kortopates

Sorry to read this. I understand the engine installer used the wrong gaskets installing the exhaust when they hung the engine. But what about every oil change after that which includes a basic inspection of the exhaust system for leaks. I guess nobody saw it but the pre-buy and annual mechanic? There weren't any oil changes besides those done by the same pre-buy mechanic? Only mentioning because every oil change is an opportunity to check for exhaust leaks that were missed yet should have been noticed much earlier. There is no requirement to ever re-weight the airplane. Its standard practice to maintain the weight and balance as a series of add's and minuses to equipment using their weight and location station. Are you saying no accounting of the avionics updates where ever made? That's terrible and illegal for any change of a pound or more unless the wt & bal was being updated as required. Ditto for what Robert said on the prop. Most of steel tanks do have life limit of 24 years, while different steel tanks used for the smaller portable ones have no limit. Kevlar tanks have a 15 yr limit but 115 cuft kevlar tanks weight the same as a 77 cuft steel tank. Since a few of these raise the question of unneeded maintenance, perhaps in addition to the miss-installed gaskets, you would have been much better served by some better professional advice in maintaining your aircraft as a new owner. That's a tough $ way to learn.

Savvy news letter today addressing this topic: https://mailchi.mp/savvyaviation.com/oil-filter-adapters-on-continental-engines?e=710336d60c

Quite a story - thanks for sharing. I can only imagine the pilots concern being locked in while be cooked by the hot summer sun. In such conditions. I bet, unlike myself at the time, he didn't wait for it to happen again before getting it fixed!

That's probably a little drastic of a starting solution. I'd suggest first starting with the guidance in the M20K service manual to install the proper "charlie" weight in the tail to bring the airplanes CG into the proper location. Of course it will depend on what if any Charlie weight(s) are already in the tail but any A&P can follow the guidance from the service manual with a log book entry. The weights can be ordered via any MSC.

Agreed and great video! I can't help but think I would have been inspired after the event to complain to the inspector that the controller should be better educated on PIC emergency authority and his role to help - as it was the controllers actions where a hindrance to the pilot adding to his workload rather than reducing it. Thankfully this has to be really uncommon and hopefully an outlier as I have only heard controllers being as helpful as they possibly could to pilots declaring in the air; as well as second hand reports from others.

Yes, its actually been discussed many times here on MS. The Mooney uses very cheap Chicago cabinet locks and over time they wear out internally and need to be replaced. I forget the exact mechanism but recall it as the constant vibration in flight that allow the lock to slip into a locked in flight. Then you got pass the keys to someone via the storm window to get help. I was a little slow in getting it fixed when it happened and experienced being locked in at least 3 times. It didn't lock in every flight but got progressively worse. When it happens at night, and you need to call someone on your cell phone and wait for quite some time it increases the motivation to fix it. Yep there is always the baggage door exit too. Its actually a very easy fix to replace the lock and have it re-keyed to your existing key - re-keying can be done by any locksmith. Some pilots here have done that themselves. But personally I didn't want to just put another cheap lock in mine so I opted for Medco locks in both the door and baggage door - which wasn't that much more difficult. I worked through a local locksmith to do that. But there is a firm on the web that sells them with a STC - not that you really need a STC to do it. But lots of threads here on that as well if that interest you.

Sorry to hear you go! Always enjoyed your informative post!

This should only apply to the Rockets with the TSIO-520. They do list TSIO-360's but I am skeptical about the even the early 231 -GB not having an integral oil filter either. Furthermore, I wouldn't go so far to say it was an improper installation as much as a poor design. These adapters have always been troublesome and there has been a long standing AD against a version that came from Cessna, but not against the aftermarket STC’d ones like this F&M adapter that is of substantially identical design. Continental did come out with a newer style oil pump with integral oil filter in the later TSIO-520's (e.g. -R7B) which would be a preferred fix but Continental has said there just aren't enough of the older engines out there to justify the certification cost to get the newer style pump approved on them.

