mooniac15u

"Steel is used where there is a need for a hardened material, like axles for cars or trucks, whereas titanium structures do not guarantee longevity and have a fatigue limit." I think I'll stick with steel on the landing gear and bolts.

A 300 foot parking lot could be a bit dicey. My 351 feet was post-touchdown skid. I used several hundred feet of runway bleeding off airspeed before I touched down. An approach into a parking lot with a flare could use significantly more than 300 feet.

It looks like they may have just left them where they were on the Mooney wing. The main goal is just to get the inboard portion of the wing to stall first so that you still have aiflow over the ailerons. The airflow over most of the wing probably didn't change that much.

The CAR 3 requirements were pretty much the same. http://www.navioneer.org/riprelay/Yet%20More%20Navion%20Files/car_part3.pdf 3.739 defines Vne with respect to VD 3.184 defines VD and VC based upon wing loading 3.159 specifies that the aircraft must be free of flutter and vibration under all speed and power conditions appropriate for the aircraft. The TCDS specifies where Part 23 changes were incorporated into the certification for each of the Mooney models starting with the M20J.

That's probably your problem. The newly redesigned Mooney website likely uses elements of HTML5 not supported in IE8. Not much you can do unless you can convince your software support folks to upgrade you to IE9 or give you access to a better browser.

Always happy to provide a source of entertainment. It's so much more fun than my real job.

Mmmmmm.... Big Mac and a Bud!

Which version of IE are you using?

IE still has the biggest share of the market largely due to corporate usage.

It's in 23.1545. ( c) If VNE or VNO vary with altitude, there must be means to indicate to the pilot the appropriate limitations throughout the operating altitude range.

I'm hoping there will be some commitment to helping the existing fleet transition to whatever replacement we get for 100LL.

I'm not an "always" or "never" kind of guy. I do like to run scenarios. I'm not sure I would know what to look for in the NTSB database. The terms "gear up" or "failed to extend gear" are likely to get me lots of results on a different topic. Are there specific cases you have seen where the NTSB commented that the pilot should have gone the other route? Short of that I think I would just be speculating that they should have chosen the other option. As I said, I'm not trying to start a debate. I'm honestly curious what you might have seen.

Could you give a couple of examples where it would be better down? I'm interested in survivability not where it would just be better for the aircraft. NOT trying to start a debate; just curious for my own education.

Most of the folks who swear by gear down are flying Cessna 172s.

Well, it's not really up to the manufacturer. It is outlined in FAR Part 23. 23.1505 sets Vne as not less than 0.9 VD (established in 23.335) and not more than the lesser of 0.9 VD or the speed demonstrated in 23.251 (which says there can be no buffeting or vibration). 23.335 sets VD at not less than 1.25 VC which is in turn not less than 33 times the sq rt of the wing loading. 23.335 explicitly states that these are Equivalent Airspeeds. Whether or not Mooney tests to flutter speed doesn't have anything to do with Vne. Which article states that Mooney tests to flutter speed? I must have missed that.

Vne is also there to protect us from overloading the airframe in the event of a sudden gust. That's why it's derived from the wing loading.

Vne is an FAA term used in certifying aircraft. They pretty much get to define it as it relates to certificated aircraft. Once again I will restate, we all agree that flutter speed is TAS. Vne is defined by the FAA and it is IAS. Vne is there to protect us from flutter speed but it is an oversimplification so it is imperfect. It is not wise to approach Vne without being aware of your TAS.

Also on page 2 of the linked article take a look at the chart of Vne for the Pipistrel Sinus. It is clearly labeled KIAS. And on page 3 the the 3rd paragraph discussion of Part 23 certification of Vne as IAS.

Because that article is addressing why Vne will not protect you from flutter if you let your TAS get too high by mounting a bigger engine on an existing airframe. Flutter speed is TAS. We all agree on that. You might note that nowhere in the article does it actually say that Vne is TAS. Only that Vne will not always protect you if your TAS gets too high. On the other hand the FAA and the airframe manufacturers both clearly publish Vne as IAS (see my previous posts for relevant links). If you choose to ignore all of the evidence I can't change that. But please look at one of my more recent posts about the Acclaim and give it careful thought. If Vne is TAS then how does Mooney advocate flying an Acclaim at 242 KTAS when the Vne is published at 195 knots?

351 feet. M20D, smooth asphalt runway, gear up, touchdown slighly nose-high. Approach with full flaps, fuel cutoff but prop windmilling. Not sure of actual touchdown speed.

Do you have a link to FAA guidance on that? The FARs have been intentionally vague on what counts as an approach.

Another interesting related item. The first new Acclaim appears to boldly proclaim "242 KTAS" on its tail. http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2014/July/30/A-new-Mooney-delivers-its-first-new-Mooney?WT.mc_id=140801epilot&WT.mc_sect=osh But the TCDS lists the the Vne as 195 Knots IAS. That's a pretty big gap any way you look at it. I wonder what the predicted flutter speed is for the M20TN.

Since we are discussing flutter in Mooney airframes this seems relevant: http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=36780 Perhaps the most interesting part of this is: "Engineering analysis and testing by the airframe manufacturer predicted the onset of flutter to occur at 241 knots." This was an M20K airframe so presumably the flutter speed for any mid-body Mooney would be similar.

Once you have your IR you always have your IR and you don't need to fly another check ride (unless you bust a reg). If you let your currency lapse for six months you just need an IPC (instrument proficiency check) with a CFII.

Probably the NSA.