201er

Jose Monroy spoke rather fondly of his piss hose that poured out a venturi underneath the fuselage all over the underside of the plane.

To avoid running it dry inadvertently during a more critical phase of flight

Neither a turkey nor a buzzard. Looks like a Black Vulture. And a costly repair.

After a fuel stop enroute to Florida, 10 gallons in I switched tanks and a few seconds after the switch the engine started to stumble. The fuel pressure gauge dropped so I immediately turned on the boost pump. The stumbling continued and fuel flow was erratic. I enriched the LOP mixture because the engine doesn’t like to relight LOP. Eventually normal function resumed. On the previous flight on the way to the fuel stop, I inadvertently deliberately ran a tank dry. Running the tank dry was deliberate but the moment it happened was a bit unexpected. I was about 10 minutes from beginning my descent and expected to switch the tank at that point before it ran completely dry. When there isn’t a lot of gas remaining, I want to arrive with everything being usable. What made it worse was my passenger flipping out over it which startled me much worse than the tank running dry. I immediately reached for the fuel selector and flipped to the other tank and turned the boost pump on. Anyway, the surprising thing was the engine stumble after refueling. Well duh, there was still air in the line from running dry on the prior flight. I’ve always been taught not to switch tanks right before taking off or critical phases. And this was a very good reminder why! So, just a reminder that you can have some engine stumble not only when running a tank dry but also on the subsequent flight when you switch to the previously dry tank.

Here we go again

Then you weren’t “legal VFR”. 91.155 Basic VFR weather minimums. (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section and § 91.157, no person may operate an aircraft under VFR when the flight visibility is less, or at a distance from clouds that is less, than that prescribed for the corresponding altitude and class of airspace in the following table: Class E: Less than 10,000 feet MSL 3 statute miles Flight Visibility- The average forward horizontal distance, from the cockpit of an aircraft in flight, at which prominent unlighted objects may be seen and identified by day and prominent lighted objects may be seen and identified by night.

The M20C is also referred to as the Mark 21 https://www.flyingmag.com/this-1967-mooney-m20c-mark-21-is-a-speedy-stylish-classic-aircraftforsale-top-pick/ https://planeandpilotmag.com/mooney-mark-20-21-series/

You kidding me? For the durations I fly that would cost a fortune!

1320nm in 11 hours upwind KLDJ to KHYI NJ to San Marcos Texas. 1400nm in 9 hours downwind KAPA to KLDJ Denver to NJ 1116nm in 8 hours KLDJ to CYWG NJ to Winnipeg 1057nm in 7 hours KLDJ to KEYW NJ to Key West just to name a few 98 gallons

Might not even be a mechanical failure. Could be milking the edge of a stall at high weight and DA the whole way. Not gonna climb if you’re too slow. Rotating out of ground effect prematurely without letting the speed build and the continued panic of not climbing can cause a pilot to keep pulling back and hanging on the edge of stall. It’s not gonna climb.

That must be why that thing kept blocking my view

Call it Airline-Ticket-Name-Change-Space, can't see anything Mooney related any more

Mooney prop-strike go-around crash: http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2016/09/mooney-m20j-fatal-accident-occurred.html?m=1 The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be: The pilot's improper landing touchdown attitude, which resulted in a propeller strike, and his inappropriate decision to abort the landing after the propeller had contacted the runway, which resulted in a loss of thrust and led to an aerodynamic stall during climb.

Came across another one of these (not a Mooney)

It's not gonna be pretty but if anyone @Parker_Woodruff can make it happen

Actually it’s not about speed at all. Speed is totally misleading because it’s a bit different for every landing. Speed is different depending where you look ASI, GPS, or out the window. Some of those speeds vary with wind, temperature, or altitude. Some of those speeds vary with weight. The right speed one landing is the wrong speed on another and worse yet you’re being fed an assortment of conflicting speed information by your ears, eyes, and instruments. AOA is the only relevant and consistent thing for approach pitch reference.

Is there something about that airport? Or just a statistical inevitability in proportion to high traffic volume?

There isn't a penalty for this at the rear CG envelope with baggage and rear seats filled?

Given the extent of the damage, I’m pretty sure the fact that it was a rocket made no difference. The slightly greater prop clearance or any other Mooney may have varied the exact extent of damage but not whether or not this approach would cause it. Heck, I’m not sure another brand airplane would fair well under the same circumstances either.

All it takes is flaps up to T/O and adjust the trim to turn the dreaded go-around into a normal takeoff.

The median age of the entire Mooney fleet is probably around 1970. I think they made more Mooney’s in 1967 than the entire time since 1990!

Ok one more question. What is the point? Is it to save money or the convenience of not having to refill o2?