cnoe

On my JPI (an EDM830) you just plug a USB stick into the display and dump the data into memory with no program or PC necessary. Then stick the USB stick into your 64-bit PC and upload to Savvy. Easy peasy. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Load your data into saavy's free web-based program. Works great and had better interface IMO. Visit https://www.savvyanalysis.com Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yep. Same thing with women too.

Thanks. Your explanation is simple enough for my feeble mind to grasp.

The TAS part is what I have a hard time grasping. Why is "true" the concern? Isn't "indicated" what the control surfaces are experiencing? I have no formal aerodynamic study in my background so it just seems like how many air molecules are beating against the aluminum that would prompt the surfaces to begin oscillation. Sorry for this follow-up but my curiosity has been piqued.

Guys... I truly appreciate all the discussion and input and am in no way offended by such. I imagine that I should qualify the term "pull hard" as "pull firmly and smoothly to in excess of 4 G's". The problem is that I don't know by instinct what 4+ G's feels like. From all accounts the majority of aerobatic students who are instructed to pull 4+ G's only manage to reach about 2.5 before backing off. And If I'm looking at dirt when I start the pull then it might as well be 6+. My take from all this is that even 10 G's isn't going to shear a wing but "flutter" can ruin your day (and that's caused by gross excessive speed). What's tough is that the advice runs from "give 'er a slight push, to let the trim do it's thing, to give 'er a firm pull". Nobody can yet confirm from experience which is best in a mid-body M20 accelerating through 225 mia in a steep dive. But what I have learned is that horizontal stabilizers will and have departed the aircraft at 275 mia (240 kts). The best preparation may be to get a good aerobatics instructor and practice some 45-60 degree banked descents and determine first-hand what it takes to arrest the acceleration (after rolling wings level of course). Having a G-meter on board to see what 4 G's feels like might be beneficial as well. This is exactly what was being proposed on the Beech forum and it sounds like good advice. Thoughts???

The last reported altitude from the pilot was at 10,200 msl descending. He acknowledged the clearance to 2,300 msl but was still at altitude at that point. Ceilings near that time were reported as broken at 5,500 and 7,000 with the freezing level at 7,000. It's only speculation but perhaps he iced up and/or suffered spatial disorientation during the descent? The 3,500 fpm descent observed by ATC was obviously the source of his excess speed. This was exactly the point of my original question, what action to take if you find yourself in this situation. I now believe the correct answer is to PULL SOON and PULL HARD to arrest the acceleration ASAP. Sounds like the wings are unlikely to fall off as long as flutter doesn't remove the tail first. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thanks for the info guys; this is very interesting indeed. The full NTSB narrative says that Mooney lists ~240 knots as the speed at which flutter might emerge. But what's really scary is the description of the flutter identified in the investigation. The report said... An FAA airframe specialist from the Ft. Worth, Texas, Airplane Certification Office, examined the recovered wreckage. In part, the specialist noted the following: 1) There was no indication from the structural fractures of corrosion or fatigue failure being present; 2) Both horizontal tail surfaces and elevators left the airplane in the air. The right side did a negative/positive cycle to come up and hit the vertical tail and rudder. The left side only indicated a positive cycle up and back; 3) Both the left and right elevator balance weight horns were missing and appeared to have separated from the elevators prior to ground impact; I can say with certainty that if things get so bad that your horizontal stabilizer whips high enough to contact the vertical stabilizer your day will not end on a positive note. Very sobering. I'm not sure where the 300 mph Mooney test story came from but I plan to stay below Vne if at all possible based on this one accident description.

FYI, we just finished the "Boeing Laser" installation on my J. Turns out that it disrupted laminar flow too much with an under-wing mounting so we had to place it on top of the fuselage. I have to say that it blends nicely with my old-school paint scheme. We're still waiting on the 337 approval to come back but I took it around the pattern a time or two and managed to bag a couple of nice geese from about 1/2 mile away. Can't wait to see a dang drone.

That's what the POH says (shown below).

It's so hard for me to read sarcasm on the computer. The Super 21 that I previously partnered in had a redline of 189 mia while my J's redline (Vne) is at 228 mia. From all I can tell there is very little (if any) difference in the airframes (other than a bit of length). With that being said I didn't bust Vne in the Super 21 but it would cruise in the yellow (which I did frequently in good air). In the J you have to push a bit to get it very far into the yellow, and that usually leads to uncomfortable descent rates for my passengers.

Mine too when I first saw it. That was apparently identified as the reason so many early Bo's fell from the skies from what I've read. It was also said that in the V-Tail the problem was exacerbated by full simultaneous movement of the rudder and elevator (as stated before go "wings level" before beginning the pull). Apparently many have limiters to prevent this now. In my M20 if passing through Vne I'd be less concerned about tail flutter if the early speed tests were indeed legitimate. And a hearty application of elevator might not be a bad idea if anywhere in the vicinity of Terra-firma.

