Bad Useful Load in M20K

[base698]

Looking at a plane with all the bells and whistles:  TKS, speed brakes, oxygen.  However, the logs say useful load of 750lbs with empty fuel and TKS fluid, which seems like the TKS would be useless with 2 people and gear.  Anyone know what it would cost to remove the oxygen and TKS and how much weight that would get you?  Maybe consider another plane?  

[rbridges]

can't answer your question, but wouldn't a lot of that defeat the purpose of having a turbo mooney?  Maybe a J model would do better for your situation?

[jlunseth]

Is it a K?  Which model, 231 or 252? 

 

Is the TKS FIKI or inadvertent?  If it is not FIKI, I don't know what good it would do you, you are not legally allowed to fly into conditions where icing is likely.  Inadvertent is there just in case, but there would be a lot of conditions you could not take off in.  A 252 could be equipped with FIKI I believe, but a 231 cannot.

[FoxMike]

TKS with 6 gals of juice is about 100lbs.( no juice about 45-50).  Ox bottle may weigh in the 40 to 50 lb range, depends on size and material.  Turboed airplanes are not much use without Ox and portables will probably weigh 30lbs.  You could probably find someone to remove the TKS system for free if they had an airplane they wanted to put it on.  You might look into the cost of increasing the gross to 3200.

[aviatoreb]

Looking at a plane with all the bells and whistles:  TKS, speed brakes, oxygen.  However, the logs say useful load of 750lbs with empty fuel and TKS fluid, which seems like the TKS would be useless with 2 people and gear.  Anyone know what it would cost to remove the oxygen and TKS and how much weight that would get you?  Maybe consider another plane?  

 

Sounds like you want an entirely different plane- that is too much work and too much airplane parts you are investing in to consider that plane - buy one that is close to what you wish.

[chrisk]

This plane would not likely work for me.  With full fuel, you have about 300 lbs left for people, baggage, flight bag, etc.  There is another 231 for sale here with a useful of 829 lbs on it.   Better, but still seems on the low side with full fuel. 

[jlunseth]

I don't know enough about the 262 conversion (231 to 252).  However, I still wonder if it is certified for Flight Into Known Ice.  There are inadvertent ice TKS systems, and FIKI systems.  The 231 can't be FIKI certified because it only has one alternator among other things, and FIKI certification requires two.  If not FIKI, there would be many times you could not take off.

 

The payload would only be 260 lbs., which is not much.  I don't have direct experience with TKS, but have been told that it is required to carry the system full, which is 40 lbs. of your useful load.  In other words, you can't carry it empty of fluid and carry 40 more pounds in the aircraft.

 

I agree that you should have built in O2 in a turbo aircraft.

 

If you want a one person plane, go for it.

[KSMooniac]

I doubt removing a TKS system would be feasible, and you're paying "extra" in a sense to get it in the first place so it seems like a bad idea to me.  TKS is great to have in a turbo plane.

 

Changes that could be made easily (by writing big checks) include upgrading the prop to an MT prop and recover 12-20 pounds plus extra weight removing any Charlie weights from the tail (if installed).  The panel might be "vintage" with old, heavy avionics that could be modernized with much lighter equipment via a full makeover.  All of the old/obsolete wiring should be removed as well.  The interior could also be modernized with lightweight Ultraleather or fabrics.  Also realize you rarely need full fuel, so if there isn't a modern fuel totalizer system installed, then put one in and be comfortable flying with 43 gallons or 55 gallons or whatever the mission might call for on any given flight.

 

If you need significantly more useful load, then consider an Encore version of the K (1997/98, $$$$$) or a 252 version that can be upgraded to an Encore configuration.  The 231 cannot be upgraded.  The Encore configuration will typically yield a useful load of 1000 lbs +/-.  Either of those options will cost quite a bit more than a 231/262 conversion due to the newer airframe and likely higher-spec equipment.

[Parker_Woodruff]

Great ideas, Scott, but unfortunately the plane in question has had almost everything you're discussing done to it, including the MT prop.

[KSMooniac]

Oops!  Then I would question the calculations for the current useful load, or perhaps weigh the plane.  Maybe it is just worse than I can imagine...

[aviatoreb]

Why is that plane so heavy with such a poor load if it has new wiring, new prop etc?  Even with tks, seriously?

