DaV8or

Hmmm... not sure I'd show up that day... Might have rolled it out, taken a final picture and walked away. Or not... it is interesting.

That would be an awesome treehouse!! What a project!

The last time I spoke to him he was well aware that his planes weren't worth much at all. He was not delusional in thinking they were worth a lot of money. He knew his Aztec was only worth it's weight in scrap metal prices and that it would probably cost him to get rid of it. Like I said, he's an old timer with what sounds like plenty of flying in better times. He said he got the Aztec to carry him and his wife with all her luggage to places. When his wife passed away, he got the Mooney for himself. I guess at this point it must be worth it to him to pay the tie down fees just to keep mementos around. I don't know if he would sell if approached or not, but with all the cheap flying Mooneys on the market now, I doubt anyone would want it. Maybe it's best to keep it in storage. I really don't want his planes to go away because there are more tie downs on our field than anybody knows what to do with. As long as he pays his bills, it's good for the airport.

Yes it is. Still looks more or less the same as when I took this picture a few years back. The only difference is it's now moved to the tie down just behind it in the photo where there is shown a Musketeer.

Yeah, no I get that it's not a Vans. I was just thinking that if your boss really wanted a bubble top taildragger, Vans (with help from customers) has been building them for over a decade.

Here's one at my field- It belongs to an old guy named Jerry. I met him once. Real nice, probably getting close to 90. Has the delusion of getting 'er ready for summer... He does come out and air up the tires and sometimes cleans it off. He also owns a Piper Aztec parked just across from this one. Both have not flown since I came here in 2011. It is what it is. Lots of good parts here for the future if needed.

Don't worry, the market will take care of this problem. When we actually start running out of airplanes (not anytime soon IMO), the remaining airplanes will climb in value. A lot of these ramp queens will all of a sudden not be just worth their weight in raw scrap. They will become more valuable and some will be restored and others will donate much needed parts to the rest of the fleet. This may become particularly true if Mooney goes belly up again. Think of them being held in reserve for the future.

Don't they call that a Vans RV-8?

Yes. There is a point at which insurance companies don't like the idea of insuring amateurs screwing around with other people's lives. If the Evolution were a single seat hot rod, they likely would be OK with it, but start dragging other innocent and ignorant people along for the ride of their lives and they have to draw a line somewhere.

Usually it's over promising and under delivering. Almost never are the stated performance goals met. Almost never does the end product come in as cheap as predicted. Almost never is production on time and usually these companies are on very shaky financials, so one little hiccup and they go belly up. Marketing is never an issue. News of the latest incredible personal airliner with record breaking capabilities, or fantastic plastic rocket ship on a dime will make the rounds of the aviation community in no time. Everybody hears of it and decides, do they believe the hype, or not. Bad design was more of a problem back in the '60s and '70s. Today, these kinds of companies have the tools to design something that they know will fly OK and not kill the test pilot on the first flight. The problem usually isn't a bad design, but rather a mediocre design that doesn't come close to the advertised numbers and sometimes the design is OK, but has a nasty bad trait that was not predicted by any computer model that dooms the plane to redesign that cripples the numbers. The one thing all these start ups in the last 20 years have had in common was, the claim that they could do better then the stodgy old guys because they had incredible computing powers, were going to use modern space age materials and XX numbers of years in experience building cool stuff and they "thought outside the box". Virtually all get a sobering lesson. The only one in the last 20 years that I feel really did achieve the greatness they professed has been Cirrus. Even in the kit world, most new kids on the block fall on their face and successful new designs there are more incrementally evolutionary than revolutionary. There has not been a lot amazing new kits either. Everything in aviation is trade off and there really is no secret sauce. The technology of fixed wing aircraft using reciprocating engines is a technology that has plateaued. Any advances here will be small and incremental and we see that in the marketplace.

What is the supposed secret sauce to this airplane? I'm not seeing it. Why try to develop a power plant and an airframe at the same time? How is this better than a Velocity again? Sorry for the skepticism, but in the 20 years I've been avidly paying attention to GA, I've seen lots of these start ups come and go, all with the same promise that they are smarter than the old folks with their aluminum and tractor engines because they have hi-def digital secret sauce and the computer generated images to prove it! The vast majority have failed. This sounds and looks like more of the same. What's different this time around?