For probably one flight, its not really necessary; especially a short flight. But for frequent flying, I am convinced after 3 flying companion dogs, 2 Labs and now a mutt terrier mix, that they don't like the loud noise for hours on end and appreciate any help they can get. They've all found ways of letting me know ... and I am no dog whisperer!

I personally won't recommend a normally aspirated 200HP Mooney even visit MMJC. I haven't visited this airport myself, but I had a local friend fly in there in a SR20 and had one of those never again moments he'll never forget much like @cliffy described flying out of MMH. I have used both the higher Toluca MMTO airport 8466' and lower Puebla (MMPB) 7361 - both with much longer runways. Of course, if you pick the day and time carefully and watch your weight of course it can be done. There is even a flight school at Toluca. But sure don't get much choice visiting from far away and if you're based there its easy to get tempted to use the airport in conditions that you'll wish you had the benefit of a longer runway. As Cliffy said, its not getting airborne that is usually the problem, (but be sure to master the 70/50 rule), its climbing out in the high density altitude that is the real challenge. Add in some unexpected turbulence, down drafts and it more than just "dicey". I've done Mammoth mountain (7135) probably over a 100x time in our Turbo Mooney, summer and winter, keeping an airport car up there and being a season pass holder, and I always cringed when we had to take off to west because of the terrain and required maneuvering early in the flight even with the turbo performance.

Too bad that Mooney is too far south in Southern California. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow, that's a huge leak!! Glad you found it on the ground it needs to go to your favorite fuel system specialist repair station asap! They run about 1 AMU to OH, at 20 years it will probably need one but starting with an inspection will get you an estimate of what it needs. This shouldn't be at all related to CSB19-01A since it replaced a hose for metered fuel between throttle body to fuel divider - nothing to the fuel pump. Also It looks like the pump has already complied with an earlier SB to replace the brass arm with a steel one - so you look good there. (The brass one would wear and all of a sudden you don't have a mixture control!)

I would agree that technology and innovation can play a huge role to reduce these incidents but I think Pipers solution was proven to be too dangerous - given it's killed people on go arounds and in higher DA situations. Personally, I really think solutions like the P2 Audio Advisory system are the right way to attack this. Only problem though is most pilots are in denial about how easily this happens in the right situations and don't think they need it till after they have done the unbelievable. And in this current insurance market some get a nasty surprise that their insurance won't renew after one of these incidents - which equates to a 3 or more year sentence of insurance hell for them. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are actually two K models for rent in SOCAL - a 231 at Santa Monica (Santa Monica Flyers) and a 252/Encore at CRQ (Pinnacle) . This is most unusual to see Turbo Mooney's for rent. I really don't recommend checking either of these out though. It'll ruin your future prospects for ever flying a NA again. Once you experience benefits of Turbo few could ever go back to NA! The other option is a very early M20A or B at Dubois at Chino. For any of these, you would join the club or school and then use one of their instructors.

They're small tube pointing into the wind on the bottom of the wing to the side past the tank. In the modern Mooney's they are in a small NACA duct embedded into the wing bottom pointing into the wind. Vintage Mooney's they can be aluminum tubing come down and making a 90 bend into the wind. Those with bladders will see a de-ice mast directly in front of the vent tube. This usually happens from insects nesting in the tubes when parked on the ramp. I personally wouldn't insert something as large as a allen key wrench into the vent tube. Instead I recommend using some .032" safety wire to wiggle it in the tube and break up any debris without allowing any chance of ramming it further back into the vent or give it any chance of getting sucked into the tank by the vacuum. I fear the tool will break it up by pushing most of back in, rather than allow it come out. I can probably get a picture of a modern one later today.