[Ftlausa]

Airplanes are all about trade offs.  There are surely other aircraft that would suit your mission better.  Sounds like you need to define the mission better and then work toward what brands and models of planes fits that mission.  The one you are looking at clearly does not seem to fit. 

[kevinw]

Something doesn't seem quite right. I realize we're talking about a K model but I have a 1982 J with inadvertant TKS and my useful load is 885. I was always told FIKI TKS is unavailable in the medium body.

[Jerry 5TJ]

Perhaps you're looking at the situation backwards: 

 

The discussion is about a well-equipped, turbo-charged Mooney, FIKI, and it will carry 750 pounds.  Often the FIKI TKS fluid IS included in the "empty" weight, check that log entry carefully.   So, you can carry two FAA standard people, 50 pounds of bags and fly 180 KTAS at 12 GPH for four hours with IFR reserves.

 

Sounds like a pretty useful personal aircraft to me.

 

 

 

 

 

[fastforward]

The installation information I have shows the TKS system at 36.7 lbs with 55.2 lbs for fluid for a total of 91.9 lbs.

The Precise Flight website says their speed brakes are 10 lbs.

The intercooler shows another 10 lbs.

That's 110 lbs without trying very hard.

If I'm doing my math right, the plane you're looking at has about 290 lbs of extras. That's based off a 1040 lbs shown on the Mooney Model comparison from the LASAR website for a 231. http://www.lasar.com/userfiles/file/Mooney-Model-Comparison.pdf

Hope that helps.

[aviatoreb]

The installation information I have shows the TKS system at 36.7 lbs with 55.2 lbs for fluid for a total of 91.9 lbs.

The Precise Flight website says their speed brakes are 10 lbs.

The intercooler shows another 10 lbs.

That's 110 lbs without trying very hard.

If I'm doing my math right, the plane you're looking at has about 290 lbs of extras. That's based off a 1040 lbs shown on the Mooney Model comparison from the LASAR website for a 231. http://www.lasar.com/userfiles/file/Mooney-Model-Comparison.pdf

Hope that helps.

 

It looks like a beautiful airplane to me.  A fantastic price on a beautifully painted and equipped tks airplane.  Your paint is way better than mine - I have paint envy.

 

I can't figure why anyone would want to remove tks.  For me it was a must have buying feature but fiki or not tks was not important since I do not want to fly in ice - I want to fly out of ice.  I have run into ice in the past when it was not forecast and it scares the bjezuz outa me.  Ice forecasting is not perfect and sometimes it is just there when it is not supposed to be there despite your best preflight planning, if you live in ice prone parts of the country.  The tks has helped me to be more calm as a backup plan in case I do encounter inadvertent ice. 

[AndyFromCB]

The TKS is not included in the weight and balance.  I was able to find the propeller installation date and it was before the weight and balance sheet, which states it was empty of TKS fluid and fuel, but had 7 quarts of oil.  

 

Re: Removing TKS.  I exceed gross weight in all configurations with a single passenger if the TKS is installed in the plane, even with only 50 gallons of fuel.  If I can't use it anyway and it's extra weight, then why not remove it?  Assuming it's enough weight to warrant the trouble.

 

What do you mean you cannot use it? You're buying a turbo aircraft. If flown IFR, icing it not a matter of IF but WHEN. Leave the FIKI vs non-FIKI to the lawyers (you can count icing related enforcement actions for last 50 years on one hand of a blind table saw operator). TKS is extremely useful.

 

And how much do you weight? 750lb - 300lb for 50gallons of fuel still leaves 450lb…The system weights about 50lb or so. After you remove it, you'll have to repaint and patch holes in your leading edge.

[LANCECASPER]

Don't get a plane with TKS and remove the TKS. You are taking what cost $30,000 to upgrade (Non-FIKI) and basically throwing it away. Also the TKS is your leading edge on the wing. The sheetmetal work alone to bring it back to original would be a huge cost. Just find another plane that doesn't have TKS.

[AndyFromCB]

There is no 90lb of TKS fluid. 56lb is what goes into the tank…Also, I fly my Bravo with 70gallons all the time. I can count one one hand the times I took off with full 89gallons...

 

In any case, I agree that 750lb is just not enough useful load. Mine is 945lb with TKS tank full and it suits me fine. 200lb less would not do the trick for me.

 

But I will have to say that removing the TKS panels is a non starter. Once installed, it has to stay on because of holes in the leading edge.

