M20F-1968

I posted a few months ago stated that I could make travel boards. I did make a set for myself. They are labor intensive to make unless you get enough orders to machine cut them. The ones I made look and function just like the factory travel boards. I would still consider the project, but would need enough takers. I am thinking price would be about 1/2 of new from the factory. John Breda

If it helps I have the original shaft from an F model. They would get you back to original and flying for little money. My e-mail is john.breda@gmail.com and my cell phone is (617) 877-0025. John Breda

I also have the York gust lock. See http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pspages/yorkgustlok.php?clickkey=333540 $259.00. The Mooney version is a bit different than the picture as the rudder end has horizontal hooks that hook the vertical rods on the rudder pedals. It works well and is sold when installed. I use a small towel to cover the leather covered yokes before installing it. John Breda

Is it better or worse than Foreflight?

I just updated my Garmin G600, GTN 650, GTN 750 by purchasing the pilot pack. I was at the PPP in Manchester at it seems that Garmin supposedly also will throw in the Garmin Pilot software without charge when purchasing the Pilot Pack. Anyone have any specific information of this? John Breda

I am another one who has the NACA duct in the dorsal fin and the Ovation venting system. My airplane was completely re-skinned from the baggage compartment forward. The full 1998 Ovation duct system was installed intact, only shortened to fit the F body. The roof is new. No patches. The side skins are new, one piece belly and the NACA ducts were put into the left and right sides with the Wemac vents from the Ovation giving significant more are than the original configuration. John Breda

Should you want a dorsal fin, I have the one that came on my 1967 F. It is in excellent shape. I removed it to put on the dorsal fin from a 1998 Ovation. You can reach me at (617) 877-0025 or e-mail me at john.breda@gmail.com Thanks, John Breda

Putting a J model cowling onto an E-or F is alot of work. I started with no nose at all on my airplane hen I bought it. The original plan was to use the Southwest Tx STC'd coling mod and use the original RayJay that is now on e-bay. The mechanic I had made swiss cheese out of the Southwest Tx cowling, forcing me to do something different. Thus, I went to the J model cowling. I purchased a used cowling from Lopresti that was supposed to be "structurally fine", until you found the plywood stiffener fiberglassed into the underside of the top cowling. It was a year to rebuild that cowling entirely. Then came the 201 windshield, cowl deck, sidepanels and fitting the cowling to the airframe. Since mine is truely a completely rebuilt airplane, it was OK. It is alot of work and not for everyone. The end result very nice however. I even went so far as to change the structural cage to be like the new ones. The RayRay system that is on e-bay is for the original F or E model cowling and its respective airbox. Both turbonormalizer systems work similarly and use the same turbo. The exhaust pipes are routed differently. Either way, makes for a very different airplane. John Breda

If that question was directed at me, I am still turbonormalized, but have the system that started its life as the Turbobullet (originally a design of Rocket Engineering) It did not survive at Rocket Engineering as a fully turboboosted application (originally with low compression pistons in a J model). It then became a turbonormalized system and has worked well. It uses the J model cowling and J model airbox. It is the same essentially as the RayJay system I am selling, but the configuration in the cowling is different. The original RayJay has a manual wastegate, which can be better as you can take the turbo out of the system when at lower altitudes. The manual wastegate also allows a higher critical altitude since you can close the wastegate completely with no leak as with the fixed wastegate. I do not have the Lopresti Cowl, I have a J model cowling which I rebuilt totally. John Breda

I will be there. John Breda

Yes it is the same person, namely me. I will not be using this system since I no longer have an F model cowling or airbox. I am willing to be flexible on price but need to keep an eye on what cost it took to rebuild the parts. This would be a great system for an E or F model owner as it truly makes an E or F a different plane. at 17,000 feet you will reliably have a 175 kt airplane burning 11 gph. As for flying the plane, you no longer worry about loosing manifold pressure, you keep sea level pressure up to 20,000 ft. It is essentially a bolt on mod but for a small amount of sheet metal work closing up the ram air door. The STC's are transferrable as the unit was built before the manufacturers put serial numbers on the STC's and before anyone (including the FAA) were concerned about it. It is a logbook entry and a 337 form mailed to OK City. I have both STC's (one for putting the turbo on the engine, and one for putting the modified engine onto the airframe). I have all diagrams referenced in the STC's, Install manual, parts manual, FAA POH letter. My e-mail is john.breda@gmail.com My cell is (617) 877-0025 This system will serve someone well. I can put you in touch with others that have the same system. Over the next few months I will be going through left over parts and try to clean up the hangar space.

