oldn0tded

Hmmmmm, well I can tell you why I wouldn't let my airplane travel away from my home base for a PPI. First, I'll cite an article written by Mike Busch, and published in AOPA magazine in Oct, 2016. It's a long piece, and you have to read all of it. For those of you who aren't familiar with Mike Busch, he is a widely respected AP/IA, with a strong background in our type of airplanes. The link to that article: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2016/october/pilot/savvy-maintenance-tales-of-woe Second, just the sake of the discussion, let's say the PPI does exactly what it's meant to do, a legitimate grounding item is found, rendering the aircraft unairworthy. The buyer walks away, goes home, puts his feet up on the couch, and breaks out the latest edition of Trade-a-Plane, feeling very good about the wisdom of spending that $$$. On the other hand, the seller is away from home, with a bunch of strangers, that potentially have $$$ in the eyes, and DEFINITELY now have control of the airplane. Again read the cited article. If I were having a PPI done on my airplane, I would insist on it being accomplished in my hangar for two reasons: 1. I'd want my airplane under my supervision at all times 2. If something were found in my hangar, I'd have control over the repair as opposed to being presented with an invoice (with little or no input/options) Please understand, I'm not suggesting NOT to do a PPI, just that I'm not gonna put my $$$/plane in the hands of someone who MIGHT have different goals. Oldnotdead

Hey guys, been away for awhile. Sorry for not keeping current. So, First, the advisory circular is good help for a flight test in general, but is not necessarily THE test profile to prove ADS-B function for rebate purposes, i.e. the requirement for 30 minutes of flight time in "rule" airspace. Second, the guidance on turns and bank angles is helpful. I suspect a couple of steep turns while I was attempting my second flight interfered with my out signals, giving me a "fail" in one critical parameter. The same parameter the equipment had passed earlier with zero faults. At this point, that is speculation. Third, the Public ADS-B Performance Report is computer generated, and 29:58 is not 30 minutes in the eyes of the computer. The reason for another "fail". Forth, The controllers have NO idea what you are attempting to do, and have been accommodating so far, but WILL vector you out of their way if need be. In doing so you may be vectored out of the rule airspace. You have to track your time, and know when you're in or out of the required airspace. My experience is limited to Class C airspace, Class B would different, I'm sure. I have to fly to Class C airspace to do the flight, I don't live near one. I have already done this twice. It doesn't take very long to burn up $500 of av gas. My story, so far, Old Knot Head

Well, I have done the GTX 345 install, interfaced with a GTN650. I'm pleased with the operation so far. Now to the point, Has anyone gone through the "Fly and Validate" portion of the rebate program? I ask because I'm finding it to be a challenge. Anyone?

Dan, at Lasar has them...

+1

All I gotta do is find a guy that can weld a feeler gauge..... Kiddin', that is another possibility....

Yessir, that's the part. Stop drilling might have worked several hours (hundreds?) ago, but the corners are past that now. I already have a call to Lasar, checking here just in case. Fabricating one, or adding doubler(s) to this are possibilities...

Anybody out there have one of these layin' around? Of course, it would be good if it were in better shape than mine. The pictures may not show it very well, but the lower corners on this one are pretty beat up. 1975 M20F, part #600050-501 Thanks in advance

Soooooo, ya take the cowling off, and that turns into new baffling, repairing the ram air seal, cleaning and degreasing, new fuel and oil lines, including fuel and oil pressure lines to the gauges. ANNNNND then scat tubes need replacing, fixing the master cylinder leak before it gets worse, clean, service and lube the induction drain (as per Don Maxwell), and finally motor mounts. If this thing flys before Christmas, it'll be a miracle. Ya know somebody could have stopped this before it got started!! Did I mention Dan at Lasar? He truly deserves a "shout out". BTW, Lasar has the servo induction boots in stock, just sayin'

I just started this job, and as in all things related to old airplanes, it has escalated .....considerably! Its gonna be a j-o-b...

