Jeff_S

That's really cool, except I don't think MY wife would like her age celebrated openly on the internet! That's one understanding mate you've got there. BTW, how did you do that? Did you just set up flight following, trace the note over a map in ForeFlight and then fly over the note?

Not to be too pessimistic about human behavior, but he might also have thought it a good chance to make a few bucks. Probably not, I'm sure you have a good relationship with him and this was just an honest mistake...but you never know!

Hi Tom, I didn't test 2300 because I just didn't think about it. For the fuel burn difference I suspect I would not use that setting just to maintain a bit more forward speed, but I could give it a try. But I typically reserve 2300 for the approach setting either to fly the final legs of an instrument approach or to help slow down for a visual. I've found 2300 and 15" with gear out and approach flaps to put me right on the 100 KIAS number down the approach path.

I don't know anything factual and haven't read any more than what's in this forum, but my first thought was a fuel situation as well. Hard to explain why a perfectly functioning airplane would all of a sudden have such an engine problem. I haven't read anything about where it was fueled, but most likely at Epps, because Atlantic and Signature AvGas prices are way too pricey. Also, Friday wasn't exceptionally hot by Atlanta standards at all. I went out for a fun flight yesterday with my old PPL instructor..she's a captain for XO Jets now and we hadn't flown in years. We talked about the accident a little bit during pre-flight, but once we got into departure mode the normal routine took care of itself, didn't give the accident another thought. Flew right over the site and it didn't even register. As always, we shake it off and move on.

I saw a blurb that said it was a group of folks from Asheville that were on their way to Biloxi and stopped in for fuel. I can't confirm that latter part, though. It does seem from the eyewitness reports that he stalled it in.

I went through this with my plane, which many folks know I picked up after it had been repaired from a gear-up landing. I was told to wait at least 10 hours to let the grease get settled in before I dynamically balanced. So far it's been about 50 hours and I haven't found the time to do the dynamic balance yet, and I really don't feel any vibration. I bet if I went up to Sensenich they would find something and tune it even better, but I don't relish the idea of them drilling a hole in a brand new spinner bulkhead to put the .5 ounce weight or whatever it would be. I'll probably get it done eventually, though, when I have a few Benjamins floating free.

I can't tell whether Rookie is serious or not. Could be someone just started this thread as a bit of a trolling exercise. Lord knows we love to pontificate on "why Mooney" more than most folks. But on the chance that Rookie is sincere, I'll echo the advice already given. You have to define your mission and why you want a plane. Once you've done that, the choice of brands and models will become more clear. The answer is different for everyone. If you ask instead, "why did YOU want a Mooney?" then for me the answer is because only cool people fly them, of course!

I had a nice, fairly calm day yesterday so I set out to do some "test piloting" in my O3, to see the difference between different RPM and fuel-flow settings on speed and fuel burn. My goal was to come up with some rules of thumb for cruise settings. At the three selected altitudes, 7500, 8500 and 9500, I show MP at WOT and the rest of the data came from the readouts on the G1000. Fuel rate was set at 20° ROP and 20° LOP. What this tells me is that in general, if I'm flying into the wind I'm going to go at 2500 RPM LOP to pick up a few minutes of time at minimal fuel cost. Flying with the wind, 2400 RPM and LOP for best efficiency. I tried to compare these numbers to the POH performance charts but it's really tough, since I left it at WOT and used only the Lean method for fuel flows. Your mileage may vary, of course, but here's the data if you're interested. GPH Calculations.pdf

You could install an air/oil separator, which may help a little bit. I had one on my J which worked like a charm, but I have heard mixed reactions to putting one on Continental, as well as which brand to use. The Air Wolf seems to get better reviews but is much more expensive than the M20 model. Other than that, I just keep a rag devoted to wiping this off after each flight, and I've put a little drip tray down at the trailing corner where the oil flows before it drips off the gear door. It makes me feel like I've got a real oil-guzzling radial engined warbird in my hangar!

The FCC issue with cellphone use stems back to the early days of wireless, when there were many fewer cell towers and the system used an analog transmission protocol that required both the phones and the towers to put out a lot of power. The concern was that someone using their phone in the air could tie up a lot of transmission facility because it would camp onto too many towers, each one trying to vie for the traffic of the phone. As we have moved to digital wireless (GSM for most folks, CDMA for those Verizon people) the number of towers has increased enormously and the power output of the phones has decreased, so even up in the air they aren't going to be captured by too many towers and the problem is significantly reduced. The FCC just never bothered to change the regs, because I think frankly the side benefit of not having someone jabbering in your ear on a commercial flight was seen as a true positive. So while it's not technically legal, your cellphone will work just fine at altitude if you have any bars at all. Just realize that you're moving very fast through the cells, faster than the network is designed to switch you from cell to cell, so you will get dropped calls. And as others have said, text messages work better because they are faster, burst transactions that don't require a constant connection. I've even had good wireless data service as high as 8000', checking emails on my way across the Midwest.

