HRM

The website says that the oxidation remover does just that, removes oxidation and nothing else. If the oxidation on your spinner is greater than a few molecules thick you have bigger problems. The company is in Kalifornia, where the fruits and nuts rule--you can probably drink the stuff. If it were here in Tejas, I would not use it to polish sewer drain covers.

I don't do that, but now that I think about it, not a bad item to add to the preflight while I am down under there anyway!

God forgive me, but what would Little Timmy say?

You have got to be kidding. Aside from the fact that a certain spot in hell has been reserved in my name given all the cursing, I sweat like a stuck pig putting in the pilot side harness and heated windows would not have made getting that clip in any easier

It just goes to personal minimums in the end. If you are not comfortable with turbulence, don't fly in it. If you are a spaz about finding yourself in a cloud, fly only when CAVU prevails. Somewhere I read/heard (Mooney Summit?) a pilot say that he simply will not do a night-time circling approach. By having that on his list of PMs, he immediately knocked his probability of an incident by, IIRC, 50%. After reading Pilot Error, I can appreciate that logic. So, by avoiding what you are uncomfortable with you significantly alter the probability of getting into a scenario where you may not make it out. I am not advocating total risk avoidance and continuing training should involve a bit of discomfort (like the poster whose CFI/I made him TO under the hood) just for the chance that you do find yourself in a place you would rather not be.

I'm sold. I'll make a video.

Looks great and you have to look close and know what you are looking for to see the fillets. I also like that you kept the Buck Rodgers swept antennae! See what you think of Starship Mode windows:

Don, I have to confess that I used to remove them and that was before I realized that if they vibrate out in flight then I have bigger issues to deal with. There is no documentation from Mooney that says take them out. To state the obvious, the only reason you take them out is to allow use of the jack points. Just an economy of design.

...and I hate to ask this question, but could you further clarify? Are you saying that if you have a GPS, then: 1) you can't use the GPS as a DME for "DME Required" by using it to tell you distances to DME fixes. 2) You can use the GPS to fly a "DME Required" approach by loading the DME Required approach into it. Does this need to be a WAAS GPS, or is that decision based on whether or not it is a precision approach?

Just make sure when you reinstall them that they are aligned perpendicular to the wing root—that way you'll only lose 2.5 KTS.

I am not quite clear on what you did, the picture isn't very clear. Of course, you don't want the vinyl showing up too much. Did you put a square piece of vinyl over the window and then cut out a rounded rectangle? I "sort of" like the look, but what I would have done is the "starship window" where the rounded corners are only at the front edge of the front window and the back edge of the back window. Then you paint the space between the windows a dark color to make it look like one huge window. See photo. Is the vinyl like a trim stripe on a car? What if it peels off in flight?

I can tell you that many of the threads in these forums would have erupted into fisticuffs had the posters been within arms reach. Flaps? Who uses flaps?

Got it. In fact, I discovered that the thread is still there (I thought it had been deleted when I looked for it a while back). I had never paid attention to the thread title, I think I may have looked briefly and then resisted the urge to jump in--the issue is a broken record. Now IFR issues, there's a thread topic we can all agree on!!!

Cool!

Will someone puh-leez PM me about what this "Little Timmy" thing is? I feel like the guy left out of the prank.

Hank, you read Pilot Error, didn't you

Indeed! ....another way to think of what I said is that you are not under the hood at TO or after you clear the MAP. From all that I have read, from the newest IFR rated pilot to an ATP veteran, the goal is to "be on top". So there too you have a visual out of the airplane, just like on TO and landing, but enroute. That said, you are absolutely correct that even if you get on top you cannot forget the fact that IMC may be waiting for you at some point in the flight. What is astonishing to me is the number of IFR rated pilots who stay current "just to get out" of their home base when IMC prevails. That if they were facing hard IFR the entire trip they wouldn't go. Of course, that may be the lowest of personal minimums and there is nothing wrong with that I suppose.

You two are with the FAA, aren't you?

You're just messing with me now.

That is not that crazy of an idea, sort of like a barn raising in reverse. Could be a fun day and would beat a hundred dollar hamburger trip by a mile and come close to the enjoyment of a Mooney Summit. As has been pointed out, you can disassemble an aircraft as much as you please, let your teenager do it or your auto mechanic. You can also reassemble it, but here is the rub, you cannot fly it until it gets signed off.

Interesting point. I wondered about "what do you do if an engine quits while in the soup" and no one seemed to discuss it—until you, now. This morning the weather at my house was unlimited RVR (it was clear for more city blocks than I could discern objects at distance) and ceiling easily at 600'. At the airport, which is located in a very low, near swampy area, fog/mist had settled in and visibility was enough for TO, but not good enough for landing. That said, I wondered what one would do if there was engine failure on TO. Given that outside the area conditions were good, the urge to "just get out and get clear" of the airport weather would be strong. The reality is that (unless you have the equipment, training and approach plate for a CAT II/III) all approaches are, at the end, VFR. The TO is, for all intents and purposes, VFR. You TO into the soup, may stay in the soup to your destination, and then break out and land. I had some difficulty getting my head around that for some reason. All that is left is: How low is the soup that you TO into, how long does the soup last during the enroute phase of your flight, and lastly, again, how low is the soup where you need to land? All of those "How's" are constrained by rules and personal minimums. Basically, if you break the rules or set your personal minimums too low, your probability of an accident is increased. Pretty simple math. If you are Barbie and "Math is hard, let's go shopping!" then you are flying at risk.

I think the "pull the wings off" and ship it somewhere (LIKE AN MSC) makes the most sense. Just speculating, but in one scenario the wings are pulled, trucked to the nearest MSC, spar repaired, trucked back, reinstalled, checked, mission accomplished. Of course, get the calculator out to see if it is worth it. One thing I will say, there is a MooneySpace and I am not talking about this forum. It exists in pockets and if you find yourself a great distance out of the space you are in for a rough time. Some A&P's look on a Mooney as the devil's spawn, others stare at them in awe, afraid to approach, trust me, I've seen it.

M016576, on 06 Mar 2015 - 2:34 PM, said: Agreed. I just finished Pilot Error and besides being both a gripping and sobering read, the reality is that so many, many IMC accidents wind up being coupled in some way to personal minimums. No wonder that the FAA harps on knowing them and revising them as necessary.

IIRC Graingers may stock them. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

PIG® Form-A-Funnel® Flexible Draining Tool