Bennett

One final thought. As pilots (and sailors) I believe we all consider ourselves highly self-reliant, and in countless prior instances, we do manage to successfully solve our own problems. Until a few moments ago, I never thought of one of the best resources that would have been available to me yesterday. I was over Clear Lake, a few miles from LASAR, and I know they monitor unicom. Both Paul and MIke were there, since I had seen them just prior to taking off. Had I made a radio call to either of them once I was circling over the lake, I'm certain one of them would have said: "Check the throttle (dummy)", but I guess that concept was out of my mindset. "Its my problem, and I will solve it". Funny, in its own way, and not a very good use of available resources. I've learned a lot from this experience, and see: "You can teach an old dog new tricks".

Frankly it is a bit easier to think about analyzing a problem when you are not dodging trees and wires. As I mentioned, I was most concerned with trying to get to the lake, the only low spot, relatively. Clear Lake is surrounded by mountains and hills on all sides, and safety would come from getting over the lake. Runway 28 leads to hills at the end of the runway, so I turned right to take the shortest distance to the lake. I did glance at the MP, and it was reading low - about 20"-21", and I really had no time to focus on the JPI % HP. I did open the RAM air, and I closed the cowl flaps to reduce drag. As I said, I missed seeing that the throttle had slid back. Perhaps, without the friction lock in the tightened position, as I kept it for the last two and a half years for this airplane, gave me a false sense that I did not have a throttle problem. In the loose position, and it was loose when I finally got to the throttle. I might even have inadvertently pulled it back when I took my hand off to reach for the gear handle. In the past, once I tucked up the gear, and prepared to bring up the flaps from the takeoff position, I relied on the friction lock to maintain full throttle - in reflection, not such a good idea. The 360 degree circles were done at half a standard rate turn, as I didn't want to give up any lift, and the lake is wide enough where I was to allow this. The circling climb was paramount to my thinking, as I wanted to gain some significant altitude before working out the reasons for the lack of climb performance. Even achieving 200 '/min ( mostly less) was difficult, and at times I had no climb at all, but I was in a safe position, had plenty of fuel, and I was confident that I could work out the problem. By the way I was about 250 pounds under gross. Once I was at 1000' or so AGL, I had the safety net to start sorting out the possible reasons for the poor climb performance. Initially, .I thought, obviously wrong, that I had a combination of too much drag (I thought that the gear might still be down, even though the indicators proved otherwise), and that the density altitude was higher than I calculated. (98 degrees F and a runway elevation of about 1200' results in a density altitude of a little over 4,000', which should not have been a problem.) My Mooney always climbs slower initially after take off, than it does a minute or two later, and I expected the rate of climb to increase with time, which, in this case, it did not. 100 Kts resulted in a negative rate of climb - I had plenty of time to try different speeds while circling over the lake. It was simply my complacency for not checking the throttle earlier in the situation. It was always set at full throttle, except when descending for landing, and for reducing speed in turbulence, so it did not enter my mind to think it was different in this situation. A lesson for me, and perhaps others. The flight turned out OK, in fact once I had figured out the problem, it was a delightful flight back to KSQL, and a great landing, with hand on throttle as usual. Someone mentioned a vernier throttle. I had one for my prior Mooney, and the button on top, if pushed in, allowed it to act as a "regular" throttle, or you could dial in the throttle for small adjustments. I liked it for that airplane because I did not want to over-boost the turbo, which could happen dependent upon outside temperatures, and how the stops were set up. Unfortunately, the cable broke at a weld between the cable proper and the vernier section - on takeoff, but I was able to stop on the runway (Little River - 5280' in length).

Thanks to all who responded to the post. Yes, bad habit to trust a friction lock in the throttle. I have been doing so after retracting the gear on takeoff. Hand is always on the throttle landing. I am surprised I didn't immediately analyze the problem. I was literally dodging trees and wires trying to find low spots and gaps, which worked out until I could get to the lake and start circling for altitude. MP looked OK, RPM was where it should be for climb, but I missed seeing the throttle had slipped back. After I finally made a couple of circles, and gained about a thousand feet, one to two hundred feet per minute, and sometimes less, I was able to take a moment to work out the problem. Old adage: First fly the airplane. The engine was sounding normal, but the Zulu's ANR might have something to do with that. I just missed the simplest reason for lack of climb power, and while embarrassing to me, i hope telling the story might help others in a similar situation. .

Held the throttle until I reached over to hit the Gear switch. I was in ground effect and accelerating so I didn't notice the friction ring wasn't tight. Completely my failure to notice it then, and later when trying to get a bit of climb. Mentioning this so that someone else might think about keeping the friction ring tight. When I was learning to fly twins, my instructor always kept his hand on top of my hand on the throttles.

