M016576

I guess he doesn't really need to sell it in a hurry!

Quote: RJBrown The posts that refer to the plane as just a chunk of aluminum are 100% correct. As a pilot we should always remember this. I had just left KSFF (Spokane WA) heading home to Denver. I was above 12,000' about 80 miles out when I noticed low oil pressure and high oil temp in my M20K N231NH. Nearest airport was Orofino ID (S-68), a 2500" long field at an elevation of 1005'. I arrived over the airport at 9500'. The next airport was Lewiston ID (KLWS) 31 miles west. Being out of glide range of Lewiston I chose to circle and land at Orofino. The airport is in a bend of the river and both ends extend over water. The surrounding hills are between 3500' and 4500'. I figured I had one shot at landing. I decided that if anything went wrong the plane belonged to the insurance company and all I was going to save was my own sorry behind. On approach I had the seat as far back as I could and still reach the pedals. My seat belt was tight and the right seat was empty. I popped the door on final and was resigned to swimming if needed. The landing was uneventful. Insured properly an off airport landing (crash) would only cost me $500, my deductible. Survivability is all that matters. Having already decided that the plane was expendable freed me up mentally. It allowed me to concentrate on the landing nothing else. She had blown 6 quarts of oil overboard in about a half hour. I took 3 hops topping the oil at each to get back to Spokane. Where she was left eventually being converted to a 305 Rocket there.

I've got another question, Scott mentioned that "What is tricky is that the value of avionics or other upgrades is only about 50% of cost...so a $75K of Mooney + $50k of Garmins = $100k hull, more-or-less. Insuring to $125k might be overkill, but that is what you need to decide." Does that mean that if the worst were to happen and the aircraft is totaled, would the insurance company keep the avionics, or would I get to keep them (if they still worked)? I could probably look this up, but I'm curious what the concensus is.... -Job

excellent advise, it's a shame that such a beautiful aircraft had to be destroyed for it to be rendered Of course, the upside is that you get to try out some more Mooney's (and in a great market!)!!! -Job

Garmin and XM radio... the crack dealers of aviation.... They got me hooked with their instant weather TAF's on my 396, now the screws are a turnin'! I only wish I could take the 396 in the hornet with me... (sigh)... guess I'll have to continue using the Metro stations for my en-route wx needs in the F-18.... -Job

JB- Sounds to me like you got an amazing deal on her! I'm of the "buy slightly distressed and fix it how you want it" mindset, too. That way you control the work that's done, and ensure that it's your aircraft top to bottom, one that you'd feel safe and comfortable operating. Particularly these days, where panels are half way through upgrades, paint may be peeling a bit and all annuals are not created equal! -Job

Drpep- That's a nice looking mooney, I noticed that one as I was browsing the ads. The paint looks great, as does the interior (if you're in to red!). The times are OK, although the engine is getting to mid-time, so it'd be wise to investigate when and where the last overhaul took place (of course, the same can be said for any engine!). The single thing I'd consider prior to placing an offer, or running down to see her is whether or not you want to fly IFR. If you're intending on a bit of IFR flight, I'd either set aside 20k for an avionics update, or I'd look for a different aircraft. I learned IFR using needle-ball, and tail, radial turn, like most of us, but I'd *prefer* to do it with a GPS courseline and a nice HSI. The KX-155 radios in that mooney will work, and they are reliable, but a nice GNS430W would be my proverbial "weapon of choice" should I be heading in to the clouds. Again, if you're going to be using her as a VFR cruiser, or just for some light IFR practice from time to time, this may very well be the bird for you! If you plan on penetrating down to 200' on a regular basis, might want to be ready for some upgrading or a different bird. Either way, the price looks great for what you get! It appears as if she's been flown a bit, too, and the owner clearly loves his plane (something that tends to show in the maintenance logs). Would be fun to check her out in person! Hope that helps! -Job

I quoted a 430W install at LASAR, and didn't like the cost for the unit itself and asked if I could "bring my own" for the install. The surcharge was either 5 or 10%.... I ended up buying their unit. For those considering a 430 install, I would probably look elsewhere-> they charged me more than many other reputable shops do....

In response to Dave- I normally put the gear down at 130kts IAS (VLE), in fact, I count on it as part of my "descent strategy" once I'm closer to the field to help slow down. I don't think I've ever considered the airload potentially driving the gear presets out of tolerance or balance. I figure if the VLE speed is 130, then the gear will not be damaged, or distressed, by lowering it at that speed. I've seen panels open in flight on hornets and stay attached through some pretty hefty airloads (excess of 400kts) with relatively little damage, I find it hard to believe that the gear mechanisms would be damaged or driven out of tolerance by 20 or so kts of extra airload *if* you are still below the V-speed for the gear. Then again, I'm not used to paying for my maintenance yet... the truth data will come at annual this year!

