600115-005 intake duct

[MikeOH]

Here are the photos of my old duct:

 

[lithium366]

That’s not too bad at all to my eye. 

[varlajo]

2 hours ago, MikeOH said:

Here are the photos of my old duct:

Mine looked even better until I undid the six retaining bolts to remove the lower cowl last week, whereupon the middle section of the duct disintegrated into a pile of black rubber flakes and a bunch of gray dust.. 

Edited April 20, 2025 by varlajo

[Sinclair51]

On 4/19/2025 at 9:07 AM, MikeOH said:

How bad of shape is your current one?  I replaced mine 2 years ago at annual since TopGun had one in stock and I knew they were hard to get.

You are welcome to my old one but it is not perfect (otherwise I wouldn't have replaced it!)

If you are interested I can take some pictures of my old one

thanks Mike that would be great that way I won’t miss summer flying!

I am new here so not sure how this chat group works but I learn fast

22 hours ago, Ragsf15e said:

This along with some minor rtv repairs could be a good solution.  Most mechanics are ok with some minor repairs as turbo described above.  Just don’t get into the duct tape and baling wire as it is a critical part.

[MikeOH]

38 minutes ago, Sinclair51 said:

 

PM me your address and I'll mail it to you. (You can PM by clicking on the 'double ballon' icon in the upper right of the page)

[Fly Boomer]

@Sinclair51

Welcome!  At first, I couldn't figure why you had quoted MikeOH.  Turns out you had written your response in-line with the quoted text from his post, but it was far enough down that it is hidden by default.  Better to select a few words or a sentence from the post you want to respond to, and then click on the "Qute Selection" button that pops up.  That will open up a response box that you can type into.  This clearly identifies the person and the idea you are responding to, and it sends a notification to the poster you quoted that there has been a response -- otherwise the poster you are responding to gets no notification.

[Sinclair51]

16 minutes ago, Fly Boomer said:

@Sinclair51

Welcome!  At first, I couldn't figure why you had quoted MikeOH.  Turns out you had written your response in-line with the quoted text from his post, but it was far enough down that it is hidden by default.  Better to select a few words or a sentence from the post you want to respond to, and then click on the "Qute Selection" button that pops up.  That will open up a response box that you can type into.  This clearly identifies the person and the idea you are responding to, and it sends a notification to the poster you quoted that there has been a response -- otherwise the poster you are responding to gets no notification.

Perfect thanks my learning curve is vertical right w 

[M Terry]

Fix that one with some tank sealant and fiberglass cloth

[N51740]

Hi all, lurking since a while.....Ok. All those ducts start disintegrating from the same points. I think that the damage comes from shaking of the engine during starting or shutdown. Does anyone know how much axial (in the direction of flight) movement there is during flight operation? I'm just playing with another solution....

[soggyplanks]

Anyone had any luck finding these boots lately? I'll be calling/emailing everyone listed. Looking for one myself after a recent Mooney purchase.

[DCarlton]

23 minutes ago, soggyplanks said:

Anyone had any luck finding these boots lately? I'll be calling/emailing everyone listed. Looking for one myself after a recent Mooney purchase.

My recommendation would be to call LASAR first and get one on order.  The sooner you do, the sooner you’ll get one.  

[TaildraggerPilot]

On 4/19/2025 at 8:16 PM, MikeOH said:

Here are the photos of my old duct:

 

That’s similar in condition to mine that got pulled last annual. 

[802flyer]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1w932vqye0o

Crash due to 3D Printed intake duct failure in a Cozy Mk IV. Hard to know what level of consideration was given for the design and material choice in this case, but just a reminder to be thorough when going the OPP route.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cliffy]

This is why the hardest part of complying with the OPP rules is making the part to conform to the original type design. That means getting the original drawings from the manufacturer and making the part or reverse engineer the part with the help of a DER for the "approved design". 

Just because it "looks" like the part doesn't make it the same as the original  part. 

Savvy Aviation has a very good video on the subject.

[201Steve]

5 hours ago, cliffy said:

That means getting the original drawings from the manufacturer

 

5 hours ago, cliffy said:

Just because it "looks" like the part doesn't make it the same as the original  part. 