I would have thought that after thirty and more years of flying, I would have come across this before. What was this? I alway do a complete run up before every flight, and I always thought my checking of gauges, flap position, circuit breakers, etc. was thorough.and complete. I had taken my Mooney up to LASAR for an oil change, a compression test, and fir the installation of a passive door pin. We ran into something seldom seen - a pin hole in the new oil filter that spayed oil over the engine as soon as it was fired up. No problem - just replace on new filter with another new filter. All was well with the compression test, and the pin installation was perfect. In the late afternoon, with the outside temp in the mid 90s, and with a field elevation of about 1200' I expected a high density altitude, and planned accordingly. Lampson field is about 3500' long, about a 1000' feet longer than my home base: San Carlos, CA. Lampson field has a displaced threshold, and I decided to use it for a maximum runway length. I did my usual run up, and everything appeared normal. I took off, used a bit more runway than I expected, and after accelerating in ground effect, I tucked up the gear and tried to climb. I couldn't climb! I headed for the lake to circle and climb up there. To get there I skimmed over some trees and wires with minimum clearance. I could barely manage 200 ft/min, and sometimes less. I made a couple of 360s and finally gained. 1000'. I was showing 2670 RPM, and a fuel flow of about 14.5 gallons/hour. I tried leaning the mixture to no improvement. Tried climbing at 80 and 90 kts, but neither speed made a difference. I was about to return to LASAR to have things checked out (bit concerned about making a go around if necessary) When I noticed the throttle was not pushed in all the way. I always fly with full throttle, and I checked this before my takeoff roll. What I didn't check ( but I will in the future) is that the clamping ring was not tight, Under takeoff acceleration, the throttle control slid back, and I didn't spot it as I always keep the friction clamp ring tight. Not faulting anyone at LASAR , but they did run up the engine several times, and I heard them change engine speed. I should have caught the loose clamp ring, but through complacency, I never thought of it. New item for the check list now. The inability to climb was just plain dangerous and scary. As soon as I pushed in the throttle I was able to climb at a normal rate. Lesson learned.

I had tried this before I found out the AI was truly failing. Good idea, though to check out potential binding. I've previously suggested marking the autopilot breaker with red nail polish, or a red cap so you don't have to hunt for it in a high stress situation.

I hate "tinkering" with autopilots, and the avionics that drive them. I have a MidContinent AI, a GTN 750, (and GTN 650), and an Icarus SAM GPSS steering unit for digital to analog conversion for my KAP 150 autopilot. All was perfect for about two years with this setup, until the nose started bobbing up and down when in altitude hold. The aircraft didn't really gain or lose altitude, just started bobbing at a rate of about 30 bobs per minute. Dang! I brought the airplane to LAC Avionics in San Jose, who had in years past repaired my KFC 200 autopilot. The good folks at LAC found that the AI was starting to fail, running slower than design, and actually you could hear grinding noises. I thought about replacing the AI with an Evolution one tube unit, but I really dislike speed and altitude tapes. I posted my feelings about this before on this forum, and I was happy with everything as it was before the AI created the problem. LAC installed a rebuilt MidContinent AI, and re-calibrated the output to meet the required voltages. Unfortunately this AI failed about two hours later - even the best rebuilder can produce a dud, and they immediately replaced that unit with a new one, which LAC then installed and calibrated. I test flew the airplane, and the nose still kept bobbing. Damn! So back to LAC, who now pulled out the pitch servo, and the KAP150. I said send them both back to Honeywell (the current owner/ servicer for Bendix / KIng) and have them checked, and if necessary, rebuilt. Honeywell sent the pitch servo back, saying they couldn't read the serial number, although they acknowledged that it was a BK pitch servo. Dan at LASAR helped me obtain the serial number from Mooney (amazing how the factory keeps all the records), and I sent them a .pdf of the Mooney factory records showing that serial number. Now it gets weird: Honeywell said the KAP150 (installed at the factory in 1983 as original equipment, and never worked on until Honeywell received it), was incorrectly programmed. They said the autopilot was set up for a Lake Amphibian. Highly unlikely, I thought, but they said they reprogrammed the unit to M20J specifications. They also said that the pitch servo needed to be rebuilt. This is starting to get expensive, but there really was no choice but to authorize the work. In time, the KAP150 was sent back to LAC, and installed, and later the pitch servo arrived. LAC applied a voltage to the unit, and the arm moved. A voltage of opposite polarity moved the arm in the opposite direction. I then test flew the airplane again, and had one of the wildest rides in my flying life. Honeywell had mis -wired the pitch servo by crossing two wires, and the output was reversed polarity. When in flight, I turned on the autopilot, put it into altitude hold, and the next small gust resulted in a correction in the wrong direction - you can see where this is going. I tried to use the electric trim on the KAP150 to make a correction, and the unit went divergent on me, with huge excursions in altitude. I tried to shut off the autopilot with the switch on the KAP150 unit to no avail, then the red disconnect button on the yoke - no better luck, as by this time the pitch servo commanded full down, and apparently jammed. I tried CWS on the yoke - no change, and then the yoke electric trim switch which normally disconnects the autopilot - still heading down, and the houses were getting bigger, so I pulled the breaker, and that solved the immediate problem. The pitch servo went back to Honeywell, who in embarrassment, sent out a brand new pitch servo. LAC Avionics put it all back together, and all is fine now. The message here, if there is one, is that, in my experience, every time components are changed in the autopilot system, the precarious balance between the components results in a chain of failures. Getting everything back to where it was has taken months, and thank goodness for LAC who wouldn't give up in their battles with Honeywell on my behalf. Good people, and although the process was expensive, I'm sure they made no profit given the time they spent on the project.