I just purchased some transfilling parts from a welder's supply. The parts will be the same as you will purchase from the aviation sites. I am using 4 330 cubic Ft oxygen cylinders for transfill which cost me $100 each, cleaned for oxygen, painted with new CGA540 valves. You can PM me for infor. I am not selling anything, just sharing experience. Took a little bit of homework. John Breda

I do not have a PlaneCover brand cover, but I do have 2 covers that you might like having for not a lot on money. I bought them before I came upon a full set of covers (cabin, cowl, wings, empennage, etc...) and now just use the cabin cover from that set. Feel free to PM me. John Breda

I wasn't acting impatient, the computer appeared frozen and posted 4 times. Good thing Microsoft has not gotten into the panel mount GPS business. John Breda

Mike: My wife is coming to FL and is interested in the right seat course. Did I hear you correctly that if there are enough takers such a course could be put together? John Breda

Mike: My wife is coming to FL and is interested in the right seat course. Did I hear you correctly that if there are enough takers such a course could be put together? John Breda

Mike: My wife is coming to FL and is interested in the right seat course. Did I hear you correctly that if there are enough takers such a course could be put together? John Breda

Mike: My wife is coming to FL and is interested in the right seat course. Did I hear you correctly that if there are enough takers such a course could be put together? John Breda

Don: I did it in a machine shop and used a Bridgeport vertical milling maching. John Breda

I might add, I purchased 90 degree stainless angle, used a hydraulic press to convert the angle to 45 degrees, and since I had bought the stainless thick enough to grind and sand, finished them until they looked good. John Breda

The Lasar tie downs can and should be left in place. I agree with not exercising the aluminum threads more than necessary. The one problem with the Lasar set is that the tie down portion is not very long and if you have certain types of aircraft jacks (I have a set of Meyers jacks) that have a larger diameter ram, the tie down will be pushed upward by the jack ram and render it useless (can not get a rope into the hole). I got some stainless steel angle, and spent a few hours in a machine shop making a more appropriate set of tie downs which I truly can leave in place at all times, and which do not interfere with my Meyers jacks (which are good stable aircraft jacks and would not change). As for jacking, I use the 2 Meyers, an engine hoist and a concrete tail jack (holding the aircraft with a fixed bolt). The 4 points are very stable. John Breda

I'm in the same ball park as Bob_Bellville... My F is essentially a J without the inner gear doors. It is a 160 kt airplane at 10,000 ft, 75% power and 10.5-11 gph fuel burn. At 15,0000-17,0000 feet it is a 170-175 kt airplane at the same settings. I had the blessing and the curse of having purchased a project airplane without a windshield or cowling installed. I thus could, and had to made it into what I wanted it to be - thus the J cowling, 201 windshield and all the other J stuff. John Breda

Skeptical John: Yes you can change the size of the O2 tank you have onboard. I installed an Oxygen system from an Ovation (115 cubic Ft) into my F model, but then decided to downsize the tank to 50 cubic Ft due to weight savings. I used a Cessna Oxygen system POH and used that data based on 1 50 c ft tank to write the new fill instructions and usage times. This was previously FAA approved data. The FAA just signed off my new POH. I started with the Mooney Oxygen POH and entered the preapproved Cessna data where necessary. I do not have the O2 tanks, but I do have the scott O2 tank brackets for the 115 cubic ft tank should you need them

Skeptical John: Yes you can change the size of the O2 tank you have onboard. I installed an Oxygen system from an Ovation (115 cubic Ft) into my F model, but then decided to downsize the tank to 50 cubic Ft due to weight savings. I used a Cessna Oxygen system POH and used that data based on 1 50 c ft tank to write the new fill instructions and usage times. This was previously FAA approved data. The FAA just signed off my new POH. I started with the Mooney Oxygen POH and entered the preapproved Cessna data where necessary. I do not have the O2 tanks, but I do have the scott O2 tank brackets for the 115 cubic ft tank should you need them

Skeptical John: Yes you can change the size of the O2 tank you have onboard. I installed an Oxygen system from an Ovation (115 cubic Ft) into my F model, but then decided to downsize the tank to 50 cubic Ft due to weight savings. I used a Cessna Oxygen system POH and used that data based on 1 50 c ft tank to write the new fill instructions and usage times. This was previously FAA approved data. The FAA just signed off my new POH. I started with the Mooney Oxygen POH and entered the preapproved Cessna data where necessary. I do not have the O2 tanks, but I do have the scott O2 tank brackets for the 115 cubic ft tank should you need them