Sure, the point about the open pilot clause is that it only ensures you the owner. Say the worst happened, the insurance company would make you whole. But the CFI or any pilot meeting the open pilot clause is not insured under your policy - just you and any other named insured - and after paying off you they could subrogate against your CFI or pilot operating under the open pilot clause to cover their losses. The open pilot clause just ensures that anyone meeting those requirements keeps the policy in effect or operation insured. Therefore when it comes to instructing pilots in owner aircraft, its a common request to add the instructor as a named insured so that the instructor is also covered by your policy.

I'd suggest you contact @mike_elliott He's is Florida on the Gulf coast and if he can't do it, he has some other Mooney CFI's that can. Realistically, I'd give up the notion of flying your family in the bird for Christmas, these things always take longer than you expect and very often the ferry flight reveals some maintenance needed. Plus you've mentioned you can only fly weekends and you're going to need every one of those 10 hrs of transition training if not more, doing maneuvers and landings, before you're ready to solo. Although the cross country will be a great learning experience and you'll lean a lot about the airplane, its not really the intensive training you need initially in the pattern. You'll probably want to wait till you get some solo time built up before taking your family and then pick the first flights very carefully for distance, weather and conditions so that they'll be confidence inspiring rather than scary. Lastly the insurance requirements you refer to are what are referred to as the Open Pilot Clause - they just ensure you the named insured are covered if there is an issue, but the CFI could then be subrogated against because they're not insured by that. Because of this, expect any experienced CFI will require to be added as a named insured with waiver of subrogation so that the policy insures you both. Good luck and enjoy!

Often when planes are repossessed by the bank, do to the circumstances, the plane gets auctioned without logbooks. @Mcstealth answered the question though if they were available.

Is your battery in the back by chance or up by the engine. If the former, it’s quite a job to pull a new wire from battery through interior and firewall to power surefly! But realistically, you can barely do anything in 1-2 hrs, perhaps remove and re-install mags during annual but not installing a new ignition system and new wires to plugs. Then the STC 337 paperwork ... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Typo - I meant to say Throttle to idle -- never ever actually killing the engine!! Must have been thinking about this incident. Never have come close to losing an engine yet simulating an engine out, just need to warm them up. Thanks for letting me know, I'll correct that typo above too.

Good questions Rob, first I have to say I don't do any of this unbriefed in advance. Before the flight, we discuss the engine out emergency glide range and power off landing procedures as well as the expected rate of descent per their POH. This includes how we expect to glide to above an airport if we have excess altitude, then lower the gear and perform 360's abeam our intended point of landing - which is the instrument landing zone a 1000' down the runway (not the threshold so as to give us runway buffer if we came up short). Then we'll go out and do it, combining the emergency glide to the airport, along with the emergency spiral descent down to pattern altitude and then the 180 degree landing. Sounds like a lot of power off - but its not as I'll explain. So several miles away from an airport (~7-10nm) and more than 5000' AGL we begin with the emergency glide demonstration pulling the throttle to idle. First we don't touch the prop, but trim to best glide and see out descent rate. Being very pitch sensitive this take a couple minutes to see our descent rate settle out to make note of. Now we pull back the prop and watch how the plane essentially accelerates from the decreased drag and again wait for the descent rate to settle out and now compare how well its improved at Vg and we readily see why its so important to pull the prop back. By this time the engine is getting cold, so next up is to demonstrate how we can simulate the best glide descent rate with the gear down and some engine power added to compensate for the increased drag. So we lower the gear and add enough power with the prop back forward to maintain the same descent rate we just verified at Vg but now with some power to warm up the engine - and we continue to glide to the airport in this configuration. Next we're discussing our remaining altitude AGL and distance to the airport as well as use of glide range rings on our iPads to help with our situational awareness of whether we can make the field. If not on a weekend with an unbusy airport, we'll continue the exercise to the airport, spiral down, now with throttle/power back to idle and followed by the 180 power off landing (i'll add some momentary throttle to clear the engine as needed). On the weekends and sometimes mid-week there is just too much traffic and instead we'll join the traffic pattern land and then do power off 180's to practice the power off landings portion. We've also discussed that if we have to go around, we won't go to full power right away if oil or CHTs are too cool per POH recommendations, but will go to minimum power to maintain level flight (~17-18") as the engine warms up enough to go full forward and climb. There is never any doubt about the engine nor letting it get too cold. While the student gets real world demonstration of the emergency glide procedure, its results compared to book, the emergency spiral/360's with ability to slow to minimum sink once at the field rather than use best glide and then of course making the power-off landing. The only item missing is the startle factor management from just out of the blue pulling the throttle and saying now what. That's a different exercise I do but I'll limit that to being high too but won't play that out to low level for multiple reasons. I end that though after trimming for best glide, picking and aiming towards best landing option and going through the engine restart procedure - then we recover while still quite high. One of my aversions to playing it out low level is that places to even practice ground reference maneuvers in my SOCAL area has gotten hard to come by due to large number of noise complaints. We're often already flying pretty far for a spot away from houses and people to practice ground reference maneuvers as it is.