Factory refurbishment vs. Do It Yourself: One major issue is profit. If the factory were to (problematical in my opinion) totally refurbish, say a J or K, and offer some sort of limited warranty for their work, they would be entitled to a reasonable profit. They would also have to (I suspect) standardize the paint, interior, and panel to gain some economies of scale. In contrast, one can buy a decent J or K and decide just how much customization they want performed, and while the price per unit of change might be higher, at least you get exactly what you want. I'll personalize this. I bought a decent J about two and a half years ago that already had a LoPresti cowl, PowerFlow exhaust, one piece belly pan, a Hartzell Top Prop, and some usable avionics. The engine was low time; about 350 hrs, with flow matched cylinders. Yes, many of these "goodies came about when the very experienced CFI prior owner simply forgot to put down the gear. No real damage, and LASAR provided all the parts needed to get the airplane back in great shape. I bought this aircraft for $85,000, and had LASAR completely refurbish just about all the wear parts with new, or rebuilt units. Their bill was in the vicinity of $20,000 (and worth every penny in knowing that this was as close to having a new airframe as reasonably possible). So now I have spent about $105,000 for a 1983 M20 J that could be flown "as is" for many hours. I decided, however, that this was most likely to be my final aircraft (I'm 78 now) and so I would continue having the airplane customized up to my personal standards. I had ArtCraft strip and paint the airplane with 5 (mostly metallic) colors and a clear top coat, including some airbrushed stripes. The cost was in the area of $15,000, and I had exactly what I wanted in design and execution. We are now up to about $120,000. I flew the airplane to Aircraft Designs at Pine Mountain Lake in CA, and Tim Hallock built an entire custom leather interior, again to my personal specifications, and the cost (including the yokes) was in the vicinity of $18,000, bringing the total to $138,000. The third major step was to have a custom panel built with the avionics I wanted. I flew N335BB to Executive Aircraft Maintenance in Scottsdale, AZ to this work. I ended up with all new sheetmetal for the panel, and a GTN 750, a GTN 650, a Aera 796 in an AirGizmo mount, a bunch of two inch instruments (Vacuum, MP, Tach), a carbon monoxide detector in the panel, an Emerging Life Technologies 406 ELT, a GDL 88 ADS-B-In/Out setup, a flush mounted JPI 830, and much more. The avionics upgrade (after selling off the perfectly good Bendix King radios, GPS, etc) was something under $50,000, so now I have as close to a new M20 J as possible at a cost of about $188,000. What would Mooney have to charge to get to the same place, including their profit, and what about the LoPresiti cowl, PowerFlow exhaust, etc? Another personal question to me. Would I pay say $250,000 for a factory refurbished M20 J, with whatever parameters Mooney might impose? Probably not. I like my customization, and the process of working out paint designs, interior choices, and panel redesign was great fun for me. Sure I lost some flying time while the work was being done, and a factory rebfurbishmet might well be quicker, but I met some great craftsmen and women in the process, who I now count among my friends. To be fair, I would expect a Mooney factory refurbishment to maintain a higher market value than my DIY project, but I really don't care. I don't expect to get all my money back when I sell her, but that is true of the cars I buy as well. I do think that when the time comes, I can sell this airplane at the upper reaches for M20 Js whenever that might be, and I am certainly enjoying this airplane now.