[chrisk]

210 for me + 120 wife + 100 gear + 90 lbs tks fluid + 300 lbs fuel = 810 lbs

 

810 > 750, so it's not legal.  Removing the 90 lbs of fluid keeps it legal.

 

The 100 lbs gear is worst case, would normally be 60 lbs.  

 

Aren't you supposed to keep the tanks full?  How many people consistently leave 50 gallons in the tanks?

 

I typically leave the tanks full, so my numbers are:  200 for me + 140 wife + 120 gear + 450lbs fuel = 910

[AndyFromCB]

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/MOONEY-M20M-BRAVO/1989-MOONEY-M20M-BRAVO/1298689.htm

 

Buy this bird instead if you don't want TKS. IIRC it has slightly over 1000lb useful and almost new engine...

[Hank]

Is Parker's former Encore still for sale? 252BH, wasn't it? Should have lots of useful load unless the current owner added a lot of stuff. Seems that Parker did a good job of starting the upgrade process, too.

[Piloto]

What good is flying a TKS equipped plane with no de-icing fluid? And if equipped for non-FIKI you are supposed to keep fluid in it since you are not supposed know when icing is coming! Is the same as flying with an empty oxygen bottle. Turbos have more options than NA planes to avoid icing because of the climbing capability. As far as for oxygen its much cheaper to have a portable tank filled at a Nitrox Scuba shop for $17 than at an FBO $100+. And you only carry the weight when you need it. The weight of the TKS and mounted oxygen tank will always be dead weight that you can use instead for fuel or payload. I noticed on Flightaware that is rare to find a turbo Mooney (M20T) flying at oxygen level altitudes, specially west bound.

José

[aviatoreb]

What good is flying a TKS equipped plane with no de-icing fluid? And if equipped for non-FIKI you are supposed to keep fluid in it since you are not supposed know when icing is coming! Is the same as flying with an empty oxygen bottle. Turbos have more options than NA planes to avoid icing because of the climbing capability. As far as for oxygen its much cheaper to have a portable tank filled at a Nitrox Scuba shop for $17 than at an FBO $100+. And you only carry the weight when you need it. The weight of the TKS and mounted oxygen tank will always be dead weight that you can use instead for fuel or payload. I noticed on Flightaware that is rare to find a turbo Mooney (M20T) flying at oxygen level altitudes, specially west bound.

José

 

I agree I prefer that my O2 is NOT built in.  Usually if I need the O2 then I am one or two on board and it is not a problem to bring the O2 - in fact I usually have it on the back of the copilot seat, unless I take it out to allow more people.  I seem to never want to go O2 if I want to carry more than two people since then they are more likely that I am carrying not pilot types who are offended by sucking o2 anway.

 

I would agree that "most of my flights" are not at the o2 levels, but I bet 25% of my flights are, and the flexibility to do so is crucial.  And a certain fraction of my flying is either short distance where going high is not worth the trouble, or sight seeing, or with no pilot types on board.  I very much demand the option for when I want it and need it.

[Awful_Charlie]

I fly with TKS, but rarely with it full to the brim - 40 lbs of fluid will last over an hour, and the normal idea is to get through a layer rather than sit in it. 30lbs of saving isn't a lot, but there's little point in carrying 30lbs of junk in the baggage compartment either. If I'm away for a VFR weekend somewhere and the tank is down to the last couple of gallons I don't mind leaving it there, but I wouldn't try to get some out for the sake of saving a few pounds - easier to leave a few gallons of gas out and take an fill en-route. I don't know where all this info on 'must have it full' is coming from, there's nothing in the POH, the AFMS or the manual about that, and if would be a bit daft if there was, or a leak in the TKS tank would ground the aircraft!

 

As for removing a TKS system, I think you're on to a loser. You could get the pumps and the tank out and maybe sell them, but the panels are bonded to the leading edge, and removal destroys them, and then you may find something you don't like behind the bonding! If you went through the panel removing process, I suspect you'd want a re-spray afterwards. Replacing the panels after you decide you do want them would be a 20k+ job.

 

O2 is great, and often undervalued. For many years I flogged a 400nm each way trip every month in an Arrow, normally at 8000'/9000' The day after the travel I'd be tired and need an early night. Now I do the same trip at FL180 or FL190 (or lower if there's a bitch of a headwind) with O2, and I don't get the tiredness after the flight. I'm not a fit person like Erik, and YMMV, but O2 adds a load of flexibility.