Shadrach

@DCarlton it’s not as low as some would think according to the POH.

I’m not doubting your statement, but I am curious where you found this information?

Was it retrofitted? I thought the early electric gear Mooneys had squat switches. Was your bird a manual gear that was converted later in life to electric.

The process is broken. I try to remain positive but there is little evidence to suggest it is warranted.

I could probably find some configurations I have not explored. I have done full cross controlled, forward slips at under 70KIAS with full flaps…at altitude. That being said, there’s rarely an operational need for an aggressive slip at that speed, and when there is, it’s likely that an alternative correction could have been done earlier. I’ve been guilty several times of having to take more aggressive measures to correct what could have been mitigated gently just a few moments prior.

I think most Mooneys of any length take a lot of nose up trim when light and slow. I have had mine against the aft trim stop of short fins more than once. That being said, I have never been able to induce a tail stall in my F.l

Grass is kind of a crap shoot. So it would depend on the specific location/conditions. I’ve had my bird on grass many times, It certainly shortens landing roll and increases take off distances, whether it’s enough to reverse the tendency of my airplane to take off shorter than it lands will depend. At 2300lbs (heavier than I would be for short field work) the book says landing at SL should take 640’ and take off should take 595’. I’m confident that most of us are going to have an easier time with achieving something like book takeoff numbers over than on landing. I’m not saying one cant get into something they can’t get out of. I’m saying it’s not easy.

I see and hear this frequently, but I just don't see how the numbers add up. Book take off roll is almost always significantly less than landing roll. Even the 50' calculations for both show that significantly more is needed for landing. Your average weekend warrior is going to have a much harder time approximating book landing numbers than the will book take off numbers. I fly into many sub 2000' strips and indeed some that are sub 1800'. I am relatively proficient at spot and stop in well under 1000'. If you haven't taken some time to become proficient, it's not so easy. Once you get comfortable, it's a skill that does not tend to atrophy as much as other skillsets. However, max performance landings are kind of hairy business that most are not performing. If done correctly, ALL of the aft elevator travel is used (and needed) in the flare to ensure a soft touch down. It is most definitely not "easy" to get a Mooney into a strip that the airplane can't get out of, but it becomes more possible at higher weights and DAs. Prudent to avoid short, back country, strips at DAs above 5,000 with the airplane at max gross. I doubt that it'll much trouble for most Mooney owners to avoid such conditions.

That depends on whether you’re planning on keeping the plane or selling. Buyers use SMOH as a proxy for engine health and expected remaining time in service. It’s not a great proxy, but it’s one of many metrics we use. When we had our case overhauled in 2011 the engine was ~900SMOH and 10 years old. I was prepared to do a major depending on what we found inside. What we found was an engine that was well above service limits across everything we inspected, though we did not take measurements. The main bearings were in good shape visually but replaced as the OHd case had been line bored. We are about 650 since IRAN and I have as much confidence in the engine as one can have in a piston recip. IRAN for operational utility Overhaul for valuation.

Operationally, I felt zero difference between old and new. However, my old disks tested fine until I jacked up the plane on a winter day (high 20s). Lots of slop in the gear for about ten minutes then they were tight again. Mine were still soft and only slightly compressed when replaced. I “think” the new ones expand better in cold weather, but I’ve not had the plane on jacks in sub freezing temps to verify

I used to subscribe to the “partial flap” philosophy but I don’t sweat it anymore. I typically crab down final and transition to a slip as I enter the runway environment. I have always had adequate control authority.

Interesting. Clearly they were made in 1969. Maybe my old ones were -5s. I’ll look this week.

I believe Mooney switched from using J11968-5s to 3 J11968-14s in 1967. My 67F came with -14s from the factory. I’m pretty sure your revised IPC calls for -14s all around. I’d be curious to learn the date code on your main gear discs.

I think Bryan bought a Cessna tail dragger more suited to the strips he was exploring. I am surprised at the number of Mooney owners that I’ve encountered that have never done a full cross controlled slip in their aircraft. It’s almost as if some think it’s undignified…

That’s an interesting policy. I would bet that the entirety of their AD, SB and SI library is well under 5GB. The cost of hosting the data online is trivial.

What a bargain at $1530 each. That would be a reasonable price for four. If made in any quantity, I’d guess those are marked up about 1000% over gross. Why not just have some made localy out of mild steel? My local CNC guy has fabricated larger pieces for me with 90° bends and precise drilled bolt hole patterns for >$150. I betting you could have identical plates made for <$200 each..

@RoundTwo Unless all of the shops that are local to you are really backed up, borrowing a case is not going to save you much time. It took me ~6 hours to remove my engine from the airframe and then remove all accessories. I dropped the engine at my engine shop late morning, and they had the case halves crated and shipped by 4:30 that afternoon. Shipping, Overhaul and Assembly will take more time. All of the above being said, Lycoming SI 1290F (requires a subscription to view) was released for a reason. Without evidence that the leak is from a case crack, it would be prudent to pursue the least invasive repair.

They should have the expertise. They were an MSC up until 2013…about 4 owners ago. Still some staff from the old days. Where was the plane based before it came to be yours?

This mirrors my experience save for some of the more interesting hardware. A teaspoon is a lot in my book. I’ve never had enough to separate into two levels, just a few clear blobs at bottom of the jar.

That’s happened to me twice. I am very hesitant to allow my plane to be fueled in my absence.

Is it hangared? edit. I can see the the tie down in the background.

I have never gotten that much water out of a Mooney tank though I know it can happen. Any time that I’ve gotten water out of a tank it’s clear. That looks like it’s been in there quite a while. I suspect that some or all the rib holes on the tank bottom are covered (sealant). The rib holes at the top of the tank may be blocked as well. If they are it will be very difficult to fill the tanks to capacity.

I wonder if one can retrofit the spring from an old leaky F391 into a new saf-airs

I hadn’t noticed they were significantly stiffer. Maybe need to compare them side by side. The upside to the SAF-AIR SA53S over the OEM F391-53S is that the SAF-AIR is field serviceable. The OEM unit is twice the cost and becomes a paper weight when an O-ring fails.

Would be interesting to see aerial images of the surrounding area.