I've tried to be quiet here. I am a member of Navitus (no, you will not find our website) which is made of a group of doctors, engineers, physicists, attorneys, and some really smart people who are passionate in their opinions. We meet about six times a year to debate social issues, someone!s scientific paper, new forms of art, and politics. These debates are more than animated and spirited, and one can see how deeply the various opinions are held. Our purpose is to investigate the various positions, and while we are free to attack ideas, no one attacks the members themselves. It is all self regulated, We believe in comity between individuals, although the beliefs, positions, and opinions are free to vigorous debate using our allotted time to speak. In over twenty years of our existence I have never seen anything like the venom expressed in this thread. The only reason I read, and occasionally post something is because I am always open to learning more about aviation in general, and Mooneys in particular. After flying for more than thirty years, and about twenty in Mooneys, I think I can sometimes answer a question, or make some contribution to the group. I am glad to see that there have been some retractions and apologies, as I was ready to abandon Mooeyspace.com. It's not that I am a prude. I just think this is an aviation forum, and the really raunchy and offensive humor can be handled by emails and PMs.

All I can add is that when I first visited the Mooney Booth on Monday morning, the COO was having his picture taken with quite a few well dressed (as opposed to us pilot types) Chinese men and women. Most photos were one on one with the various Chinese folk, and there was a great deal of smiles all around. I didn't see any of them upon later visits to the Mooney booth. I did have a few 5 to 10 minute conversations with the COO, and Jerry, an Asian Ph. d. aeronautical engineer employed by Mooney, whose business card indicated that he was more involved with business development than acting as an aeronautical engineer. All a bit strange. None of the Mooney folk there were really taking about the future, except to say that a parts only future was not viable, and that they were "optimistic" about Mooney's future. They know something, but they are not talking publically, yet. For some reason, Jerry kept talking about the idea of a wider Mooney. Not sure what he meant, and he didn't seem at all interested in learning about the interior mod from Aircraft Design that creates an armrest space that virtually touches the outer skin. I have these, and they increase elbow room by several inches. The newest Beechcraft use these, as Tim at Aircraft Designs ships complete interiors to them for their refurbishment program. For what it is worth, there were two Chinese pavilions at Oshkosh this year. Some day, but perhaps not immediately, China will, in my opinion, be a huge market for general aviation - perhaps motivated by status and ego considerations. I've made more than a few trips to China over the last thirty years, and watched the bicycle transport system move on to small motorbikes, both gasoline and electric, larger motorcycles, small cheap cars, and now BMWs, Buicks, and Mercedes. The roads may be jammed, with few freeways, but many in the emerging middle class are buying automobiles. New flight schools are being established, and as we know Chinese companies have been buying up American engine manufacturers, aircraft builders, and they are building portions of airliners, while they also are designing and building passenger jets. To me, Mooney seems like an unlikely target for acquisition with old highly labor intensive metal technology, but who knows.

As good as VASIs and PAPIs in daylight (I would hope). Now you just need to be able to read English. (Funnier in California where our Department of Motors Vehicles provides interpreters for drivers license applicants who cannot understand English. Makes you wonder about reading regulatory and warning signs). Driving between my office or home to San Carlos Airport has more close calls than flying in our very dense and complex airspace.

Sent to me by a Mooney pilot couple: works best on a regular computer than on an iPhone using Tapatalk. This is an animated .gif file.

I too, am a great believer in four and five point harnesses (which I installed in other aircraft). Too bad we can't do four point harnesses in our Mooneys. . So far as airbags are concerned, I survived, without injury, a head on crash between my Ford Escape, and a snowplow. The closing speed between us was between 70 and 75 mph. We were both sliding on "black ice" , both going downhill into a depression in the highway, and neither vehicle was going much over 35 mph. My airbags went off, then deflated, and I and my passenger opened one of the three doors that still worked, and waited with the (unhurt) snow plow operator for wreckers to pull the vehicles apart, and to clear the road. Since this was a head on, only the airbags in front of me, and in front of my passenger went off. The stop was so abrupt and short that my passenger's necklace snapped, even with a light drop. You would not believe what the front end of the Escape looked like, Yes, I want airbags for my Mooney! I have driven a NASCAR race car at a NASCAR training school, and while the sheet metal is downright flimsy, the interior roll cage, the seat construction, the neck restraints, helmets, five point harnesses, etc. are impressive, but these vehicles are designed to protect their drivers in high speed crashes, and the driver is virtually immobilized by all this safety gear. I really needed my spotter talking to me on radio just to be aware of cars around me, as it is very difficult to move your head or body when at speed. I wouldn't want, or be able, to fly with these restraints, so it is hard to compare safety issues between Mooneys and NASCAR (Nationwide or Sprint) cars.

