cliffy

I've always followed- "never buy the first airplane you look at" mantra.

YUP price is too high for the condition. 10K MAY be about right - or more. Depends on what you want in the end Look around some more and you'll see what we mean

The new Pipistrel (sp) has a chute and the plane comes down level and not nose down like the Cirrus. Just thinking, nose down would be better for the shoulder harness/seat belt forces and my back ain't as good as it used to be for dropping in seated upright. Just thinking.

The cutting board idea (or even plywood) is good.

Lucky you AND ME! I went to Tucson AZ on Wed. and left yesterday. Upon geting the ATIS it said 41 C. I did a quick 9/5 C +32 and got a 104-105 number. Again damn hot. Getting back to Page AZ it was 100+ and a DA of 7300 ft. (3000 above field elevation). It had even been bumpy at 12,500 cruise(14,5 DA). But, out here in the west that's not unusual. But wait- It's a dry heat and you don't feel it!

For the way I fly and many others that I have seen, we use our Mooney as a 2 place airplane "most" of the time. For that, the M10 with room in the back for "stuff" might be a reasonable option. For training in China it hits what they want right on the head. It may be too early to speculate too much on what if any a "new" Mooney might debute as. My feeling is that though the parachute may be a selling point, it is not the only determing factor. Look at design and cool interiors. I feel these are probably just as important as the chute to new buyers. No matter what you do with our old school airplanes, they are still old school in design. And people see that. There is a certain cache about the "Mooney design" that may be advantageous to keep as an over riding design theme. BUT, the innerds can be changed the make the total airplane competative in cost to produce compared to the rest of the new style airplane coming on the market.

If one thinks outside the box it's not too hard to come up with a smooth skin, composite Mooney airframe keeping the original exterior shape but filling with a composite structure (just as strong as what we have now and better aerodynamics) with the use of CAD/CAM design (like the M10? :-). This is just speculation on my part, but at the West Coast Summit we were shown pictures of CAD Mooney's and then the actual airplane. Both identical. Once the outside demensions are locked in, going to internal structure is not hard. That could bring the parts count and labor hours to produce down (this is the Achillies heal of Mooney production)to a mangable level. Then take a look at the M10 interior designs and see how advanced they are compared to our "old school" technology interiors and what do you see? Cirrus type style? BMW style interiors? Start thinking outside the box. We could be witnessing a revolution in Mooney production.

Don't pick up so many bugs- fly higher! :-)

In reality, your 94 can do eveything the 430 can do except the lower approaches. How many low approaches in GPS would you really do? What are your personal limitations on weather flying? Yes the G/S in a WAAS approach is nice but I have found that I personally don't need it that often (if ever) in my type of flying, it really doesn't impact me that much, so I'm sticking with my 155 TSO ist generation GPS for a while yet to see how the ADSB stuff filters out.

For one- A stall only means that the amount of lift generated is not sufficiant to overcome the weight It doesn't mean that ALL lift is lost. Maybe a nuance, but interesting in the least. At the stall "most" wings are still generating about 80% lift due to the progreesive nature of the stall along the wing from root to tip. Aerodynamics from an engineer's satnd point compared to a pilot's stand point may be in degrees of fineness of description.

Just a question- How did a nice "travel log" commentary degenerate into a biased political diatribe so quickly?

Just back from the Mooney Flyer Summit in Paso Robles, CA. If you missed it you missed a great time. Over 30 airplanes arrived. LASAR was there, TOP GUN was there, Chandler Aviation was there, AND MOONEY was there in force! Mr Chen the President, Ton Bowen, the COO and Chief Engineer Ron Blum were there. Now tell me, what other aircraft manufactuer would come to a regional meeting of owners like that? NONE, NOT ONE, ZILCH, ZERO! These guys have their act together to bring Moomey out of the dark ages of ups and downs and into the 21st Century. Their presentation was very interesting on what they are doing in the Calif. Engineering Plant. Phil Corman, Jim Price and their wives went WAY over board to make sure everyone had an excellent time. AND WE DID!. Great presentations, fantastic food. great venues (the air museum at KPRB has to be seen to be believed). Mooney International even floated lunch on Saturdat, Thank You Mooney! The FBO gave us truck fuel at SS prices. Volunteers were arranged for transportation. All in all a very well planned event. If you didn't go you REALLY missed out.

