N33GG

Quote: Parker_Woodruff Thanks! Was the cowl on or off (checking induction leaks)? He just finished with some fuel tank patchwork...

Hi Parker; I was getting a little work done on my Mooney today at Don Maxwell's shop and saw a pretty nice 252 sitting in the corner that looked a lot like yours. Beautiful aircraft...congrats! I had the same questions...which digital tach?

Beautiful panel! And flying since '56... OK, you have me beat!

Never underestimate the power of class envy. I have lived through and enjoyed the golden years of general aviation here in the United States. I lived in Europe in the early 70's and saw the beginning of the end for general aviation there. I am afraid that we may not be very far behind Europe.

Good choice to move on to something else, IMHO. I have one comment about planes that look like that: RUN AWAY!

I have owned both Garmin and PSE audio panels. I don't think you can go wrong either way. But my final vote is two thumbs up...one for PSE, and the other one for Garmin.

The version of the Six that I flew for many years with my family was the Saratoga SP. Retracts, not turbo, and tapered wing. Consistently trued at 155 kts around 8-10 kft. Maybe there are faster aircraft out there, but it was an awesome performer for what it could do. Older hershey bar wing Six's will not fly as fast, but do have the same room.

Sorry Dave... the above post recommending the Cherokee Six was mine... login bug got me.

Yes, by design it is a flooded engine start every time. And no, it is not hard on the starter. With the throttle full open and the mixture cut off, it only takes a second to clear the cylinders. Be sure you are ready to reverse the throttle and mixture settings quickly when it fires.

OK, I will throw some more fuel on the fire... no pun intended. I used to work at a job where I had to fly many different makes and models of aircraft every day, singles and twins, big and small, hot and cold. I never had the benefit of owners giving me tips and tricks on how to start each plane. Some big engines could be particularly difficult on hot starts. An old pilot gave me the formula that I have used for over 30 years, and it has yet to fail me. I still use this technique to this date. Here is the story he shared: "Georgee (he always called me Georgee - ARRGH! On the other hand, I was pretty young and inexperienced back then, although I didn't seem to know it.), the problem with trying to prime an aircraft engine just right, is that it is impossible to know when it is just right! (Unless you fly the same aircraft every day and learn some number of seconds that seems to work...now back to the story.) Sometimes you get lucky, and the engine starts. But if it doesn't, you don't really know if it is under primed, or over primed. The only way you can be sure what you've got is to over prime the engine. That's right, prime it good, and then prime it some more. Then, push in the throttle to full open, and pull the mixture all the way back to fuel cutoff. Now, with one hand ready on the throttle, start cranking the engine. As lots of air comes into the engine without any additional fuel, the fuel/air mixture with go from too rich to more lean, until the engine gets to the exact right fuel/air mixture and begins to fire. When it starts to fire, let off of the starter, pull back the throttle to idle, and quickly push the mixture in to full rich." I usually try whatever technique is recommended for each aircraft I fly. But if it doesn't start immediately, I revert to old reliable. Many of the aircraft I have owned over the years just seemed difficult and unpredictable, and I just stuck with the above technique. My 68C seems to work pretty much OK with the published procedure. My J model used to receive the over prime technique on a regular basis. I am not saying it is right, just sharing what has worked for many years on many different aircraft, including many Mooneys. Good luck!

Congrats Ken!!! I used to have a BE58TC, and have really missed it at times. I too have been watching the twin prices go down, and have been thinking about one of the baby Barons. I flew several different models with the Colemill conversion, and they are great. Sweet flying aircraft.

Very, very interesting! Now I know the straight scoop. Thanks everybody. What an impressive aircraft.

I have read/heard that the G wing had more washout for stall control??? Anybody know the straight scoop here? In 1968, as stated above, a cost saving effort was made that did away with flush mounted rivets. The result was more drag. The J went back to the flush rivets. My C is an early 68 model, and still has the flush rivets, or "clean wing". As far as the actual profile of the wing (other than the rivets), I think or have heard that they are the same, with perhaps the exception of the G. But I am not an expert, and do not claim to know for sure. Great question. I am looking forward to the answer from someone that knows. I have also wondered the same.

There is nothing more frustrating that a gear problem that has revealed itself briefly, gone into hiding, and is lurking and waiting to strike. Murphy's Law for this case: The gear will fail to extend at the worst possible time when you really need it to work right. I have been there, a couple of times. Good luck!

I once had a stuck mic button and didn't know it. Fortunately, all everyone heard was an excellent description of the proper way to land a Navion. Free flight instruction for the masses. Still left me red faced.

Hmmm... it didn't take Parker long to get pretty cocky now that he owns a 252.

I have this exact arrangement in my 68C. A gizmo with a 496 where the glove box was, with the two antennas setting on top of the glare shield to the far right side. The gizmo is angled toward the pilot side. Works great, and I really like it. Easy to see and operate. Great use of space. I have no idea of how it was done, as I bought this aircraft about a year ago and this 486 was already in place. Love it. I traded a Grumman TR-2 as part of the deal for this Mooney. Love the Grummans... got my private in one of the original Yankees in the early 70's. Good looking 68C in your picture there. Nice paint scheme with the blue and white. Welcome to MooneySpace.

Parker: I feel your pain. Really makes me wonder what people are thinking. Even some airports here in the great state of Texas are rediculous. If you are stuck at Maxwell's, give me a call and I will come and pick you up for a break. There are some great places to eat and hang out not far from Longview, and my home is just south of Tyler, or about 30 minutes away. Don has my cell number. George

I used to own a J, now own a C, but have always really dreamed of and wanted a 252. Following this acquisition is making that itch flare up. Thanks Parker... this may cost me some money! All kidding aside, congrats again. You scored an awesome aircraft! Hope to cross paths with you and see it some day.

Hank: Yep, high density altitude is correct!

I second the vote for Hanks information. Well stated Hank. My only additional comment is if you are landing at an airport that is a high elevation, you may not want full rich mixture, or your engine may die on the runway after landing. Should be clear to all of us expert pilots, but we sometimes get into our procedures to the point that we forget to deviate if we are not used to landing at high elevations. Please note that I would never make such a mistake... :-)

A real beauty Parker...CONGRATS!!! Say hi to Don for me.

I wish you had a video of that landing. I have never seen what a bad landing looks like. :-)

Several years ago, I was looking at another make/model aircraft to purchase. I went through the logs thoroughly... complete and clean back to day one. I decided not to buy the airplane for other reasons. Shortly after I passed on the deal, someone from that aircraft association called me and said "Psssst... you do know that the aircraft you were looking at was the one that was landed on water and sank to the bottom of....". It was only luck that I didn't get that airplane. A few years later, I was looking at another aircraft, clean logs, just like before, but some things didn't look right in the prepurchase inspection. The metal looked funny in places, like nothing I had ever seen before. I started calling previous owners, and one of them said "You know that aircraft was in a hangar fire and it got so hot some of it melted, don't you?" Even with due diligence, and a thorough review of the logs, it is possible to miss big problems in the purchase process. If I were selling this airplane, a full disclosure would be on every ad and posting. Then buyers could decide if they wanted a bargain, but they would know what there were getting. It might not get sold as quickly, and the disclosure might run off several buyers, but when it did sell, I would still sleep fine. But then again, this gets to the core of the issue... I would care and it would matter to me if a buyer got duped. Some people just don't care. Shameful IMHO.

Quote: Magnum But flying a Mooney is worth all the hassle and money :-)