Did anyone else notice that AmSafe didn't have a booth at Oshkosh? Or at least I couldn't find one. Still wanting airbags for my '83 J, but I am losing hope that I will ever get them

Very nice! Has all the data, and has room for the optional aircraft photo.

I had forgotten about the MAPA name tags. Too long ago for me to remember what they looked like, let alone my serial number. What I have been thinking about is something worn around the neck similar to what AOPA uses at their conventions, but with the Mooney logo (to identify the brand), the name of the owner / pilot, N Number, the city and state of residence or home airport, and optionally a photo of the owned aircraft At Oshkosh I wore a cap with a very well done embroidered photo of my M20J (done by the N Place), with my N number, and the only comment I got was "Is that a Bonanza?"). I did wear the red Mooney "60 Year" T shirt for two days, and I received quite a few comments about Mooneys, and that started more than a few conversations. Could this be an extension for the Mooney Ambassadors? I would really like to meet more Mooney pilots, and especially this forum's members. I am sure I walked past many members of these groups without having any idea who they were, and that is an easily cured shame.

From prior dealings with Mooney, I doubt we would have to pay a royalty for the use of the Mooney logo, but obtaining written permission is a good idea.

I didn't see any of the Mooney Caravan name tags when I was in the area

When I was at Oshkosh this year I wandered over to the the Mooney tent area in the North 40 where the Mooney Caravan was tied down. Lots of Mooney owners and pilots milling about waiting for the BBQ. I didn't recognize anyone, even though I have been flying Mooneys for over 20 years, attended MAPA homecomings many times, and been a member of this forum and Mapalist (and the old West Coast MAPA). This was true at the Mooney booth as well. It would have been really helpful if pilots and owners were to wear some sort of name tag or Mooney badge. It would have been fun to match up some of the forum members with their faces. Of course, many of the panel folks at the larger EAA Mooney forum tent were people I know, but not very many of the general attendees. Maybe for next year, and for various Mooney functions, someone with more graphic talent than I have, could design some sort of of name tag with name and aircraft N number, and model - even a photograph of their aircraft.

See photo: doubler under outer skin

I used 120 volt electric winches and long extension cords for the controller for two uphill hangars for more than 16 years without problems, however I now use a RoboTow for my newest Mooney. I like being able to use the RoboTow to maneuver the aircraft outside the hangar, and line it up to and from taxi. The space between my current hangar and a line of parked aircraft is small, and I would need a tow bar, and a stronger back, if I didn't use the RoboTow. Posted. a photo on another thread about a week ago.

When I had my 261 (262) conversion done, I had a dual braking system installed (great stopping power without locking up the brakes) and Paul at LASAR engineered a three main gear door system. That one really helped with adding a couple of knots. Neither was part of the standard conversion, but they were good augmentations.

I also have a RoboTow. Great unit, and I also added wheels. The standard battery has been working fine for me.

Many years ago I had my 231 converted to a 261, which is effectively the same as the 262 conversion. Mine (261) was done by Tim and Coy at the old Mod Works, Later Coy split off, and started the 262 conversion. I have to say that the 261 was a great airplane, and that in the 16 or so years I owned her, I flew her to Alaska, most of the Caribbean islands, Mexico, and many transcontinental flights, mostly in the mid flight levels eastbound, and the mid teens westbound. The conversion was exactly right for my purposes at that time; mostly long distance, with just myself, or one other person. I had the Monroy tank mod done, along with just about all of Paul's STCs. As I recall the price at that time was about $66,000, not counting the long range tanks or mods not listed on the quote above. The only problems i ever had were vacuum system failures (could be any aircraft, but operating in the flight levels can be hard on vacuum pumps, and the speed brakes were the old vacuum system, which again is hard on the vacuum pumps). The solution was an electric back-up vacuum pump in the tailcone. Unfortunately I used the fully synthetic Mobil One aviation oil that was being touted by Mooney at that time. Some may recall that the FAA stopped Mobile from selling that oil after several Bonanzas suffered engine stoppage after using that oil. I ended up settling with Mobil (long story), with them paying for about half of a new super custom engine (built by Paul at LASAR) that ended up costing about $64,000 with all new accessories, and baffles. One other squawk: It was difficult to keep the two voltage regulators in sync for this mod. Not a terrible problem, but these regulators were expensive (even though they they carried Ford markings). All in all, the 261 was the perfect airplane for me at that time, and for my requirements. A good 252 would be an alternate, depending on the price differentials. At the time I had the 261 conversion done, 252s (few if any used ones) were at least twice as expensive as having the conversion done to my perfectly good 231.