With any profession there will be a few at the bottom that really need to be doing something else. Some Doctor graduated at the bottom of his class. With every airline I have been with, the bottom 1 or 2% were always a problem and should have been doing something else. Someone will always be "trainable" enough to barely get through a check ride but then slip back to sub-par before the next training session. How to weed them out is the problem. It always has been. No different in the PP ranks.

Buy the book "How to Buy An Airplane Without Taking a Dive". It will be the best thing you can do BEFORE you even look at airplanes.

I just got a set from him last week They are made very well.

If memory serves me correct, with the elevator counterweight faired that equals zero deflection on a travel board. If one can take the measurement of the angle that the elevator surface skin sits at (at the proper station with the counterweight faired) and use that as "zero" then the angles up or down at full throw (once the counterweight is released) should equate to the throw of that elevator. Much like using a prop protractor. If the "faired" condition is zero deflection then a board that keys on the nose radius and the trailing edge of the entire elevator assembly (with the counterweight held in the faired condition) will show the stabilizer angles in relation to the level line (thrust line) of the fuselage when the trim whee is moved. Computations will be needed for the level line not being exactly level unless the aircraft is actually leveled. The same would hold true for the setting of the elevator angle at the "zero bungee" setting (3 1/2 degrees negative value). "Leveling means Edge of skin splice over aft fuselage radio access panel. Spirit level is used to level" (taken from TCDS) Airleron and flap travel could be checked in much the same way but the rudder is a different being :-) I really am open for counter arguments to this theory. :-) I could be wrong but I don't think so.

A who for a what? A watch has 3 hands that go roundy roundy and a phone has 10 buttons (of wait, a DIAL!) and all phone numbers start with DIamond, STate, UNion, etc. and your neighbor is on the same party line. :-)

What if there was a way to check the all the elevator riggings by making your own easy to make "travel board"? And use a bubble level or a prop protractor ( I know, no one even remembers those), a machinest protractor or even a pendulum angle finder.

San Diego will be no problem The controllers are the best for what you want to do as mentioned Flight Following with them is easy. Just watch the weather with the morning marine layer. We call it the June Gloom. Its always there but goes away by noon most of the time.

Damn, had to do mine last year also. Any number of shops can rebuild it. Look in Trade-A-Plane. You might be able to sell it after the upgrade and recoop some of the expense.

Grew up there, learned to fly there, remember the start of it all with the TCAs and now what it has grown into. Joe Z has the best plan above. Very easy to do that way. Don't go stealth mode unless you know EXACTLY what you are doing.

What is the problem with your gauge? It could be just a loose line or fitting depending on what you are seeing. Does it show correct MP when engine not running? @30" at SL minus 1" for every 1000' above SL Does it not "suck down" to idle MP when engine is running?

I have a very close relative who is an FBI agent. They use the planes for survailance of suspects or groups with a court order. This thread is interesting in light of what "we" as pilots are willingly giving up in the way of freedom with our tacit approval of the tracking of our every move-from our start up parking place to our shut down parking place, on every flight, no matter where we go, with our acceptance of ADSB. Our every move will be tracked and recorded from now on and, made available to the general public in real time via N number searchable websites.

Typo on the 928 The IN was an after thought to make the system edible for GA. Without the IN on UAT (not enough space on 1090 for the IN side of the equation) there is no reason other than Mandate for GA to have ADSB. The entire system is already upside down in cost benifit per the government not me. They are "giving us" something (the IN side) to make us want to equip. You can debate the "benefits" all you want but most everything offered on the IN we already have with other venues. If you want fake TCAS on your pad then this is for you. The entire systen was designed form the inception from the top down. Large A/C, big airports then down the ladder to bring us in. Right now they can't even do an end to end test. They needs LOTS of us to equip so they can finalyze design and testing.

I was thinking in terms of mission creap. Someone will propose that there is no need for a ground based system to recieve 928 UAT if the 1090 system in space is available. So then we have "bye bye UAT". Mission creap always happens. Then they (FAA) don't have to absorb the cost of the IN side either as most of that is UAT only and it WILL go away.