tgardnerh Posted March 30, 2019 Report Posted March 30, 2019 2 hours ago, Kevin Harberg said: The 51% Rule is difficult to quantify so it is imperative to have the inspectors involved early in the planning stages. Is this how your Mite became experimental though? I was just wondering if it's even possible in theory, since I'd never heard of anybody doing it. Quote
Kevin Harberg Posted March 30, 2019 Report Posted March 30, 2019 On 1/13/2019 at 7:09 PM, MiteN4055 said: I have a 15 gallon tank so I get about 4.0 to 4.5 hrs... Your 145 cu. in. Lycoming 0-145 powered Mite is the envy of owners of the 170 cu. in. Continental A65 powered Mites (at least as far as fuel consumption is concerned). With 15 gallons onboard, at the power and mixture settings I use at high cruise (75%), I would only get 3 to 3.5hrs in my Continental powered Mite. Auxiliary fuel systems in Mites seemed more common once Lycoming 0-145's were no longer available. Quote
Kevin Harberg Posted March 30, 2019 Report Posted March 30, 2019 13 hours ago, tgardnerh said: Is this how your Mite became experimental though? I was just wondering if it's even possible in theory, since I'd never heard of anybody doing it. C-GXTR was inspected from day one as a homebuilt project, and I assume that the blueprints purchased for the Mooney Mite homebuilt, in addition to the vast number of modifications (some of which emulate the changes seen on the Mooney M20A), contributed towards the inspector's assessment as qualifying for amateur built status. I remember hearing from the AME that built this aircraft, that the most difficult part of the build was satisfying the 51% rule. I therefore doubt that your previous ponderance of a person performing an extensive rebuild of a certified aircraft would comply with the intent of the amateur built category. If, however, you are comfortable performing "substantial modifications" to a design type, and are able to satisfy an inspector's assessment as to meeting the intent of the "Category", you may own and fly an aircraft based on a certified design that is registered in the homebuilt category. As implied, once registered in this category, you have the "freedom" to perform future modifications entitled by category. 2 Quote
Fred Bennett Posted August 9, 2019 Report Posted August 9, 2019 I have owned 3 Mites, 327M 1972 C65 w/Beech Roby prop. 363A L65 1985 4051 C75-12. I bought this one 3 times. I'm 89 And if it were not so expensive to hanger I'd buy another. My medical expired this year and so I'm done. 2 Quote
carusoam Posted August 9, 2019 Author Report Posted August 9, 2019 Hey, Fred! Welcome aboard. Don’t throw in the towel too fast... Have you considered going the route called ‘Basic Med’ for your medical..? Many of us have gone this route... expired class III is OK. SIs are good too... (Special Issuances) Thanks for posting the great Mite pics. We have been trying to get more Mite Pilots to join us here. Since the Mite site ran out of financial support a short while ago... Our oldest MSer made it into his mid 80s before hanging up his keys... his awesome plane is still around here... The nice thing about the Mite... you can fit it into a corner of a large shared hangar... We have a few people that discuss the financial challenges of keeping a plane after retirement... the planes are typically forever-planes... bought and cared for, for decades... A Mite, and forever-plane.... that could make a nice set-up! Where are your located? Best regards, -a- Quote
Fred Bennett Posted August 9, 2019 Report Posted August 9, 2019 I have lived temporarily in Sunnyvale Texas for 46 years, and have always had an airplane hangered at KHQZ (Hudson) Mesquite. Passed my physical every time and decided not to renew it since I don't have an airplane and would not take anyone up if they didn't know how to fly. I have had a great life with airplanes Starting with a 1939 Aeronca Defender in 1950, and 27 airplanes later the Mite 4051, (3 times). Since a lady friend of mine has a 120 and a 182, I can still fly if I get the urge. I used to keep my Mite in the hanger with her, but sold it several years ago and it was demolished in the hurricane in Aransas Pass a couple of years ago , no chance to buy it back, soooo, I quit Glad to be on the Mooney site. 1 Quote
carusoam Posted August 11, 2019 Author Report Posted August 11, 2019 Fred, I came across this thread this morning, from the early days of MS... It has some interesting Mooney Mite pics and video from 2008. Only 11 years ago... Best regards, -a- Quote
carusoam Posted August 24, 2019 Author Report Posted August 24, 2019 The West Coast Mooney Club @MrRodgers posted this pic today... I just put a copy here for the Mite folks... Best regards, -a- 1 Quote
Mooneymite Posted August 24, 2019 Report Posted August 24, 2019 (edited) I owned and loved a Mite. If you ever get a chance to fly one, don't pass it up! One word of advice for potential Mite owners...pay attention to the max gross weight. Edited August 24, 2019 by Mooneymite 2 Quote
Guest Posted August 29, 2019 Report Posted August 29, 2019 On 8/24/2019 at 1:56 PM, Mooneymite said: I owned and loved a Mite. If you ever get a chance to fly one, don't pass it up! One word of advice for potential Mite owners...pay attention to the max gross weight. Glad to see you back! Clarence Quote
Guest Posted August 29, 2019 Report Posted August 29, 2019 On 3/30/2019 at 1:23 PM, Kevin Harberg said: C-GXTR was inspected from day one as a homebuilt project, and I assume that the blueprints purchased for the Mooney Mite homebuilt, in addition to the vast number of modifications (some of which emulate the changes seen on the Mooney M20A), contributed towards the inspector's assessment as qualifying for amateur built status. I remember hearing from the AME that built this aircraft, that the most difficult part of the build was satisfying the 51% rule. I therefore doubt that your previous ponderance of a person performing an extensive rebuild of a certified aircraft would comply with the intent of the amateur built category. If, however, you are comfortable performing "substantial modifications" to a design type, and are able to satisfy an inspector's assessment as to meeting the intent of the "Category", you may own and fly an aircraft based on a certified design that is registered in the homebuilt category. As implied, once registered in this category, you have the "freedom" to perform future modifications entitled by category. My understanding is that Transport Canada has clamped down on the transfer of airframes to the amateur built category. Owner Maintenance category offers another route. Clarence Quote
EMC Posted October 11, 2019 Report Posted October 11, 2019 (edited) Does anyone have the info from the mooneymite.com site or do you know if Dave R is still selling it and how to get in touch w him? Lots of good info there that I'd like to keep accessing.... Also, what are Mite owners doing about ADS-B? Thanks! Elizabeth Collins N393A (M18L) Edited October 11, 2019 by EMC 1 Quote
carusoam Posted October 11, 2019 Author Report Posted October 11, 2019 Welcome aboard Elizabeth. Great Mite pic! Many Mooney owners are going the way of UAvionix solutions for their ADSB requirements... Look for the skybeacon and tailbeacon products... https://mooneyspace.com/search/?&q=Uavionix&search_and_or=or&sortby=relevancy many people got a copy of the mite site via CD... The site had a very well controlled shut down... with plenty of advanced warning... I don’t know much more than that... Trying to get more Mite pilots to visit here has been challenging... a few people check in every now and then... and a couple of Mite owners have other Mooneys... Last I heard from Dave Rutherford... he was using this email address... mooneymite@gmail.com Try the email address to see if he kept it alive... Best regards, -a- Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.