And the elephant in the FAA’s room is the thousands of certificated airplanes who’ve been orphaned for decades and there exists no hope of obtaining drawings or support of any kind- yet I keep seeing them show up to Oshkosh every year. They must be maintained on pixy dust or….”everyone” just stops caring and they do what they have to do to stay flying. Mooney exists in a never ending purgatory of there “sort of” being factory data and “sort of” having parts availability. Where this crossover occurs I have no idea. I just know there are type clubs of the aforementioned orphans who build and sell to each other while the FAA gawks at their beauty on the vintage flightline. 

[cliffy]

Univair has an FAA PMA authority to make parts that comply with the TC of many legacy airframes. Many of which the original manufacturer is no longer around. They have the approved data to make the parts. 

IF a company is no longer in business one can petition the FAA to release the official drawings  so parts can be made but in the case of Mooney- who actually exists as a live entity- one has to obtain the drawings from them. If they don't want to release the drawings then some other approved way of making the part is required- DER? Reverse engineer? 

The issue always comes down to liability. Mostly on the part of the FAA as THEY are the ones that accepted the airworthiness responsibility when they "approved" and signed off on the TC  drawings package as being safe to manufacture. They approved of the materials, process and design  all the way through flight testing and said if made to these specifications (TC package) we agree that the airplane is safe to fly. Any parts replaced or added to that package have to match that package (drawing for drawing) for their approval to continue or be altered in an acceptable manner. 

Whether made by an FAA PMA or by OPP the part still has to comply with some form of approval back to the original design or approved alteration. 

We have parts for our Mooneys that will eventually ground many airplanes due to lack of availability. One of which are the flexible air intake ducts. With a fleet of around 7000 airframes the market is very small so the cost will be very high IF anyone can make them- Mooney or ?

[201Steve]

2 hours ago, cliffy said:

Univair has an FAA PMA authority to make parts that comply with the TC of many legacy airframes. Many of which the original manufacturer is no longer around. They have the approved data to make the parts. 

That is a really big blanket to cover. 
 

 

 

[DCarlton]

7 hours ago, 201Steve said:

Mooney exists in a never ending purgatory of there “sort of” being factory data and “sort of” having parts availability. 

This is certainly one of the things that's kept me from moving up the Mooney ladder to something newer or with higher performance.  Everyone has their own standard as to how much money is comfortably disposable.  If my ~ $100K F ends up grounded, and becomes a ~$30K parts airplane, I won't be disturbed by the loss.  I've had it and enjoyed it enough years.  If I were to buy a $300K+ Mooney now, I would want to get more of my money out of it down the road.  I might be able to convince myself to risk/dispose of $200K but I'm not sure if I could stomach $300K.  Every now and then I'll stop to consider a Missile or Rocket for this reason.  Less buy in, plenty of fun for a while, but just assume it'll be written off due to parts availability and don't worry about it.  Does anyone have any idea what the various models are selling for if they become parts airplanes to a salvage yard?  How much money can you get out of a grounded or damaged airplane?  Is anyone really willing to rack and stack which models have the most unobtanium parts?  

[201Steve]

@DCarlton right there with you in that sentiment. My goal is to have one more piston bird and eventually step up to a turbine. As I consider a bravo ovation or acclaim, I think about the poor prospect of ongoing mx both in parts AND labor. Both are not well represented. Hard consideration for spending $300+ 

it’s one of the strong arguments for perhaps investing in an airframe that builds a lot, services a lot, and has a robust overall network. Irrespective of their slower speeds. =(

[MikeOH]

I've had the same conversation with myself.  In the end, while I could afford a much nicer/newer Mooney (or some other plane) my 'mission' really wouldn't benefit from a somewhat higher speed or fancy glass.  When it comes down to it I just find pleasure and joy in flying.  Owning my own plane is icing on the cake and I consider myself fortunate to able to do so.  Consequently, my F is perfect

[DCarlton]

5 minutes ago, 201Steve said:

@DCarlton right there with you in that sentiment. My goal is to have one more piston bird and eventually step up to a turbine. As I consider a bravo ovation or acclaim, I think about the poor prospect of ongoing mx both in parts AND labor. Both are not well represented. Hard consideration for spending $300+ 

it’s one of the strong arguments for perhaps investing in an airframe that builds a lot, services a lot, and has a robust overall network. Irrespective of their slower speeds. =(

Yep.  I saw a really nice new Cessna 206 at my airport a while back.  If you're gonna "invest" in new, that seemed like a wise choice.  It'll be working hard for someone years from now.  

[201Steve]

“Invest”