In the Bo forum the thinking was that their tail-feathers departed due to air-speed induced flutter long before any ultimate g-load was surpassed. If the 300 kt/mph test flight is true then it's nice to know that "flutter" is not a primary concern. And it also sounds like g-loading of the wing isn't a huge concern either. I've seen the pic of the factory guys standing on the wings, and I've also heard the tale of the test-jig breaking, but I didn't know the related numbers. It would be interesting to hear the "numbers" from an authoritative source. If the wing and airframe are as strong as legend has it then I'd likely pass out well before breaking the wings off in a simple "pull" from a steep dive. Does anybody disagree?

In light of the recent Pilatus breakup and some older Bonanza incidents I've been reading about proper handling of an excursion into slow spirals in IMC. Of course the best solution is "don't go there" and that's one reason I have a backup Attitude Indicator (electric) as well as a backup vacuum pump, but... If I were to realize that I'm in IMC banking, with the altimeter unwinding and the DG (or compass) turning the obvious first action is to simultaneously LEVEL THE WINGS and REDUCE POWER. I've done this many times in the past year as well as during my recent Instrument Checkride. No problem. But my question relates to a situation where the scan also shows the IAS nearing Vne. I know, "don't go there", but if it happened I'd want to be certain of the best course of action. Evidence I've read from the Pilatus case suggests that simply unloading the elevator and letting the trim do all the work might suffice. But there was a heated discussion on the Beech site arguing the merits of "pulling" on the yoke, with some even arguing for a "push" as the trim took over flight attitude. To minimize airspeed gain and altitude loss a respected member of the forum suggested that one should "pull" to the design limit of the wing ASAP, and if the ground was quickly approaching one should pull BEYOND the design limit reasoning that "bent wings are preferable to ground impact". This seems reasonable to me, but without a g-meter how am I to know how hard to pull? It was oft repeated that a typical pilot "thinks" they're pulling 4+ g's when they're really only pulling something like 2.5. So... how strong IS the M20 wing, and how hard should one pull on the yoke if inadvertently approaching Vne in a dive?

Can that be mounted under my wing? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

When we had the strip-and-reseal done on the E by WetWingologist at KFXE Edison called about our questionable sender flanges and seals. I sent him used replacement senders and he furnished new seals. Easy peasy; no leaks since. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Instead of "grip tape" you might try the "rubberized" 3M's Safety-Walk Anti Slip Tape as shown below. It's quite durable and is typically used for underwater applications such a treading for dock ladders and such. I've had it stick to treated wood on an in-water stair for years without coming off. It's available in 1" or 2" widths and my local Ace Hardware sells it by the foot. http://www.acehardware.com/product/index.jsp?productId=1273901

It takes LOTS of electricity to generate 3 HP. If a cordless drill can tug a plane you could likely employ a much smaller motor. Airbus is now using chain-driven mains on their new E-Fan electric plane for taxiing as it's more efficient than the ducted fan. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Hell if I worked out any more I might just blow away. Problem is I'm the runt of the litter at 5'6" and 135# so it's more like the plane moves me rather than me moving it. I do okay on level ground but anything steeper than that and I'm just wearing out my sneakers as the inertia exceeds traction. 22others is right about "checking your pride at the door", but now that I've overcome the stigma of pulling my J around with the scooter I'm now able to drive the loaners around inside Walmart with my head held high. Just wish I could get my hands on one of those turbine models!

Did this incident really happen or not? If so, why aren't we hearing about it? AOPA's Aviation eBrief linked a story today from the Washington Post stating "No incident has resulted in a midair collision. But in dozens of cases, pilots reported that drones flew within 500 feet of their aircraft, so close that they usually had no time to react." https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/faa-records-detail-hundreds-of-close-calls-between-airplanes-and-drones/2015/08/20/5ef812ae-4737-11e5-846d-02792f854297_story.html We at least have a right to know the extent of the problem.

Tow speed shown on attached video... Video.MOV

Unlike a wheelchair the scooter has a single 24V motor driven through a direct-drive transmission. It runs forward or backwards in variable speed. Without the plane in tow it'll run faster than I can walk for more than a mile. Keep in mind these are designed to transport individuals like Marauder's gals.[emoji57] BTW, love the Costanza reference but I roll faster than that WITH the plane. I gave up being self-conscious years ago and have no qualms about driving down to the FBO on the scooter, you just have to look like you OWN IT![emoji41] Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

... and there are lots of these used personal scooters available for sale at flea markets, Craigs list etc. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

After reading about the "cordless drill" tugs on a recent thread I thought I'd post a couple pics of my tug solution. Having used the lawn tractor option with some success I was looking for something a bit quieter, but didn't need something as substantial as a golf cart. An elderly family member left me with this. I beefed up the batteries and installed new innertubes but the drivetrain is all stock. It'll pull my J 300' to the fuel dock and back but still needs a few feet of momentum to roll over the sliding-door tracks. 2 years in service and counting. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Good idea. Now as long as you're using Camguard and flying LOP then welcome aboard! Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk