takair

Have you tried the salvage yards? They may not even know they are on a plane in their yard. Perhaps somebody with them on their plane can send a photo and you can forward them to a few of the salvage companies. You would still need paperwork, but perhaps a field approval using the drawings others have provided.

Alisha, Any chance you have OAT burried in one of the menus of a piece of equipment you already have? Not knowing what you have, it's hard to say. For example, a Garmin 430 will take OAT from an air data module and can display it on one of various sub-menus. Many engine analyzers have OAT burried on a page of sub-menu and I think there are even some clocks that do it. Usually when the meat thermometer comes out, it is because of a superior replacement. If you describe some of your avionics, maybe somebody here can point out where to look.

Mike Sent you a PM.

Thanks, that would be great. The 39 inch dimension is at the bottom of the door sill level. There may be another half inch or inch where the arm rest is, but from there everything narrows.

Quote: AustinChurch At 170lbs, you'll fit just fine! I'm 5'11", 215lbs and a buddy of mine, who flys with me often, is 6'2", 280lbs and he and I fit pretty well. Granted, our shoulders are against each other, but no big deal. Here is a cabin dimension comparison: AircraftCabin WidthCabin Height Mooney 201 43.5" 44.5" Beechcraft V35 Bonanza 42.0" 50.0" Cessna 182 42.0" 48.0" Piper Arrow 41.0" 45.0"

I notice many of you are using IPads or concidering using them. The certification office at work sent this to me. Note that this is a report through the NASA reporting system, so the details are not verified or validated by FAA. I have not used the IPad so I can not speak to it. Just hate to see anybody busted for an airspace violation. I could not figure out how to attach the PDF, so I found a link: http://www.nafinet.org/APPLE_IPAD_USED_AS_AN_EFB.pdf

It's amazing they have never been resealed. Be sure to inspect with tanks topped off. I suppose you could ask for some deduction. I had bladders put in by O&N about 7 years ago. I really like the peace of mind. On the E model they actually add a little capacity. The only thing I don't like now is the wieght. As I recall, it is a little over 30 lbs to the empty weight. It was not a big deal back then, but my kids are getting bigger and I could really use that 30lbs now. Time to get a bigger plane. In the end, I would do the bladders again....just keep the 30 lbs in mind. Also, check the accuracy of your fuel guages. Whether you reseal or do bladders, concider having your senders overhauled at that time. Also, be sure to have the guages checked for calibration after doing the bladders. It took me a while to get them to read right. Would have been easier at the time.

Quote: KSMooniac I'm really sorry this is not going well. I typically hate recommending places for this reason. I wish I could recall the name of the guy I dealt with. I'm surprised they gave you such a low worst case. I don't recall the number but they warned me about the possibility of higher cost if the exhaust was in worse shape. Again, sorry your experience is not going as well as mine did. I hope the quality at least makes up for it.

David I saw a similar issue on an E model a few years ago, not quite the same, but the same type of troubleshooting. I had sent out the governor twice for a check. On both occasions it checked good on the bench. That prop shop said I may have an engine problem. The engine shop insisted it was the prop or governor. Long story short, I sent the governor to another shop. It initially bench checked good, but when they tore it down they found all kinds of problems. Under the right conditions it could not keep up the oil pressure and the prop would go into lower pitch. The internal damage was enough that the first shop should have seen it. Feel free to PM me for the shop that got it right.

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAD.nsf/07577b0b9213888985256930005117ca/9fa5e5f8683a0a4686256e9b004bc295/$FILE/041014.pdf This is the AD which applies to prop strikes on our 360s.

My 64 came without it, but had a the leveler added in '65. I added on the nav and heading coupler years later. I took my instrument ride in the plane years ago (PC only a the time). He did not ask that I shut off the wing leveler. Not sure if he knew it was there. I think it's best to discuss with the examiner ahead of time. Bring something to disable it in case they insist on it being off. Recently did my CFI ride. I specifically disabled it since I had to fly from the right seat and it is a pain to fight the system through VFR maneuvers. I really like the PC. I do shut it off when doing instrument proficiency work......just so I know I can do it.

Same here. They have a jig for the Mooney exhaust and it is a perfect fit now.

Filters may or may not help the crackling. Usually you have another problem. Try to isolate. Crackling can be magneto noise. Often broken P-lead shield. Does it change during mag check? Is it only while flying in rain? Try pulling the alternator or generator breaker, audio panel, intercom, etc. Here is a recent post on static wicks. Unlikely to be your problem. On the other thread someone mentioned prop balancing for vibration in the yoke. I would agree, if you feel that much vibration in the yoke you should look at balancing and/or engine mounts. Otherwise you may start to crack things up front, like baffles. Also accelerates wear in the nose gear steering mechanism. http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.cfm?mainaction=posts&forumid=2&threadid=2035

Just had a similar thing on my E. Dawley has a jig for the 360. They replaced a riser and welded the crack for around $250. Quick turn time too! Lots cheaper than a new exhaust. This assumes the flame tubes and everything else is good. Give them a call. I suggest sending all the risers and parts so they can jig it up accurately. Biggest pain was shipping. http://www.dawley.net/

Quote: Skybrd This is sure a tragedy. This morning I was thinking about this accident and wonder if part of the cause could have been from frozen plexiglass and loss of visibility. I'm not sure how well the defrost system could keep up with freezing mosture on the glass. I have friends that have no defrost on their airplanes and my Wittman Tailwind doesn't have any cabin heat. It would be terrible to have the glass freeze up and not be able to see outside especially on a approach. My M20E Mooney has cabin heat and not sure if it could keep the glass clear enough if I entered the same situation. Any of you had your glass freeze up during flight and had to do something to heat it up?

Don't know how accurate this link is, but it looks like they may have used similar serial numbers for different models during those years. http://www.mooneyevents.com/chrono.htm

Here is a related thread: http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.cfm?mainaction=posts&forumid=1&threadid=1888

He may have had other things going on after the paint job beyond just not having static wicks. We used to find unbonded antennas, stripper in the antenna seams, stripper corroding the ground plane of the antennas, forgotten bonding cables between the airframe and control surface and panels no longer bonded to the airframe due to paint. These will contribute, with or without static wicks. Typically static wicks help if you fly in allot of precip and you here static buildup in the radios. They used to be mandatory for IFR installations of LORAN. I think it depends on how you fly and if your airframe is prone to static. I can't recall ever seeing an older Mooney with static wicks. Would be curious to hear from somebody who flies lots of hard, wet, IFR if they get static in the radios.

Quote: tony Well I asked a few people about the tab and I did get a lot of opinions but no one said “I know what that’s for”. The best guess I got was that the tab is functioning as a rudder wedge. A common design solution, for having a dead band at high speed, is to incorporate a wedge. The test pilot probably complained of a rudder dead band at high speed cruise. This dead band is cause by flow separation around the rudder. Putting a wedge out there to increases the rudder effectiveness when the flow detaches. However if the Mooney design team put a wedge out there, that would increase drag. We all know that would have been a big verboten. So they probably came up with the circular shape to minimize the parasitic drag which in the days if slide rules was pretty ingenious. So then I asked, “Why is this then only on some 65, 66, and 67 models and then the factory disconnected it with later models?” I got the deer in the head lights look. So bottom line is we are where we started…sorry

http://www.mooney.com/images/pdfs/sb-pdf/sbm20-93.pdf http://www.mooney.com/images/pdfs/sb-pdf/sbm20-99.pdf Depending on what model you have, these are the bulletins that install the plates. The kit is not made for fuel injected versions. If number 2 is running much higher than the others, I would be suspicious of a leak in the intake tube. The Orings going into the lower plennum/oil pan often wear and you will get a lean running cylinder. Alternately, if you are an e/f you could have a patially blocked injector. What is the EGT running at? Are you a c or and e model?

Quote: Skybrd I noticed on a friends M20A Mooney that there is a baffle plate on the rear of the oil cooler to redirect the exhaust air closer to the side of the cowling instead of it's normal rearward flow. Will this help the number 2 cylinder to run cooler. My EGT shows the hottest temps on #2. I would rather try this, than do the mod to relocate the cooler to the back of the air box. Have any of you tried installing a baffle plate to redirect the air closer to the cowl?

http://www.mooney.com/images/pdfs/sb-pdf/sbm20-150A.pdf This service bulletin should help. I think the part you are looking for is later in the document.

I too got my instrument rating with the shotgun panel and minimal equipment. I flew it that way for a while then did a LASAR upgrade. You can fly IFR with the old panel, and many people did and do. You can certainly get used to it. However, it is not just the placement, but the distance. The farther things are apart, the longer to scan and get the big picture. Enroute, this is not a big deal. On a low approach it can be. That is the big advantage to EFIS and glass panels. It is even an advantage of an HSI over CDI. The less you have to move your eyes, the quicker you have the big picture. It really comes down to how you fly the plane. If you are going to do hard core, low IFR, then there is an advantage to the standard panel. You can always upgrade your plane as you gain experience with it and want to push lower, or you may find you can keep up with no problem. I really like the upgrade. The only thing I miss is the big, original Mooney Attitude indicator. It was easier to read and more stable. Wish I could squeeze it back in.

Quote: Ashy Do you use the heading bug input to counter crosswind also when you are tracking the GPS with the Accutrak?

Quote: DaV8or So, you have to wonder, why doesn't the F and later models have this?