Rare Mooney Model

[Flyler]

Whoa, the 71 I'm planning on checking out does have the stinger tail! I had to zoom in on the photo to notice it.  Super cool, I'm excited now.  Hopefully it doesn't have a dent....

[Shadrach]

38 minutes ago, Schllc said:

I’m pretty sure they made some e’s and some f’s. 
I wish I had bought the one on trade a plane that is pictured above. 
if another F comes on the market or if anyone wants to sell one I am Interested. 

There is a really cool stinger tailed F model out there somewhere that has a full 201 cowl and windshield, plus a rayjay turbo normalizer. Used to be based at Truckee IIRC. In some ways it’s literally a Mooney unicorn.

Edit- The plane I mention is actually N6717V which was posted earlier. It was based in South Lake Tahoe at KTVL or KMEV.

[Schllc]

1 hour ago, Shadrach said:

There is a really cool stinger tailed F model out there somewhere that has a full 201 cowl and windshield, plus a rayjay turbo normalizer. Used to be based at Truckee IIRC. In some ways it’s literally a Mooney unicorn.

Edit- The plane I mention is actually N6717V which was posted earlier. It was based in South Lake Tahoe at KTVL or KMEV.

Yes, I wanted to pick that up up something fierce, but the timing wasn’t in the cards. 

[N201MKTurbo]

On 10/27/2022 at 3:53 AM, BasicPlaneGuy said:

This one is labeled an Aerostar M20F. Off the top of my head, I think it is 22-0005.

Sorry to revive a long dead thread, but it's neat to see some other Mooney's (Aerostars technically) are still flying with that unique tail.

This one has a J cowl and a turbo.

[Pinecone]

Before I bought my plane, the only time I had flown a "Mooney" it was an Aerostar 220.  

I was instructing and the owner took me for a flight and let me fly it some.

[Shadrach]

1 hour ago, N201MKTurbo said:

This one has a J cowl and a turbo.

I like everything about this plane including the paint scheme and colors. If it had manual gear it would be nearly perfect.

[Flyler]

I visited a gentleman and his 1971 Aerostar, "M20E" for sale.  I am not sure if he would want me posting pictures so, out of respect, I've removed the tail number.  The tail was indeed very pointy looking.  I am not sure if I like how it looks better than the standard setup or not.  It is sort of like a fashion model, has lots of sharp angles, from some perspectives looks amazing, from others... makes you think "hmm."  Images below!

[Schllc]

It’s already posted for sale online so I can’t see why there would be an issue putting pics. Did you get any of the panel or interior. 
the ones on the ad seem so limited that makes it seem like it must be a wreck inside

 

edit…

 

injust noticed that really unusual tail tie down/skid. 
that is a really nice setup, this is something they should have kept!

[Flyler]

17 hours ago, Schllc said:

It’s already posted for sale online so I can’t see why there would be an issue putting pics. Did you get any of the panel or interior. 
the ones on the ad seem so limited that makes it seem like it must be a wreck inside

 

edit…

 

injust noticed that really unusual tail tie down/skid. 
that is a really nice setup, this is something they should have kept!

The deal with poor pictures is just that the owner is up there in years, and not tech savy.  I went to see if this was some sort of miracle barn find, but also just to get my butt in the back seat of a short body model.  It was a little over an hour drive, and worth the time as I would absolutely consider a C or E model now.  It is the second owner, it has always been kept indoors.  Its almost all original, including most of the paint.  Lots of the paint is peeling up off the primer.  It has a few items such as fuel bladders and at some point the seats were refreshed.  Still, it looks like something that has survived since 1971.  It needs to be restored.  I don't think the asking price is realistic, but am not an expert.

He had tank bladders installed and they painted the root wing sections at that time.  The color is a bit off there.

He said that the only damage history was the left aileron and gear door had been replaced.  The plane was parked outside and someone parked their car nearby, left it in neutral, and got out.  Car rolled into the plane and dented the aileron.  When the insurance adjuster came out he noticed a little dent in the gear door so they replaced that too.

I did not speak to any A&P, only the owner.  Perhaps if he emails me I can digitize the logbook scans he gave me and send to him so they are easier for others to obtain.