.....and giving a lot of opinions, but very little factual evidence. But everyone is..... All I have is anecdotal evidence, what sort of factual evidence are you looking for? The OP was looking for opinions. Certainly, your experience gives your opinion more credibility than mine. If you say it's sound to put new cylinders on that bottom end, I would NOT say that was the dumbest thing I'd ever heard. Getting back to original question, If it were my plane, it would be a full rebuild with new cylinders. I could not use rebuilt cylinders, and I could not put new cylinders on a bottom end with that history. As to factory or field, I'd get you to do it!!

Byron, It's not the crank, it's the bearings. Well, and maybe a crank. Let's think about it for a sec. Are you familiar with BMEP? I don't know the number for a Lycoming blowing 72/80, but just for the discussion, lets says it's 125. If the new cylinders bump it up to 135, then YES, there will be increased stress on the crank, but more specifically the BEARINGS. This crank is somewhat special due to the prop strike, that throws an unknown into the equation. Does anyone out there know how torsional vibrations affect the cranks in our motors? I don't but it's a question. Finally, "a shed"? A shred of what? Its my opinion, based on prior experience. Do you have any "hands on" engine building experience? And you're welcome!

"I get plenty" Good, maybe you'll be more social. I think the bottom end in question is 2000 hours old, with a freshing up 4xx hours ago, and a prop strike. I'm reasonably certain that will increase the odds. I stand by the original opinion.

Well, somebody needs to get laid.. I'm guessing you have not had that happen? I have....not with an airplane engine though, thus the THEORETICAL part....

As long as you're soliciting opinions.... I started flying in the mid eighties. I've been around internal combustion engines since before I was a teenager. I'm NOT an AI or an A&P, but I have always done my own wrenching, and do so now, on my plane, under the supervision of a local AI. Over the years I've seen a lot of different "kinds" of maintenance/repair/rebuild people/facilities in ALL areas i.e. marine, automotive, motorcycles, bicycles, and aviation. I'm not an expert, but I am experienced. So, here are my thoughts Premise 1: I can safely say for every technician that really can DO the job, there are 20 that think they can. Premise 2: There are no shortcuts. Premise 3: Pay attention to your instincts. Your "inner brain" talks to you all the time, be sharp enough to listen for the red flags. First question IMHO, I would not replace just the one cylinder, nor would I use overhauled/reconditioned/rebuilt cylinders. It's a false economy, in my opinion. New cylinders, and all four, no question. Keep in mind, a new top end could, theoretically, jerk the bottom out. Second question Field overhaul or factory? The techs at Lycoming are not Supermen, they're just people with a LOT of very specific experience (and a warranty). As for the question of getting YOUR crank or YOUR cam back in your rebuild/overhaul, Do you really care? It's a part, that's all. If it specs out, what's the issue? I'm aware of the question over the quality of the steel, but has that ever been validated or is it another tale spun up at the hangar? As for the "field" overhaul, if I positively KNEW the tech was good, I wouldn't give it a second thought. For me, I'd have to be physically there before I could go there. Just some thoughts, Old Knot Head

Cabana boy, I can second PiperPainter, budget $100, and you won't be dissapointed. The hardest thing for me has been stumbling thru the Eapis website. It can be "fussy", not impossible, but ... My favorite jumping off point is KFPR, my favorite spots are Eluthera and Long Island. I flew out here commercially for several years back in the nineties, and learned it's ALMOST always VFR, and if it's not, in 20 minutes it will be (assuming you're not silly enough to launch into a hurricane or impending hurricane) Sooooo, for routes, I prefer going VFR and staying within gliding distance of the islands. The first 60 or so miles are really the only time you're over open water. IFR out here is kinda cumbersome and NOT what we get in the states. For me, VFR works best. Hope this helps, Oldnotdead

Good Day to All, i just wanted to drop a note. I brought the Mooney down to Long Island! No, not the one in NY, the one down South. Good flight, except for a persistent 20kt headwind, regardless of altitude. Excellent people down here, I can say it's really nice to be here. The North end of the island came thru the hurricane relatively unscathed, the Southern end, not so much. The airports at Deadman's Cay and Stella Maris are operating, get a friend and come ooooon doooooown!!! And yeah, gas is expensive, so don't even ask.... Oldn0tded Its an attitude, not a screen name!!