Bruce's custom covers are also pretty nice, and offer similar options. I have one, but haven't had the rivit kit installed yet to just snap the cover on (instead of using straps). It's a nice cover, but costly. I use it when I'm on the road and tie down. Keeps the cockpit nice and cool... also keeps water from the antennas and glass, which I like. It seems to stay pretty secure, even in high winds and nasty rain.

I'd love to hear about it, too... It'd be nice to make that rear seating area a little more useful... anyone know if it's a structural concern? Does the rear seat play into the fuselage re-inforcement at all? I know the later model J's have split seats, but do they incorporate extra reinforcement? Thanks! -Job

Thanks for the GAMI test link, I've just sent in my latest motor download from the JPI. I've been curious about running LOP for a while now, but I have yet to take the plunge. Thanks!

Very nice!

Well, thanks to the recommendations from the board, I've gone ahead and scheduled my M20J for a new paint job through Art Craft! I'm dropping her off on the 26th, I can't wait to see how she turns out!!! -Job

Thanks, Hansel! The mooney is a beautiful machine: safe, fast and efficient. I can't think of a better light four place aircraft out there. Not to mention, she's fun to fly!

Mr. Perry- I respect your opinion and spent quite a while thinking about your statements regarding the difference between flying a light civil vs. a modern fighter. I cannot speak for any modern jets other than the T-2C Buckeye (not so modern), T-45C Goshawk and the F/A-18A-F. On the "civilian" side, I have flown a C152, C172, Piper Archer II, Piper super cub, Mooney M20J and Pilatus PC-12. I have just short of 3000 total hours. I like to think of the comparison more as the difference between an Audi and a Formula 1 car. A capable driver can sucessfully navigate either vehicle, but those used to flying an Audi will struggle to maximize the performance of a Formula 1 car. I disagree that applying military flying techniques to a small GA aircraft won't work: I find they not only work well, but emphasize generally safer principles in both preflight planning and enroute procedures. There are a few exceptions to this, particularly in regards to engaged manuevering within a MOA, which is a dangerous prospect. I initially nodded as I read your summery of why it was easier to fly a fighter than a mooney (light civil), but after giving it some thought, I now disagree: here's why.... What you say about the LEX is true. Also, our flight control computers in both the Hornet and Super Hornet are amazing (they allow for controlled flight well into a developed stall, of course the danger of a tailslide+motor snuffing ensues in these situations). Both the Hornet and Super hornet also auto trim to 1 G flight. When flying at high alpha, if a lateral stick input is sensed, the flight control computers will attempt to give the appropriate response, but using all 12 flight control surfaces. Truely a sight to be seen from the cockpit (lots of twitching control surfaces)! I believe this is why you said it is "easier to fly a tacair aircraft." Here is why I think it is harder: A) The speed. You can put a fighter pilot in a cessna and he won't have many problems "keeping up." When I transitioned from the T-45C (a pretty fast jet!) to the FA-18E, I oversped the gear in my first sim (most of my friends did the same, as do many students now). Afterburners/large motors move you along at quite a clip, and you are right: you can train people to deal with the speed (once they get used to it), but there are PLENTY that don't make it through flight school... ask two of my five roommates from Meridian.... The systems. you aptly described the beauty of the flight control computers. Did you know the FA-18 does not have a VOR or ILS? In fact, the only precision approach we can shoot at a civilian airfield is a PAR. The "moving map" is nice, but our TACAN systems aren't the most reliable, and while our INS/GPS system is nice, it is not tight enough to be certified by the FAA, and a far cry from a WAAS system. Also, our autopilot is fairly basic by modern standards, having only a couple to course feature, baralt hold or flight path attitude hold setup. It will not shoot an approach for you at a normal field (the carrier is a bit different, I can get into that later) C) The boat. Landing on the carrier is the hardest thing I've ever done in my life. Day gets to be fun. Night never does. It's all hand flown*. (I'm asterisking this because senior pilots, once they have proven their ability to land on the boat, may couple to the ACLS at night or in case III scenarios... over the course of 5 deployments, I have done this once [it was scary], and I have seen it done only a handfull of times). D) The mission. Two people flying in excess of 500kts (initially), at alphas in excess of 35 degrees both trying to kill each other. It's hard and dangerous, even in training. Low level attacks are practiced at 100-200 feet and 540kts ground speed, while our velocity vector helps us avoid hitting the ground, it is by no means an easy task, and it is hand flown. In my mooney, I take off, level off, couple my autopilot to the GPS, then plan an enroute descent so as not to overspeed or cold shock the aircraft. Then I land. The landing part is hard for me, I'm not used to flaring and a mooney is VERY sensative to both ground effect and flaring. However, after a few hours with a CFI that had experience in a mooney, I figured it out. Honestly, my M20J is far more capable an IFR platform than the hornet: it's got a 430W (waas approaches), and ILS, two NAV radios (hornet only has a single TACAN), XM weather (awesome!) and a century 41 autopilot that will shoot an entire approach for me! Heck, the Garmin displays the whole appoach! In the hornet, we have to fly it all manually: we don't have the GPS database onboard (not enough memory for it, we use our waypoints for tactical purposes). Other difficulties, like I mentioned: A) the Mooney (or my mooney, at least) has a bit of roll-off when it stalls. and the single engine mentality- I had to get back into the "if I lose my motor, where am I going to glide to" mind set. All in all, I believe that flying a military jet is the same as a general aviation jet or turboprop if all you are doing is going from point A to point B in VMC conditions AND you are used to flying at 250kts below 10000' and much faster at high altitude. However, when you factor in the other missions we are required to perform, I believe it is more difficult to fly the military jet. Just my 2 cents!