Is that right? Is that a new thing? Plenty of flood planes have sold in the past with data plates intact. Either way, I still say she will fly again in some form. Could be they just pull the Rocket parts and other cool upgrades and put them on another plane, or just swap data plates with a tired, dead K.

It's a Rocket, not trust a regular ol' J, or K. I would bet money it flies again. How well it's cleaned up and repaired and how reliable long term, I'm not sure. We should all remember this N number so that in about a year or so when we get a new member asking, "What about this Rocket? It seems like a great deal..." we can give them the heads up if they don't already know. I don't think this was salt water, so as long as the restoration is thorough and documented, I see no reason to not fly this plane again. I think it will only because it is a Rocket.

Thanks for the tips! My biggest concern that I'm not 100% clear on yet is the procedure for getting the actuator back in and rigged right. I've read the manual but I'm still kinda fuzzy on a few points. How did you do it?

OK, you go first. High stressed auto engine conversion on a plane that lands pretty fast and long. Too rich for me.

I'm reviving this old thread because I'm considering proactively removing my Dukes actuator and getting it rebuilt along with the motor and having the 40:1 gears put in while I'm doing the annual. I'm looking for any tips or pointers that anyone here that has done this before can provide. Neither I, nor my IA have done this before. I do have the factory manual and have gone over it, but as usual, what it does say on the subject is almost as much as what they don't say. Nothing beats actual experience. Thanks for any help on the subject!

I'm a total rebel. A misfit. I bought a Mooney, redid the panel and I didn't go with JPI. Then, I didn't put my engine monitor right in front of me, I put it at the far right side of the panel! Of course I do have a vintage Mooney with a vintage sized panel, which I actually like better than the now standard 201 size panel! I really don't pay attention, do I? Funny thing is though, I'm so out of touch that for the last six years I have been absolutely satisfied with my panel design. I have zero regrets and wouldn't change my monitor's location if I were to do it over again. It really does work just fine over in the waste lands of the airplane panel. I do have big warning lights mounted right in front of me though, and they do work to get your attention! I vote "B" position and also suggest you check out the EI MVP-50. I love mine. Super easy to use and very intuitive. Ever wish you could talk to somebody on the phone when you had a problem that actually helped design the product? At EI you can. Anyhow, here's what my backward ass self did-

Yes and airbags and helmets and safety goggles and hearing protection and respirators and ... jeez, the list goes on and on. Some people just hate change.

You're kidding right?? The Mooney M20 has terrible spin recovery! That's why they're prohibited. It does recover, so way back in the day it got certified, but it takes something like 3,000 ft to do it and you had better be an expert at it. The Cirrus SR-22 has been demonstrated many times to recover from spins just fine and in a reasonable amount of altitude. Here is an interview with one of the Cirrus engineers and their thinking on spins and the CAPS system. http://www.kineticlearning.com/pilots_world/safety/06_05/article_06_03.html

Yep. The airplane has a terrible reputation for a reason. I have heard that some insurers now refuse to insure them. In the words of Dirty Harry- "A man's gotta know his limitations." and I know mine. I'm not getting in a Lancair IV unless it stays on the ground.

Ya gotta wonder, why is the insurance so high?

Oh jeez... this thread just gets more an more life threatening as I read on! Might as well finish the job with a Lancair IV-P running some sort of auto conversion engine.

Absolutely agreed. These performance numbers were only made up to draw in deposits from hopeful people that something new from somebody somewhere will revitalize GA and finally provide the solution to the dream of a safe, affordable personal airliner. It's no accident they chose a canard design. It looks like "the future" and "out of the box cutting edge" design. A Velocity with a car engine in it. What's new about this plane? I'm pretty sure a homebuilder out there somewhere has already done it. Someone might be able to seek that plane out and see how she flies.

Yeah, I have always understood that the wing tips could be put on any M20 C to present except the twisted wing F.

With so many more used Js out there, one has to remain rational about it. Take solace in knowing that if your plane was pretty nice prior to the accident and you do walk away, it is likely your plane will fly again.