FAST FLIGHT OPTIONS LLC

Not Possible...sorry

Quote: Parker_Woodruff As Scott said, I have a 1987 Mooney M20K. I converted it to an Encore last year. The performance provided by the conversion makes it legal for me to carry a 1050lb useful load. (The Encore adds 230lbs of capacity). Some TAS numbers I've experienced while slightly lean of peak: 14,000 - 173 KTAS, 10.9 GPH 16,000 - 183 KTAS 11.9 GPH 17,000 - 190 KTAS 11.9-12 GPH 19,000 - 188 KTAS 11.8 GPH All these performance numbers are Lean of Peak. It's hard to keep the engine cool at high power settings unless you are LOP, or have the cowl flaps open to a less-than-desirable degree. I am absolutely impressed with my airplane and can't see flying anything else at the moment. Another note, if you typically fly down below 9000' or so, your performance will be about the same as a Mooney M20J. I owned an M20J before my current ship and it's a better plane for poking holes in the sky. But my plane is used for cross country flying 80% of the time, or more. I want to be able to quickly climb above the summer convective buildups to where the air is cool and smooth. The turbocharger helps. And there's nothing like busting 240 knots eastbound with a kickin' tailwind...

Could anyone tell me who has the STC for the 262 conversion on the older 231's? I'm trying to figure out if it's still possible to have it done and how much of a cost one would be looking at. I'll bet it this day and age it's not economically feasible to have the conversion done if it were even still possible

Cris- This might be what your referring to? I received it just the other day

Don- Good info, I didn't know you could increase the useful load on the Rocket. I guess the question then becomes how far do you want to go (non-stop) which will dictate the amount of fuel you will need to carry and how many people you could bring. I normally travel with myself, one other adult, two kids and some luggage. I'm usually right at 500 lbs in the cabin which alllows me to fill the tanks all the way. I obviously dont get the speed you get but i can fly 800 miles with a comfortable landing reserve. Kids dont like the o2 so I stay right about 10K and will burn about 9gph with a true airspeed of 150kts +/-

Ahhh, the old Rocket useful load question. Once you see what the answer is you will see why I didnt find much value in a Rocket and went with a "regular K". My useful load is 950 lbs. with full fuel I could fly longer then my bladder would allow and still have 500 lbs of people and stuff in the cabin. Although the Rocket would get me to my destination quicker it would be at the expense of more fuel and a reduced useful load. Not sure why the conversion never allowed a higher useful load?

+1 GTN / Just had a 650 installed as a replacement to my 430W. It crossfills to my panel mounted 696. I would say it's now impossible to get lost

Your going to want to go with the ultra embedded if you have the wingtip enclosure and the other ultras if not

Interestingly enough the company said there installing the non-certified lights on mooney production aircraft via 337.

Is there only one type of aveo light certified for the M20 or do you have a choice? I know aveo makes several available light combos

On a side note, I do advoctae lean of peak operations and routinely make a practice of flying that way in my K model. I could not run Lean of Peak in my J and as such I'm actually burning 9 - 9.5 gph in my K (LoP) and was buring closer to 11 gph in the J (RoP)...stock injectors in both aircraft. Although annuals might be a bit more expensive the benifit of getting high in a reasonable amount of time far outweights any expense associated with it...for me. Also the value of the king autopilot and O2 alone in this vintage model mooney made getting a K over a J a no brainer based on what i considered to be a real value in the standard equipment mooney supplied with the K

Quote: allsmiles The added (and unjustified) expense of the turbo is bad enough. LOP is even worse and asking for more trouble! The cost of fuel is miniscule next to the expense of maintaining the turbo! Not interested in a L/ROP debate, just my opinion. I woulnd'nt be thinking of the fuel! It's peanuts next to the cost of the engine. Of course I don't nor do I have any intentions of getting into a turbo! As someone said earlier its all about proper planning and proficiency and not about NA or turbo.

Quote: triple8s I have a friend who has a 231 (w/out intercooler) and he never goes over about 14 because he says it will run too hot. If I couldnt get over 14 I wouldnt have it. Another thought, what is the serv. ceiling for more powerful NA Mooneys or even twins for that matter? Would an Ovation, Missile, a Screaming Eagle high a much higher service ceiling? What about twins? Do NA twins get up there higher than most singles? My CFI has a Turbo Arrow that has an intercooler and he says it will go to 16k no problem.

Brett- 696 is cheaper, doesnt get as hot, and I like the buttons much better in turbulance. Also the xm wx connection plugs directly into the unit which I think is nice when your panel mounting.

i had to remoave the dme/adf to make it happen. i couldnt be happier with the choice. I now have a 650 which crossfills to the 696. I didnt like the 796 and went with the 696

Take a look at the panel pics in my photo gallery. I have a 696 mounted in the location your talking about; however, the air gizmo docking station for the 796 is the same footprint.

You have to put the last 5 gallons in real slow. Just because fuel is stuck above the flapper doesn't mean the tank below is exactly full. Not sure this makes sense but I know it to be the case in my K

Those figures are based on parts per million...it looks good to me. Oil analysis is really trend analysis right? My figures are not far from yours on my TSIO-360 and I was told by several different AP’s I have nothing to worry about.

Jim Teski @ Daytona Aircraft Services. He goes home early. If you call in the afternoon ask for Jake. With the exception of annuals they do pretty much all of the maintainence on my K

Does anyone have any experience with the AirBoss Fuel savings card program? It’s $39.00 to join and the web site says a pilot flying about 100 hours a year and burning 10 gallons an hour SHOULD benefit. I was wondering if anyone knew how much off per gallon of gas on average one might expect to save utilizing the program?