What we have are "rust buckets" !

[cliffy]

5 hours ago, Dialed In said:

OK Cliffy, I may be in this category but not for the direct reason your stating. My plane has 7500 hours on the airframe, NDH, and has always been hangered.  When I took over ownership it was in immaculate, however dated, shape.  I have not put a dent in it since I bought it in 2017.  I have taken it to a different shop every year but one for annual since I purchased it.  Why? Was it the $3500 annual inspection fees? No.  It was because every year I had to go through what some careless A&P had done and redo it myself with oversight.  I have been fed up with A&P's in my area and it is very, very frustrating to pay someone $100 an hour to dick up my plane and have to do the work over again.  There are too many things to list and I don't want to write a book but it has been items like the heim joint that attaches the governor cable to my brand new governor they installed was so loose I could move the arm over a 1/4, that's why my brand new PCU 5000 was wondering.  I had new screws installed in my interior, they were too long and poked through the skin it made me absolutely sick.  An oil leak developed at the back of the engine could it be the 2400 hours on the engine?  Nope, the new vacuum pump that was installed three years ago was so carelessly installed they left some of the old gasket on the flange which made the new gasket leak, stupid and careless. There are many many more examples that I have and these are respected shops.  Do you think I want to pay these guys $100 an hour to fix a leaky vacuum line on a brittain autopilot?  No I'll do it myself when I get time.  I do want to thank the people like M20Doc and several other that provide good advise on here it's helped me out many times.  

I will agree with you on the shody A&P work IN FACT I had penned an entire paragraph  just on that subject but deleted it to stay on topic for the posting. 

Many of the maintainers here have the same story of following behind some other shop only to have to repeat their work. Some of us have seen a lot of crappy work in our time. A mag falling off (emergency landing) due to loose nuts and worn lock washers Landing gear not going up all the way (even just after an annual) 

with the wrong actuator installed. it goes on and on.

BUT we have also seen "the attitude" that I described. Not everyone nor did I mean to implicate everyone in my diatribe but many of us have seen a lot of the CBs club or again "more airplane than the owner can afford" either by finances or skill level. And it all ends in accidents in the end. 

[A64Pilot]

It’s said that over time every pilot will eventually own the airplane they can’t afford, for some it’s a twin, others a turbine. Most sell it and go back to something smaller.

But with inflation like it is and the Stock Market dropping like it has the I can’t afford an airplane club is getting bigger, so it’s not getting better short term

[BravoWhiskey]

I don’t know that I have flown a plane yet without something being INOP… 

Cliffy, in reading you OP, is your concern that you have aircraft come through your shop (I assume it’s your shop or a shop you work at based on your wording) that aren’t airworthy from neglect.  Or you are concerned that some items make it past a basic preflight.  Or that  a squak list just gets ignored or grows over time?

I’m also curious if there are certain aircraft you are referring to or if this is Mooney specific…

[hammdo]

I have 2 inop items - single probe CHT (replaced by G2) and an Apollo RNAV localizer indicator (replaced by 2G5s). I’ll remove RNAV indicator (which is placard) when I get the Auto Pilot.

Sometimes, it’s not due to lack of maintenance ;o) 
 

I have maintenance done throughout the year when anything is not ‘normal’ - no sense letting thinks get worse.

Flying IFR or Cross Country flights long distance I’d rather know I’ve done what is needed vs ‘required’.

-Don

[hubcap]

When I discussed a fractional ownership with the guy that works on my 231, he recommended that I avoid it because "nobody else wants to take care of their airplane the way you take care of Myrtle."

Myrtle is 40 years old but she is in tip top condition with zero squawks or INOP stickers. 

She is getting a complete avionics upgrade beginning in November. 

Some folks may not take care of their plane, but I do.

 

[Yetti]

I kind of agree with you in some spots.   But then again my brother has a 1972 Corvette that he just dropped an LS3 in.    Here is my predicament.   I have looked at upgrading to less years, but it would be a step backwards in terms of panel.   So I would have to upgrade and then install another Skyview to be at the same place.   I have gone through the plane enough to know that it's not so much of a rust bucket that you claim. 

[DXB]

On 9/30/2022 at 1:21 PM, cliffy said:

When ever someone comes on this site and is new and looking for a Mooney we all seem to want them to find the "Holy Grail"

We tell them to find a low time, good as new airplane. In reality a needle in a hay stack by the way many pilots treat their airplanes

Yes spoiler alert! I'm going to make some comments not too well received by many.