The plane is more dirty than the pictures suggest, but I think a lot of it is just elbow-grease... then you'd get to about how the pictures look.

 

Interior isn't "busted" but its absolutely been around for a long time...

[Hank]

1 hour ago, Schllc said:

injust noticed that really unusual tail tie down/skid. 
that is a really nice setup, this is something they should have kept!

That's how my 1970 C was done, too. No, I don't have the buttonhook tail.

Anyone know why it was changed? How about a photo of the new, not-so-good one? I've never paid attention before.

I just noticed that the stinger on top of the tail is angled up at the front, while I'm used to the tail top being rather flat.

[Schllc]

14 hours ago, Flyler said:

 

 

Interior isn't "busted" but its absolutely been around for a long time...

Am I the only one who can’t see the pics?

[Flyler]

4 minutes ago, Schllc said:

Am I the only one who can’t see the pics?

I've re-uploaded them.  I'm not sure what the problem was, they are displaying for me now though.  P.S., your signature picture cracks me up! 

[N201MKTurbo]

I can’t see them either.

[Pinecone]

I saw them, then I couldn't see them, now I see them.  Both sets (original and reloaded).

[Shadrach]

14 hours ago, Schllc said:

Am I the only one who can’t see the pics?

I see both sets.

 

that tail skid is vintage standard issue. Identical to my 67.

[Shadrach]

On 4/8/2024 at 6:07 PM, Hank said:

That's how my 1970 C was done, too. No, I don't have the buttonhook tail.

Anyone know why it was changed? How about a photo of the new, not-so-good one? I've never paid attention before.

I just noticed that the stinger on top of the tail is angled up at the front, while I'm used to the tail top being rather flat.

No skid on the new airframes.

 

[Flyler]

Sorry guys, I'm not sure what was going on with the images.  I do recall looking at the tail skid/tiedown as it sort of stuck out to me.  It looked like a simple flat bar that would have a small amount of "spring" to it.  I can't imagine it weighed much at all and would sure as heck take more of a beating than the skin!

[Pinecone]

I see a lot of trainers with a similar skid.  It is simple piece of flat stock with a hole for the tie down ring to screw through and hold it and a bend to give a semi flexible skid.

And I have seen airplanes without it and bent backwards tie down ring with the bottom ground flat.

 

[Shadrach]

25 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

I see a lot of trainers with a similar skid.  It is simple piece of flat stock with a hole for the tie down ring to screw through and hold it and a bend to give a semi flexible skid.

And I have seen airplanes without it and bent backwards tie down ring with the bottom ground flat.

 

In a mid body, a slow steep descent into ground effect coupled with an aggressive flare to arrest the descent can result in tail scraping deck angles. I imagine the long bodies are even more prone to tail strikes.

[Hank]

34 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

I see a lot of trainers with a similar skid.  It is simple piece of flat stock with a hole for the tie down ring to screw through and hold it and a bend to give a semi flexible skid.

And I have seen airplanes without it and bent backwards tie down ring with the bottom ground flat.

 

My tie down, identical to this one, is a long piece, rounded side-to-side to match the fuselage. The eye bolt is at the front; the back is curved down then back up but the free end doesn't touch--call it an inch and a half long and 1/2" or a little more down. No idea why, the whole thing is probably 8-9" long. 

[Schllc]

7 hours ago, Hank said:

My tie down, identical to this one, is a long piece, rounded side-to-side to match the fuselage. The eye bolt is at the front; the back is curved down then back up but the free end doesn't touch--call it an inch and a half long and 1/2" or a little more down. No idea why, the whole thing is probably 8-9" long. 

That is such a simple and logical insurance plan. 
I remember noticing on one of mine, the new style loop had about 3/16” ground off of it. 
I honestly can’t say I didn’t do it, I certainly never felt or heard anything, but it’s so thin and fragile it would not take much to bend or wear through. The skid is just good sense. 
I wonder if it can be legally put on a long body?

[Flyler]

Any thoughts on reasonable price for something like this, assuming there are no major mechanical issue?

[MikeOH]

My 70F has the skid:

 

[hammdo]

Hum, my ‘66 has it too…

-Don

[Schllc]

One may appear on my Mooney in the future!

this should never have been changed. It is such a simple and elegant insurance policy.