONT>

Matt, Is this the same as the following post? Made by bug35man Re: AOG @ ABQ -- Gear retraction failure M20K Posted Jul 3, 2010 1:14 PM I had a total electric failure last week while in IMC.* It got my attention, but sadly the manual gear extension procedure in the POH did not. It warned of exceeding the number of pulls on the cable. The laminated emergency card I use didn't include that and I exceeded the number of pulls on the cable. Problem: the Eaton actuator is overextended and the whole mechanism is bound up tightly. Is there a way to get it backed off manually, perhaps by getting into the back of the motor or the gear drives? The multiple rod ends in the linkages are so tight that we can't get them disconnected without starting to destroy some of them. I am working with an experienced Mooney mechanic but neither of us have tangled with a jammed Eaton LG drive to this point. *(I found a hole in the overcast and ATC was following my skin paint radar signal all through this. The green light from tower never looked so good!) I'll much appreciate any suggestions from the group, Cord

Reason #XX to use your mooney for practice.... Get a good feel for what full power is like after a go-around. The transition from full flaps / low power, to flaps up / full power, probably comes with a healthy dose of holding the nose down and re-trim. You may not get the same practice with a Cessna. This is neither of the classic power on or power off stalls. It is a situation I have encountered trying to get a fully loaded plane into a relatively short field. It certainly can be a handful. See the similar thread on touch and go landings. http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.cfm?mainaction=posts&forumid=1&threadid=1100 Keep in mind, this can be practiced at altitude. It does not need to be an actual go around at low levels... Best regards, -a-

Russ, After the 4G vs 3G vs Service provider discussion for the new I-Pad... Dialup didn't even make the discussion, you must be very daring!!! Looking forward to the next photos.... -a-

That's is a lot of blue in the cabin... If it were a bolt, a screw or a rivet or two that were seaping, I would try locally. Fuel running across the back bench and a year's supply of blue pigment in the cockpit might be enough for me to seek expert help. The cleaning you should be able to do yourself. Try and identify what is leaking and how bad it really is. While you are there check the health of the "rubber" fuel lines. They can often be old, cracked and a large source of fuel leakage. What do the logs say? ...If this is all original sealant that is 40 years old, I'm with Lew. Chasing leak after leak gets expensive quick. Unfortunately Patch on top of patch is not generally going to improve things either. Long putt (or good luck): The tanks have been resealed in the late 20th century and somebody just did poor work resealing the fuel level senders, maybe a reseal on these fasteners is all that is needed? If you can get to an MSC (Maxwell because he has the process) they can inspect and advise of how to handle. With fuel tank leaks, experience REALLY counts... If you want to try your luck. Clean up the fuel stains. Have your IA reseal the obvious issues. Aside from what the law says, I would not want to be in the same cabin that fuel leaks into. Best regards, -a-

For BFR, I typically use my own plane. If the flight instructor is going to point out a deficiency, it will be real and something I can learn from. For repeated slow flight, power-on and power-off stalls and recovery, I would consider using the flight school equipment. BFRs don't typically do this repeatedly do they? Best regards, -a- Best regards,

http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.cfm?mainaction=posts&forumid=1&threadid=1191 Alun, Nice to see you back. Sorry to see why. Check with Ned at the above link. He had a fight with a fence post.... Not quite the same, but similar type of work possibly. Best regards, -a-

Have you tried the plug at the instrument end yet? In the event that you have picked up additional resistance (contact corrosion) at this connection, it would be additive to the reading..... Unlikely, but not hard to try...... -a-

Time to switch up the Avatar! You have earned a real mooney.... Good luck with the weather getting her back home. GUMPS, GUMPS and GUMPS again....... Best regards, -a-

From Dan at Lasar.......regarding the tie down / jack points... Still available.... $35.00 for the set for the wings. Dan

I look forward to finding the MooneySpace family out there somehow.... I had to back out of the Caravan list due to scheduling difficulty, but I am still committed to camping with the M20R... I'll have to hang a sign on her carusoam@mooneyspace.com ....... See you there.... Best regards, -a-

Ryan, When I first got my 65 M20C, it came with an owners manual. It was more of a pamphelet extolling the virtues of Mooneys and how smart I am for owning one. POHs were not a government requirement until a few years later. Bill Wheat at Mooney Aircraft Company can point you in the proper direction of what POH to purchase. Since the M20F was built way into the 1970s, bill may suggest picking up a more recent POH. All of the modern requirements of performance and emergency procedures will be in the "modern" POH. You will probably want to have one in its printed form to stay in your plane. Best regards, -anthony-