Let's look at how we operate our Mooneys. If you fly 75 hrs per year (or the airframe has 4,000 hrs since 1970) (and not many do) the airframe is actually being used 

less than 1%  (0.008) of its time on the ramp. It has spent 99% of its time just sitting there rotting away. 

For those who tie down outside it spends realistically its entire life sitting out in the sun's heat in the summer and the snow rain and cold in the winter.

How long would your NEW car last with that treatment? Would you even put your new car through that gauntlet?

And here we have a half century old airplane under those conditions that we place our lives in its hands every time we take to the sky!

YET- Many of us still cling to the CB Club and look for ways to get the quick and cheap annual, do minimal maintenance and have numerous items INOP 

in the airplane.

What we have in many cases are in reality  RUST BUCKETS that we go aloft in. And its us doing it to ourselves. 

Just walk around and look at your  own airport.

How many of you would go out to a 1970 Ford that has been sitting outside for 30 years and just jump in it and drive across the state let alone the country?

Yet we do that all the time in airplanes that sit rotting away year after year.  And many of us do nothing about it. 

What do you think it does to all the avionics in the panel? And yet many jump in and fly IFR with them. With no thought of testing or maintenance until

something breaks in flight and then its likely to get deferred. 

Sure you say "we have annual inspections"! HA!   How many times do we see airplanes that go 2 and 3 years between annuals? (with no flying)

Here's a question I have asked a couple of times on here-

HOW MANY INOPERATIVE ITEMS DO YOU HAVE ON YOUR AIRPLANE RIGHT NOW?  If you can't say "NONE" then YOU are the problem. 

If you can't afford to fix what breaks on your airplane then you have more airplane than you can afford and YOU are the problem.

Most accidents IMO are caused by incompetence or "too much airplane for the level of the pilot"(financial or skills). I've studied it for over 60 years. 

I've watched and read accident reports and most come out the same way. Too much airplane for the competency level of the pilot. 

When I see a plane come through the shop with differed maintenance I know the owner can't afford the plane he owns and his skill level for that airplane

is probably lacking also.

Look yourself in the mirror and ask if YOU are part of the problem!  I've seen too many smoking holes and many are tired together with the same theme.

If you can't afford to fix your airplane when it breaks then you can't afford the airplane.

If you can't afford to fix your airplane when it breaks your own skill level is in question. 

One leads to the other.  Too much airplane for the pilot to handle.

 

A surly, divisive diatribe? Yes. Some elements of truth in it? Absolutely .   But it's not a Mooney-specific issue. To me, the new and/or under-resourced private pilot buying an old Bravo doesn't seem much more precarious than the same pilot picking up a late model SR22T before making a smoking crater, an all too common story.  In my own defense, 8 years ago, I bought a carefully vetted C as a newly minted amateur pilot not because I couldn't afford a higher sticker price but rather because I didn't ever want to feel in over my head both in terms of maintenance needs and airplane performance. In retrospect, that was a good decision, though I now realize I could have also handled an E or J just fine.  I've had enough time and resources to learn about maintenance and keep up with it pretty well, along with thoroughly updating the panel. If one is fully game to take the best possible care of a plane, much of the learning and judgement is actually knowing when not to throw money at a perceived problem, only to dig a deeper hole (I've definitely done this a few times, even recently ).  After the instrument ticket and 1200 hours, could I safely move up to an Acclaim now if I wanted to devote the transition effort and resources needed? Probably, but the return on investment doesn't seem to be there, given the largely recreational nature of my missions.  

 

[Yetti]

Then the question of how old is too old.   I mean even the year 2000 was 22 years ago.

[Schllc]

1 hour ago, DXB said:

A surly, divisive diatribe? Yes. Some elements of truth in it? Absolutely .   But it's not a Mooney-specific issue. To me, the new and/or under-resourced private pilot buying an old Bravo doesn't seem much more precarious than the same pilot picking up a late model SR22T before making a smoking crater, an all too common story.  In my own defense, 8 years ago, I bought a carefully vetted C as a newly minted amateur pilot not because I couldn't afford a higher sticker price but rather because I didn't ever want to feel in over my head both in terms of maintenance needs and airplane performance. In retrospect, that was a good decision, though I now realize I could have also handled an E or J just fine.  I've had enough time and resources to learn about maintenance and keep up with it pretty well, along with thoroughly updating the panel. If one is fully game to take the best possible care of a plane, much of the learning and judgement is actually knowing when not to throw money at a perceived problem, only to dig a deeper hole (I've definitely done this a few times, even recently ).  After the instrument ticket and 1200 hours, could I safely move up to an Acclaim now if I wanted to devote the transition effort and resources needed? Probably, but the return on investment doesn't seem to be there, given the largely recreational nature of my missions.  

