David Mazer

NY State grants a license at 18, however a license can be obtained at 17 with some education requirements. NYC suggests teens wait until they are 18 to drive in the city (I suppose they can't trump state law). According to Wikipedia, Conecticut is 18 and Washington DC and Maine are 21. Several other states have numerous restrictions on kids under 21. My mother started driving when she was 13. She'd shoot me if I mentioned her age but, suffice it to say, there were no licenses required then. My father, on the other hand, didn't drive until he was 21 (+/-, he isn't around to clarify unfortunately). I'm not sure that distance is as great an issue as other availble modes of transportation and in sparsely populated areas it doesn't make sense to develop mass transit. Rather oxymoronic to create mass transit with no masses, eh. That must mean it is the government's next big push - a subway stop at every farmhouse. I'm equal unsure that allowing a 14 yo to charge down country roads at 100 mph (just 15 mph above the highest US speed limit) is safe despite the incovenience.

Reducing price to $175,000.

I've also used Voyager for years on a Motion tablet and it has worked reliably uty Seattle Avionics doesn't seem to be too interested in supporting it anymore and any glitch or question can literally take weeks before the one tech guy can/will answer.

Let's take these on one at a time. First, No, states where the driving age is 18 rather than 16 show dramatically lower accidents among new drivers and far fewer deaths of teenage drivers. Sixteen year old adolescents aren't just 11% younger than 18 year olds they are far more immature disproportional to their chronological age. Delaying driving to 18 is just safer for our kids. A sample size of 8 is entirely irrelevant. I don't really believe your freedom as a parent trumps your child's safety and certainly doesn't trump my family's safety on the road. As a parent, and I'm one too, one doesn't get that option in my humble opinion. At some point we feel it is appropriate to allow our children to drive, I submit that there are significant advantages to slightly delaying that time to 18. On what basis do you make your claim, "it is not as high a heart risk factor as most assume"? The nature of our forum make our opinions appear equal when they may be far from that. You may be a researcher in the field with years of experience and vast knowledge of the available data or you may just be stating your opinion on another small sample (n = 1). I'm not sure of which. Mooniac15U has cited a source for rebuttal and been able to show the basis of the study. Further, based on his source, I'm guessing he is a medical professional. And, to me, 24% increase in relative risk is significant (although I'd still like to see a p value). Mooniac15U's study also doesn't demonstrate causality but that is another entire question. To add to the double standard, I haven't cited sources either but I am a practicing Internist and deal with these issues on a daily basis and you can use that to decide what weight to put on comments. I can tell you that I have encountered many who feel a physician’s opinion about healthcare and safety issues are of extremely little value (I have a sister who feels that way!).

Thanks. Any information about the validity of the study? For example, do you know the p value or the power? It is hard for me to gauge the validity of thiese from the mainstream reports. They always leave out the important details as far as I'm concerned.

This requires a log in.

I used to do a mag check by turning to off then back on but my IA advised that I just turn to left, then right mag and watch for and RPM drop, even at idle. Seems to work great.

Yes. About 35 for the rebuild and the bill was about 50 when all was said and done. Of course, I went with premium upgrades at the time and also had the turbo rebuilt and the prop a few month later. All in all, it was an expensive year but the engine should be good for some time to come.

If your looking for a Rocket with no surprises, look at mine listed here on MooneySpace. Mine has a lot more going for it. Low time engine, better avionics, new paint and interior. If you want to talk, let me know. Erik, where does it say there isn't a reserve? I can't find that. Of course, the engine overhaul is about $45,000 - $50,000 when all is said and done, if it is required. That brings it to $120,000 if there really is no reserve but it seems an awfully low price. http://mooneyspace.com/topic/10618-fs-1986-252-m20k-rocket/

Bump

Not a Dreamliner but a Dreamliner Lifter. It's a modified 747.

Erik and Ron, thank you for your kind words. It is my pleasure to assist and share any way I can. You won't be getting rid of me this easily and I'll be happy to share my building decisions and progress. Most likely, the closest you've come to describing my future project is the color which I plan to be orange like my SeaRey and I'd prefer another taildragger as well. One wing and closed cockpit for sure. Some pics of the SeaRey nearing completion.

I know. I'm agonizing over this but she is what she is and I'm not using her properly. There is a smal group at my field that have a 74 M20F and they have invited me in. Other than reducing my annual costs by about 67%, the plane just makes more sense for my typical 200 nm, 7,000 ft flights. On top of that, being the fool that I am, I want to build something (2 seat, efficient, aerobatic +/-). What is largely in research.

Like so many others, the time has come to admit that my Rocket isn’t being used the way she wants to be used. A Rocket is designed for going far away and getting there fast. For climbing as high as you want and doing it fast. For taking off at high density altitude like it is a cold day at sea level. My Rocket can do all that and do it great. In the near future I’ll be listing her with a broker but that means fees. I’d rather sell it here to someone who loves Mooneys and let you keep the fee. She isn’t going to be the least expensive Rocket you’ll find but I doubt you’ll find one better equipped or maintained. The only thing not on her is TKS. The only squawk that is unresolved is a patch to the cowl flaps that works but isn’t the original motorized system. I’ve attached a spec sheet and pictures. Let me know if you are interested and we can discuss inspection and test flights. Asking price is $179,999. 1986 Mooney M20K – 252 Transponder code: 50631224 Serial #: 25-1062 Model: 5870220 305 Rocket conversion 1998 TT ~ 2100 hrs, TT – 774 before conversion/~1325 after hrs SMOH including turbo ~115 hrs, 2011 Prop OH - ~75 hrs No damage history per complete logbooks Engine: TSIO-520-NB and THO8 turbocharger Prop: McCauley 3 blade, full feathering Dual batteries Auto wastegate Intercooler Gross weight: 3,200 Empty weight: 2,295 Fuel tanks: 109 gal, 104 usable, resealed in 2007, no leaks Speed brakes Hoskin FT101 fuel analyzer Electronic fuel pump JPI EDM-730 Eng monitor with RPM GAMI injectors Standby vacuum Built in O2 Copilot brakes - No Aspen Avioincs 2000 PFD/MFD Nav/Com #1 – Garmin 430W Nav/Com #2 – KX155 Transponder – Garmin GTX-330 Audio panel – PS Engineering model 6000 M-S Autopilot KFC 150/FD, yaw damp inop Stormscope – WX-11S ELT – 406 mHz New paint 2009 New glass 2009 New interior 2009 All ADs completed All manuals, POH, appropriate checklists All logs Specs may change

Good luck. I completely failed to find a solution to that problem and had to replace the entire system with a manual system that is far from ideal. The 232 setup is completely diffferent and you can't even use that.

Michelin makes Condor. They appear to have the same specs. I've had some problems with Flight Customs getting flat spots so I'm trying the Condors. Of course, the real problem might be the pilot!

I have used a different system. Unfortunately, I don't remember the brand or cost. Next time I'm at the airport, I'll snap a picture of it. Basically it is made like one of those cones vets put on dogs to keep them from licking a wound but there is a clear plastic cover zipped to the what would be the open end of the cone and a cannual runs to the mask. My dog had no problem with it but he is particularly easy going about almost everything.

By repeated web searches, I've been able to determine that this is a G8 (8 mm center to center, bi-pin base) T4 (4/8 in diameter), 100w, 24v bulb. Finding an LED replacement seems to be difficult. Even finding an exact replacement is turning out to be a challenge. I have been able to find a G8 T6 LED bulb but their G8 T4 version had been discontinued. The search continues.

I'm pretty certain it didn't pull out of the base. This bulb is certainly closest (https://www.interlig.../SYLVANIA-59078). You must have a 231 conversion with the 14 v system. Mine is a 252 conversion with the 28 v system.

Lacee, It is an M20K part rather than a Rocket specific part. There are no identifying markings whatsoever. I looked at the links above and the big rub appears to be the base has those prongs rather than a bayonet base.

I'm sure this has been asked and answered before but my search has failed. The white bulb in the trailing edge of my 1986 M20K Rocket wing has burned out. I'm looking for an LED replacement or, failing that, an incandescent replacement. See image.

For what it is worth, I recently had a second problem with my JPI 700 and the people at JPI tried to mislead me into thinking they were helping me upgrade from the 700 to the 730 (about a $1300 cost) with a $200 price reduction. It turned out the "price reduction" was a $200 rebate being offered for OSh and JPI was giving me nothing. When qustioned the guy at JPI admitted he wasn't really going to help me and the rebate was all he was offering. I ended up speaking to his boss about the way I was treated and got a little more satisfaction but I advise not trusting JPI's customer service. On the other hand, I have a EI volt/amp meter and it works great. No problems ever but it is very simple in comparison. On the third hand (how many hands can one person have?), the JPI 730 seems to be working very well. Also not a 930 but pretty similar.

I believe all the extra space is in the baggage compartment and not in the rear seating area. If your looking for more backseat leg room, the long body isn't better than the mid body, if I recall properly.

The guys at Rocket felt those speculations were primarily to dampen interest in their product and, apparently, unfounded. Mooney was, again according to the Rocket guys, very angry at the FAA for allowing Rocket to get the STC since it created a plane with which they couldn't compete, at the time.

Mooney did. The Bravo has a 270 hp engine and the Acclaim is 280 hp. Okay, the Rocket is 305 hp but it is very similar. Truth be told, the big engine requires careful planning on descents and penetration of clouds since the airframe has the same Vne and Va. There is a 252 on the ramp with my Rocket and his maintenance is higher than mine. My fuel burn is generally higher but so is my speed. You won't really go wrong with a 231, 252, Encore, Rocket, or Bravo if this version of Mooney fits your mission. They are all very good airplanes. Find the one that has the closest specs to what you want and can afford (avionics, engine time, condition, TKS, etc), get a good inspection, plan on a couple years of fixing stuff and enjoy buying a plane at the low point of the market (boy I hope its the low point!).