Two stunning reviews right off the bat, and Artcraft is right around the corner. I think I'm going to give them a call first thing monday, thanks! -Job

Hi All- I have a 1980 M20J that's in need of a fresh coat of paint and possibly a new interior. I'm wondering if anyone out there can recommend a good shop, preferably in the south west, that is well versed on the ins and outs of a mooney. I'm also trying to not break the bank on this; how much does the typical new paint job + interior cost? Thanks in advance!

The first thing I installed at annual after I bought my '80 M20J last year was a JPI EDM-830. I initially wanted to go with the 730, but as I started adding options, the guys at LASAR said it'd work out to about the same price to just get the 830 w/ff. Might as well get all the add-ons. in my opinion you can't put a price on a thorough engine monitor (this comes from years of military flying.. I can fly the plane in any condition, just so long as the info I'm getting is accurate and thorough). The 830 is a solid piece of gear. The ROP and LOP functions are nice, the user interface is a little lacking (two non-labeled buttons.. at least they are different colors), but the monitor functions are very powerful. The unit will display any out of limit parameters in big, red, blinking letters at the bottom of the display. This includes a "shock cooling" function, which senses when the CHT's are decreasing too quickly. All your standard other info is included as well. I had the fuel flow function installed, and wouldn't want to fly without it now. Again, the user interface is a bit clunky when trying to add fuel in increments less than a full tank, but it is do-able. The USB download feature is more of a gimmick for me right now (although I have been doing it faithfully), and I only really find myself checking the engine stats after a flight when I am longing to be back up in the air. If I had some sort of an issue with the motor, though, I'm sure I'd be scouring the data! The manual comes with a list of possible causes for engine "abnormalities" on the gauge which I copied and cut out for my kneeboard. All in all, you can't put a price on a solid understanding of what's going on under the hood, and I'm VERY pleased with the EDM-830... if I ever get another aircraft, that will be the first thing I install. -Job 1980 M20J

Hi Buster- It would be nice to have AOA in a mooney, but I don't see it as safety of flight equipment (neither do the pro's from Kerrville, either, apparently). I understand why we need it in the Hornet, and I imagine that your viper is similar: thrust curves + relatively large changes in gross weight due to fuel burn + precision glideslope control + attitude at touchdown = AOA approaches. In the mooney, airspeed does the trick well enough (it's only a few KTS shift between full weight and empty). I think the lack of an AOA gauge is primarly due to private pilot training, where advanced aerodynamics isn't really broached as a subject. Regardless, the only two times I would want to see AOA in the mooney are A) on approach, on the waveoff (nice to know exactly what the best alpha for a flyaway is... especially at high altitude in a 200hp single!). You'll find that the Mooney has plenty of buffet/response to let you know as you approach the onset of a stall or approach turn stall. The one thing I really don't like about it is that she tends to exhibit a pretty harsh wing drop (maybe that's just mine, though...)... I wouldn't want to experience that during the approach turn. Are you in the guard or AF? I recently purchased a 1980 M20J for trips from my duty station to my parents home up in Idaho: it's nice to have the flexability to land at any FBO that'll take me, regardless of contract fuel... and it beats driving! -Job