 

My experience is limited to the last 8 years…

but it would seem that what you spend on the plane is generally at least what it will sell for it if it’s properly maintained. 
I realize this isn’t axiomatic, but planes don’t generally depreciate.

The cost of owning and using is the expense, and when you sell it, you get awfully close to what you paid. 

For me, the cost of ownership for new planes has been pretty inexpensive. I haven’t had to do avionic upgrades or major repairs. I think generally new planes have less issues. 
It’s all a trade off. 
I didn’t want downtime, so I went newer. It’s worked out so far.

[A64Pilot]

49 minutes ago, Yetti said:

Then the question of how old is too old.   I mean even the year 2000 was 22 years ago.

If an old school airplane is properly maintained, there is no too old. I say old school as more modern materials do sometimes have a use by date.

There are many pre WWII airplanes flying around everyday, as long as money is spent maintaining them there is no too old. Even aircraft with wood spars can still be airworthy. Actually the old airplanes are easier to keep flying, not much to a Cub or Stearman, no special parts. There are some things in a Mooney that could require someone to be creative, one day we will be finding a suitable linear actuator for the landing gear etc., but they do exist

[RobertGary1]

Just because you’re paying new BMW money doesn’t mean you’re getting a new BMW. There are no perfect 50 year old planes. 

[Pinecone]

And considering that new planes and cars come with warranties, that are frequently used, I would say that new planes and cars are also not perfect.

Mike Busch has some charts in one of his books that shows a new engine is more likely to fail than a one near TBO.

Hmm my cars are 10 years old, 20 years old, 21 years old and 27 years old.  The 21 year old is something of a rust bucket, but it is the only larger (SUV) vehicle and gets driven about 1500 miles a year to haul stuff.

 

Oh, and my race car (SCCA SRF) is about the same age as my plane, circa 1987

[A64Pilot]

11 hours ago, RobertGary1 said:

Just because you’re paying new BMW money doesn’t mean you’re getting a new BMW. There are no perfect 50 year old planes. 

I built a few hundred new airplanes over about a 15 yr period and did the production test flights on every one, none were perfect

There are no perfect new airplanes either, in fact there are no perfect airplanes, period.

AH-64’s were manufactured in Mesa Arizona, new units formed up at FT Hood Tx. and drew their new aircraft and went through unit training, as I was stationed at FT Hood we often were used to ferry the new aircraft from the factory to Ft Hood to await the new units forming up, none of them were perfect either. 

How many people have new Avionics installed and it all works perfectly from the beginning as opposed to those that have bugs to work out?

Neighbors 90 yr old Stinson, I can assure you it’s in as good or better than new condition, oh and I believe it’s for sale if anybody want a real classic airplane

 

[Shadrach]

45 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

I built a few hundred new airplanes over about a 15 yr period and did the production test flights on every one, none were perfect

There are no perfect new airplanes either, in fact there are no perfect airplanes, period.

AH-64’s were manufactured in Mesa Arizona, new units formed up at FT Hood Tx. and drew their new aircraft and went through unit training, as I was stationed at FT Hood we often were used to ferry the new aircraft from the factory to Ft Hood to await the new units forming up, none of them were perfect either. 

How many people have new Avionics installed and it all works perfectly from the beginning as opposed to those that have bugs to work out?

Neighbors 90 yr old Stinson, I can assure you it’s in as good or better than new condition, oh and I believe it’s for sale if anybody want a real classic airplane

 

We had a Reliant on the field for nearly a decade. The cabin of that bird was like flying in a living room. It was warmly trimmed in wool, leather and wood. Reasonably quiet. A very nice place to spend time.

[A64Pilot]

Yeah I think it has roll up glass windows like an automobile.

[Shadrach]

6 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

Yeah I think it has roll up glass windows like an automobile.

It does.