cliffy

And then you have the Cirrus plastic wing A pure case of a better mouse trap

People were smaller back when Mooneys started down the line ! Heck Bill Wheat MIGHT have been 150# dripping wet.

Everyone is waiting on you! :-) :-) Inquiring minds want to know

A DER is NOT REQUIRED for OPP but a foundation of the OPP (here we go again) is to use "approved" design information so the part is the equivalent of the original. Getting past this requirement is the crux of the problem. You can reverse engineer or even new engineer but some sort of "approved design info" is needed. You just can't say (40:1 gears) that they look like brass and make them out of any ol' brass. What type of brass were they made from? How can you prove that? Just as an example. The part has to be the equivalent of the original one. Use a DER and all things become easier in the areas that really need good work - like landing gears that actually go up and down. Herein is where the "Approval" of a DER comes in to make things easier.

If the real desire is there - there are ways to make any part on the airplane One route is to use a DER to design and approve the part for OPP by reverse engineering (or even original engineering). That covers the "approved " paperwork trail requirement for OPP (just one way of doing it) but it can be done IF THE REAL DESIRE IS THERE! 40:1 gears COULD be done if one wanted to do it enough ($$$$$). No Back up Springs COULD be done if one wanted to do it enough In the end its only money that is stopping any part from being made.

Let's not forget that the impetuous for the M10 was a perceived Chinese market IIRC

Many years ago at a flyin presentation just before the 2 door model came out I was told by them that they had the ability a to design a fixed gear that would only cut 2 MPH off of the top speed. The amount of effort and money needed to bring out the 2 door model caught them by surprise (FAA) and probably doomed the company. Bonus question= How many 2 door airplanes rolled out of the factory?

I'm basically referring to a mass market product like the industry produced 40 to 50 years ago. Rivets and sheet metal were all the industry had back then That's all the market knew or understood. The market is now fragmented into niche areas (Sport aircraft, experimental niches like RVs, STOL, Ultralights, plastics, etc) The market that used to be available to manufacturers (Cessna, Piper) is now so small that we will never see a return to what was. The current metal offerings are for very small markets themselves as we try to resurrect a mass market product from 4 decades ago- our beloved Mooney. The numbers of buyers and the financials just aren't there anymore to support the effort. As much as we'd like to see it - it ain't gonna happen. The main market we had for rivets a sheet metal has moved on to other forms.

ALL A&Ps also learned how to disassemble, repair and reassemble carbs in school but today almost none of them even think of working on one. Years ago when the two piece venturi was AD'd out of existence many were changed by A&Ps in the field to the one piece venturi but not today. And it doesn't matter what field we are talking about- cars, boats or planes. Most mechanics today only do the parts cannon approach and not real trouble shooting and repair.

Its called 'Liability Insurance" cost

The Bonanza actually started with a 125 HP Lyc O-290 (1st airframe test unit) Then it went to the Cont E-185 with 165 HP and then to the E-185 with 185 HP From there many variants were added O-470. Io470, Io-520 nd the IO-550. In the original 165 HP model the performance was similar to our C model airplanes.

Time marches on- You can't go home again. We don't fly biplanes anymore like we did in the 1920s Anymore than a sheet metal, hand built airplane out of the 1950s is viable as a marketable product today compared to the industry leader Cirrus with a plastic airframe (regardless of performance). The technology moves on as does the market. We can have our heads buried in the sand from nostalgia of things that were BUT that won't change the market place demand. Take a hard look at who and why they are buying new plastic airplanes. Ponding rivets into sheet metal has no future as a wide marketable product That's just the hard reality of a marketplace (and populace) moving on in technology.

Where do you want to visit in Los Angeles? What venues? BECAUSE no matter where you want to drive in LA you will spend hours on the roads and freeways. You need to plan accordingly. Are you planning on staying in one hotel and venturing out from there for the entire trip? Same as above. What is your flying experience level? Newly minted PP or are you IFR capable? As mentioned the marine layer weather on the south side of the Hollywood Hills can keep you on the ground if you are not IFR rated. I was based at KSMO for years. Give us more information on what your trip will be so we can advise better. It can take literally an hour and a half to drive from KVNY to KSMO at times during the day.

Don't change a thing until you go through your first annual and find any "surprises" to fix, then start the mod process. Too many first time buyers have had issues and BIG surprises on their first annual that threw out any budget they had in mind.

Some people have WAY too much time on their hands

"from a wrecked C model" (with the battery in the back) or other EFG and J with the battery in the back. It doesn't matter which one. The parts should fit fine.

IIRC RTV requires moisture in the air to cure A washing machine room might be a good place for the elves to work.

Don't need a 337 Its all in AC 43.13 Minor Alteration Its all spelled out in that AC Only A&P sign off needed IF- factory parts are used. Get all the parts from a wrecked C model ( battery box and all the mount plates rerivit it into your airplane. I did it on mine

Look up the FAA program VARMA and it allows substitutions like this under specific criteria

I know of one 172 in a hangar, stored for 2 years, unattended., on some kind of trickle charger that went bad and all the acid (flooded battery) rolled down the firewall and back through the belly of the airplane. It wasn't a pretty sight. Don't know the make of charger so "you all be careful out there" (to quote a very long ago TV program) :-)

BINGO! The casual discussion of adding "charlie weight" to cure a too far fwd CG has more to consider than just fore/aft balance. Consider two airplanes -one with low polar moment longitudinally and another with high fore/aft polar moment BUT- both with the same vertical fin and rudder- The higher polar moment a/c will have less ability to recover from any yawing upset spin or no spin. One just can't add charlie weight if not provided for by the factory in testing. Other treads brought my attention to this subject.

My instructor had me doing spins way before my PP ride in a 150 I enjoyed them Back in the biplane days with no instruments, it was taught that if one was caught above a cloud deck and knew that there was room underneath that the way to get down was to go into a spin and hold it through the clouds. Once you broke out you got out of the spin. You always knew what condition you were in in a spin in IMC

My Commercial ticket check ride consisted of 2 turns about a point and 4 spins in my 1946 Cessna 140. I spun it many times I talked with Bill Wheat once and he related that he got into a 5 turn spin in a Mooney and didn't think he was going to get out of it. Said he'd never do it again. Polar moments play a big roll in spin recovery after rotation is established (IMO). "They all fly through the same air" as Al Mooney said but a lot of things play into the dynamics of aircraft control

In those airframes with "charlie weights" in the aft of the fuselage I wonder what Mooney found as far as how it affected the fore/aft polar moments in spin recovery? I've never heard it discussed Adding extra weight there "might" have deleterious affect on spin entry/recovery