"I have a 1975 F and at the last overhaul, part number 600155-503 were used on all 4 and described as Lord mounts." Here is a thread on it: Marauder, The link didn't make the electronic voyage.... The parts manual that I have doesn't list the 600155-503 part number, but I think, after some research, that is the # Mooney puts on the Lord mount # J-9613-12....I think. Also, the part numbers I have in my manual might be for each HALF, and the 9613-12 number is for the assembly, I think. I'm spending some time on trying to make sense of a copy of a copy of a copy of a manual that appears to have been put together in the middle 70's. I'm sure you know what I mean..... Old not dead

I have noticed this "ring"....didn't know the significance... It seems the same mount, J-9613-12, mounted with the "harder" side in compression is the way to go.

I'm looking for some group input. The background: 1975 M20F, IO-360-A1A, 2810 TT, 900 TSMOH. Engine is sagging, starter does not touch, but the alignment is not correct. Engine mounts are roughly 30 years old. The current part is #J-9613-12 (all four), as listed in the engine logs. Here's the question: Is there anybody out there that has looked at the parts manual (concerning engine mounts) and picked up on the idea of there being TWO different mounts specified? As in, since the engine "hangs" from the mount, the upper mounts are under a diffent stress load than the bottom mounts. A different mount is specified for the different locations. Part II: Is this a big enough question to lose sleep over? Apparently, it wasn't for the previous owner, and I haven't seen anything on this prior (and YES, I did search). So, what does the group say??? Oldnotdead

What a coincidence, I just finished my "owner assisted" annual this past Tuesday, started on Friday. I spent Friday opening it up, Saturday was spent on routine cleaning/lubing/prepping prior to the IA part, no work on Sunday (domestic obligations), Monday was little things like new defroster ducting, cleaning seat rollers, etc. Tuesday was THE day with the IA. So, the answer is: four working days for me. Lots of work though, somebody at the old Mooney had a relative in the fastener business!

The GPS has sold, however the cable is still available. I have the power/data cable to connect the Aera 5xx series portable GPS's to a GDL 39, if anyone is interested. $45+ shipping for the cable. Thanks in advance, Oldnotdead

Wow, if I get started, I'm gonna sound like I work in Mooney Sales. BUUUUT I got my F a little over two years ago, and have not regretted the decision for a second. I feel I did get lucky in that, so far, the plane has done very well with few surprises. It had flown very little in the 10+ years prior to me getting it. I have flown about 200 hours so far and it produces book numbers consistently, and uses a quart of oil every 8 hours or so. I wanted an F model from the beginning. For me it was pretty basic: 1. Six pack instrument layout was a requirement 2. The extra room is nice, REALLY nice 3. Big gas tanks are nice 4. Higher gross t/o weight is nice 5. Couldn't do a J model That meant an F. It's the 201 prototype. As to buying a used airplane, good luck. Take your "common sense" knob and turn it to 9.5, at least. My thoughts were (are), "you're buying the airframe" everything else can be fixed/replaced/repaired. AND keep a reserve account ready for the $hit that can't be predicted. Suggestions: If you're not mechanically inclined, find an A/P you can believe in A prebuy is an opinion, it's better to have one than not I agree with the poster that said buy as much airplane as you can, let the other guy put the 430 in. (Easy to say, hard to do) After two years of ownership, the only thing I'm sorry about is that I didn't get one 20 years ago! Old Knot Head

DaveL, Do you have an update on how things are going on your plane? Just curious to see how you're doing...