N33GG

Sorry, had trouble getting link to work... please see revised post above.

Has anyone seen this? Opinions? Sorry, was having trouble getting a file to attach. The info is in this thread... Go to page 19 here: http://azpilots.org/images/newsletters/2013/apanewsletter2013-09sept.pdf

Words of wisdom...

This should be good...

That was back in the days when cartoons were GREAT!!!

Too funny! Thanks for posting that one. Beyond that, I am going to keep all of my thoughts to myself on this one...

Sounds about right to me as well, all things being equal. However, my commute here in the DFW area is prone to getting snagged in traffic if by car, and this issue doesn't exist by air. My commute is very near to this break even number, and I occasionally decide to just drive. Then I get stuck in traffic because of an accident or construction, and I get reminded why I fly, even for relatively short hops. Likewise, I love flying over DFW area and looking down at the traffic and thinking you guys have a nice day!

Us old timers refer to TCP as Tom Cat Piss. I added it religously to the gas in my Swift since its engine was designed for much lower lead than 100LL which was the lowest available. Without TCP in that engine, the lead fouling on the plugs and valves was significant and immediate. Worked great. I have never added it to fuel in higher compression engines that are designed for higher lead content. I am not an expert in this area. Before I would add TCP to an engine I would seek advice from some people that could assure me that there would be no adverse effects. For all the experts out there, here would be my questions: Do modern engines need the additional lead for lubrication, and does the addition of TCP to modern engines present a risk in any way?

How low can this market go???? Amazing!

Yes, it is hard to find a 40-50 year old aircraft without some damage history, but they are out there if you look hard enough. And this is not a 40 year old aircraft. Damage history will be an issue to value, more so and less so depending on the repairs, who repaired it, and records, etc. But it will be an issue, and potentially more so with a newer aircraft. Some buyers will pass on an aircraft with damage history regardless of who did the repairs, thus shrinking the market for sellers. This is an incredible buyer's market. Keep shopping. There are plenty of awesome deals out there. Just remember, if it seems too awesome to be true, there is probably a very good, or bad, reason. Keep shopping. Just my humble opinion, and 2 cents. FWIW, etc... Good luck, and welcome to the Awesome world of Mooneys.

How many hours on it? Was it factory new?

ATP, CFII, MEI, AGI Only thing I did in a Mooney was my original complex endorsement, a long time ago.

You can add to the list of airports to be ready for a slam/dunk approach: Houston Hobby and Burbank, CA. Sure wished I had speed brakes on my BE58TC when I would get handed one of those type approaches. Not a big deal when you kind of have a clue what is coming and can prepare for it. When it is a surprise, things can get challenging for the best pilots out there. Speed brakes are a great tool when used properly. They should not be considered as only necessary for cleaning up a botched procedure, or a crutch for a poor pilot.

A properly rigged and balanced aircraft should fly straight without the PC controlling the aircraft. Before I even thought about bending anything, I would take that aircraft to Don Maxwell at KGGG and get it checked out by someone that knows what they are doing and has the proper tools. Don't screw up your aircraft trying things that may be masking another problem. FWIW...

Congrats and welcome! Beware of Fantom's left jab. The truth can sting...

May or may not be the case here with this Corsair, but I could make a very long list of examples right off the top of my head. I agree completely Fantom.

Look on the bright side... if you can afford a Corsair, you are probably OK! Sorry... in all seriosness, that really is painful.

Factory Reman - That would be my choice. I know the feeling, and it reminds me of a lot of pain I felt when I found a crack on one of the engines on my BE58TC. That was really expensive. It really sucks, and you certainly have my condolences! Good luck and let us know how you proceed.

If you have a monitor, it is hard not to look at it and worry about small things. I like them more on injected engines than carbureted ones, as the carburetor causes more erratic things to worry over. Engine shops have told me they chase a lot of phantom problems due to engine monitors on both types of engines. Some pilots and mechanics swear by them. They are essential equipment if you want to run LOP. If you have only seen monitors on injected engines, it can be a bit of a shock and even alarming the first time you look at one monitoring a carbureted engine! Of all the flying I have done in both injected planes and carbureted planes, with and without monitors, I have never had a problem that a monitor would have solved. Maybe I am lucky. Techniques are there for operating both types of engines, with and without monitors. After all, you still have the other engine instruments, just not every cylinder. All that being said, I like having the monitor to keep an eye on my engine. It is simply more data and information that I can decide what to do with. I do wish they were not quite so expensive. Not a big deal if you are flying an Ovation, but a significant percentage of the price of a typical C Model, or other small carbureted aircraft. FWIW...

And yes, aggressive leaning on the ground during taxi or mags will be very rough. Just don't forget to go full rich before applying take off power!

Welcome to the world of C-Models! My 68 C is equiped with an engine monitor, tracking CHT and EGT for all four cylinders. I also have an accurate fuel flow monitor. I fly ROP, and that is every cylinder ROP. If I only used the engine rough, and then rich to smooth mixture setting technique, I would probably be flying at about 10 gph cruise. However, watching the engine monitor, cylinders 1,2 & 4 become ROP at about 10 gph, while cylinder #3 is lean and does not peak or begin to be ROP until about 10.7 - 11 gph. There is no roughness with this one cylinder LOP, but monitors don't lie. So my usual cruise at altitude is full throttle, 2400 rpm, and fuel flow is right at 11gph. If I am at lower altitudes and pull back power to 23"/2300 rpm (or 23 squared), fuel flow settles down to about 9.5 gph, and the cylinders are much better behaved, all four with more similar response to leaning. I have flown lots of planes with carbureted engines, even owned several, with and without engine monitors. I have used the lean until rough, and then rich to smooth mixture setting without any known problems. When I have the monitor available, I keep every cylinder rich of peak. I consider the behavior and performance of my 68 C to be very normal. I have flown lots of planes with injected engines, even owned several. Injected engines tend to be pretty uniform with each cylinder peaking at about the same time, at least much more so than carbureted engines. GAMI engines or other tuned injector systems especially get everything even. Carbureted engines can have very different cylinder behavior than injected engines. If you have one that behaves very uniform, consider yourself lucky. Intentional LOP in a plane with a carburetor is not for me.

I flew about a thousand hours in a Saratoga SP that was radar equiped. It was an excellent radar, and it made a big difference! Flew it all over the lower 48, and for a few years flew from Ft. Worth to Los Angeles every week. It was and still is a great plane.

WOW! Nice airplane and looks like a great deal. Just curious, what 180 did you get, Cherokee or Cessna? You should have no problem selling that 201.

Congrats! Feels good, doesn't it?

The aircraft may not be in many pieces, but it is not very intact. It looks like (to me at least) it is smashed in mostly a downward direction and little forward momentum. Either it stalled and dropped like a rock, or it hit that little hill right behind it at the wrong time and wrong angle, or maybe the pilot was trying to squeeze a little more out of it to miss the hill and caused the final stall. I don't know, but that is what it looks like to me from what is presented. Either way, there were severe downward forces. I agree with Hank on this one. Those early decisions in a flight, as well as those very last fraction-of-a-second decisions and control inputs, can make or ruin your day, even if you have lots of experience and ratings. Be careful out there!