That's one way to look at it, and the really positive thing is that only aluminum was bent, nobody was hurt in this training incident. But the FAA says "AIRCRAFT UNABLE TO RESTART ENGINE DURING ENGINE FAILURE SIMULATION, LANDED IN A FIELD AND GEAR COLLAPSED, NEWTON, UT." Pulling the engine to idle, is not shutting it down - far from it. How it was shutdown we don't know, but the FAA report, which could be wrong says it was shut down. But we also know the engine was shut down no where near gliding distance of an airport. Logan was about 15 mi away. And it also appears based on lack of ADS-B coverage and the low ceilings the shutdown likely occurred at a very low altitude of not more than 2000' AGL. That's likely because there are several snippets of partial flight tracks showing the plane is in ADS-B coverage at at only 6600' msl which is just a bit over 2000' agl - but no flight aware track the day of the incident. That's only a couple minutes of glide time - hardly enough time to get the engine restarted after probably setting up to land somewhere and then discover it wouldn't come right back to life as expected. Why it wouldn't quickly restart is a mystery; especially if it was only a couple of minutes as it appears, but its hard to imagine fouling that quickly or carburetor ice that quickly in such cold dry air. I do emergency engine out training every week with students from a much higher altitudes and I'am looking forward to the NTSB reports on this.

This is also discussed in the gear up thread as this weeks latest incident, middle/end of page 13

If you look at the handful or so of recent ADS-B snippets of flight tracks, there is a repetitive theme of short half hour flights in the same area between Logan and Preston. But the odd thing is they appear and end no where near an airport. Although it could be due to flying to low to stay in Ads-B contact but it leaves me curious as to the aircrafts home base. Unfortunately there was even a snippet of incident flight. Looking at the picture of the downed aircraft with overcast skies probably explains that from having to fly low to stay VMC and thus avoiding ads-b coverage. What we know from the snippets is that the plane was picked up in the same area at 6700' before where ground level of nearby LGU is 4457' so only roughly 2000' AGL - so apparently less than than that on this day. Which then really begs the question would a CFI and pilot really be practicing engine outs with limited ceilings? Hoping some one familiar with the area may come along and shed some light. But from the news article picture, we only see one blade with apparent damage; so probably stopped. I wondered about carb ice but if AGL altitude was pretty low to begin with, that would be very quick in likely cold dry air - I am skeptical. But as best as I can tell this is no where near an airport - about 15 miles from Logan UT airport. Its a mystery!

Some refinements, .... Yeah somewhere between 6.14159265359 and .14159265359 But I thought Speed is everything to Mooney Rocket pilots but Efficiency is everything to most pre-long body pilots. But you got to have your bird looking like it fly's fast to actually really go fast - hence aesthetics like ditching the antenna farm. Cheap is everything to the 4 cyl Vintage Mooney pilot. But I wouldn't discount numerical accuracy, to many engineers and PhDs in this forum. But its humorous how we so often use it to justify our choices.