Not sure what problem you're having with Mooney. I ordered up two spare MEDECO ignition keys and two door/luggage hatch keys and got them promptly. Now, it was absurdly expensive compared to what keys normally cost...I think the total bill was about $80 or so, but they had no problem getting them to me. I just called and talked to whoever answered the main service and support number. Can't remember who that was now.

If you're in the middle of the state and can get to Bartow (KBOW) then Aircraft Engineering would be a good choice. They did all the maintenance on my Mooney prior to my purchase, and Bill Turley will work with you well. They aren't a Mooney specialist but they are well rounded in all planes. They are the shop that Dick Karl (of Flying Magazine fame, the surgeon-turned-pilot writer) uses for his Cheyenne.

Interested...keep us posted.

On the video I saw, he's talking about how the engine quit and he tried boost pump and everything. I'm sure we'll get a full accounting from Richard at some point, but this sounds like some sort of infant mortality problem with the engine. It was very low-time, after all, and it's within the first 100 hours of a new engine that most problems appear.

Okay, having just looked at FlightAware, I see that the plane started today in Auburn, which pretty much indicates that Richard was at the controls because that's his home base. I can't tell much else from the track log. Too many unknowns at this point.

I called Richard to see if he was alright or knew anything about this, but it went to his voicemail. I left him a message so we'll see. He generally does represent Mooney and Premier at these functions. It will be interesting to learn more about this.

Sounds like you guys with the vacuum driven brakes have more options. When my right-side speedbrake started malfunctioning (just wouldn't come all the way up) I had to pull both sides and the central controller and send it back to Precise Flight in Oregon. The total repair including shipping was only about $800, though, so I figure anything less than one Aviation Unit is still a bargain!

I don't know anything about Precision at FFC, but in general, I've never been one to believe that all work has to be done by an MSC, especially not the things you're talking about. A Lycoming engine is a Lycoming engine, and basic maintenance for any airplane is about the same. There are some things that about Mooney's that do require some specialized equipment and knowledge to perform...landing gear biscuits come to mind. This requires a unique tool that many non-mooned shops may not have. So as you get comfortable with your plane and the various types of repairs it will need, you'll figure out which ones require special handling. You may want to have your first annual done by an MSC, just to make sure things are kosher, but then subsequent annuals could be done by your local mechanic as long as there are no "Mooney specific" items you want to address.

If I go at all, it will be for a day trip on one of the weekend days. I've got business trips unfortunately during the week. I do want to go down and talk to Mooney and see if there's any news on upgrading the G1000 panels with S-TEC autopilots. We were supposed to hear something this month I think.

I think the demonstrated crosswind for the Ovation is 11 knots or something like that. But flying into KOJC (Johnson County KS) yesterday I figured to test that theory. The TAF for my arrival was showing 15G20 at 270 degrees, for a perfect 18-36 runway. But the frontal system didn't pay attention to that, so when checking the weather 40 miles out I saw it had increased to 20G30, still directly out of the west. Whoa. A quick check of alternate fields showed KC international as a fallback with a 9-27 runway, so I said "let's give it a shot." On my first attempt, I crabbed to about 100' AGL and then kicked into the slip to land. But then a wind shear dropped the bottom out from under me so I had to add power, and was one-third down the 4000' strip before I regained stability. Time to go around! Tower asked me if I wanted another try, which I affirmed. "Ok, 1034S, make left pattern for 36, cleared for the option." They were somewhat pessimistic! But the second time around I caught a more stable wind, and crabbed back to 100' AGL before kicking into the slip. I think I used every ounce of rudder I had, but I wrestled it down and then made a surprisingly smooth arrival. The rollout was just as interesting, and made me appreciate the tail wheel rudder training I've had. It was one of those flights that bring together all the training you've had and give a real sense of accomplishment. And also showcased how great Mooneys are. And when I filled out my log I realized it got me to 999.4 hours total time. On my trip home I'll cross that 1000 hour milestone.

I've never owned a boat, but have had two wives and three airplanes. Does that make me 0 for 5?

Okay, I voted for the party line, but I have to say, it's hard to compare between a Mooney and the airplane that helped bring an end to German occupation in WWII. As much as I love the M20, I think the B-17 is a more historically significant aircraft. But I picked the Mooney anyway!

So, sorry to hijack this thread, but for some reason I didn't see Andy's original post because the system said I had chosen to ignore posts from him. No offense, man...I don't remember ever choosing to ignore anybody, and yet I can't figure out how to turn that setting off anywhere. Anybody help with this?

So pardon my ignorance on this, but how would that differ from the Acclaim as it already is? Is that something other than turbo-normalized? I always thought that's what the "TN" stood for in the model designation.

Robert is correct. Mine is a factory O3 but the paperwork for the upgrade is still all governed by the STC. So when you look at my POH, you see essentially the same document that I uploaded, with the supplemental sections that Robert provided. Back then they were still producing both O2s and O3s so this made sense.