CRXCTE, Things to consider...... After all of the super sleuth work that you have completed, I am going with the sensor not working right at the hot end.... The temperature gauge is simply a voltage meter (calibrated in degrees F) reading the voltage difference across the variable resistance of the sensor, using the electricity provided by the ship's battery. [1] Broken wire would give a constant reading. Maximum resistance = maximum reading. [2] Shorted wire (crossed) would give the opposite, but constant reading. minimum resistance = minimum reading. [2a] No power to the gauge is certainly going to read minimum. (no voltage difference) [3] Sensor is of the variable resistor type, (thermistor). Resistance increases with temperature. [4] The sensor seems to be working, but improperly. Shows cold when cold, but shows well over heated when hot. [5] If the oil was really that hot, you would surely notice a significant drop in oil pressure. A thermocouple type thermometer from a cooking store would help you understand what the real temperature is. [6] The gauge itself could be at fault. The gauge is in the nice environment of the cockpit. The thermistor is in the harsh, hot and vibrating environment of the engine. Lastly, you may also consider that the full battery voltage may not be getting to the system (least likely, but something to consider). See item [7] battery voltage is delivered internally through the cluster gauge connector. [7] Super lastly...The indicator is reading a collective resistance of all the wire, connectors and thermistor. If the connectors have increased in resistance for some reason, the indicator will change as things warm up and then go off scale. There are two connectors to check, one at the sensor in the engine and one at the back of the instrument cluster. (this would be your lowest cost fix) Disconnect the connector, use contact cleaner, reassemble the connectors. [8] The battery voltage isn't running incredibly low is it? This would cause a whole new set of issues anyway... That's why I vote thermistor being most suspect, gauge being the next and wire/connectors being the third most suspect. Best regards, - anthony - PS. I looked up the part number for a 1965 and 66 mooney M20C and E. It is listed as bulb, oil temp AN5525-1 Aircraft spruce lists a similar one (possible identical) for $145 http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/inpages/oiltempgauges5.php If nothing else, check this website. It will give you a good idea of what you are looking for.... Jose: does this look right to you? PPS: The EGT is a thermocouple and does not look or work anything like the oil temperature sensor, other than generically it has two wires going into a metal sensor..... Best regards, -a-

Let me be the first on MooneySpace to say congrats on the PPL and first Mooney in one week. (unfortunately, I can't help with your instructor request). Best regards, - anthony -

There are two human errors that seem to come up in training. [1] Have you ever pulled the red knob on final approach in place of pulling the throttle to idle? That will get your flight instructor's attention. [2] Have you ever forgotten to switch a VOR or GPS source to ILS (and confirm) for the final approach? Easy mistakes to make, do whatever it takes to keep it from happening (again). I see you have a real turn coordinator, standard altimeter and a hole bunch of instrument lights also. Very nice..... -a-

I recall somebody having a visor that was mounted to the center post..... Best regards, -a-

Go see Brian... http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.cfm?mainaction=posts&forumid=1&threadid=1150 Check out piperpainter in the photo gallery.... Enjoy, -a-

Dav8, You're very right, somebody did spend copious amounts updating the panel to get far away from classic...... While you are selecting your new throttle control, check out the following thread. http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.cfm?mainaction=posts&forumid=3&threadid=876 It's time to decide whether or not you like the vernier type or the regular/push pull..... It seems more people like push/pull, RFB and I like the vernier.... Best regards, -a-

Check out the link from John Paul Townsend at GAMI.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEyYFsn2tjg If I understand correctly.... [1] GAMI states that the new fuel will contain more power per gallon than 100LL (no statement of density comparison) [2] They show it flying in an SR22 with turbo charged engine (I believe to be Continental TSIO-550). Pretty harsh environment... [3] Very nice instrumented engine test stand. Also get a read on AOPApilot cover story...There are some details about Continental TSIO 550 - K that is 94UL friendly... 94UL is stated to be 100LL with the LL removed. The turbo charger that is used in the SR22 comes from GAMI (Turbo Alley). (I'm not done reading yet.....Just more fuel for the fire of this thread) Best regards, -a-

Nice numbers Randy. No matter what fuel we are burning it will be market driven pricing unless it is used by the masses such as diesel or MoGas. Alcohol died down significantly with the end of the Bush administration. Turning food into alcohol turned out to have unintended consequences. Price of grain became highly inflated, feed for livestock went the same way, price of food increased significantly. Percentage-wise Huge amounts of food were being used for very small amount of fuel. Alcohol, as indicated by Randy, is very corrosive and has significantly less energy per pound. Anything that takes away useful load is usually unpopular in aviation. Alcohol also has the ability to carry water with it. If it were a drop in an entire tank, this is a good trait. If it adsorbs as much water as it can, you would be getting a few percent watered down fuel (more pounds, less energy). A final thought: I wouldn't mind low power fuels at altitude so much. However, I would be very uncomfortable with low power fuels while screaming towards the end of a 2,200 ft runway. Best regards, -a-

They've got you surrounded!!! -a-