Jump to content

Sportster64

Basic Member
  • Posts

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Sportster64's Achievements

Rookie

Rookie (2/14)

  • One Year In
  • One Month Later
  • Week One Done
  • Dedicated
  • First Post

Recent Badges

2

Reputation

  1. You say your ready to buy a plane that you know will need repairs. but you are in a plane now that you know all the quirks and squawk’s of. so it would make sense to keep what you have as opposed to focusing your time fixing the ovation, instead focus your time getting the instrument in a plane you know, otherwise you could be spending the next year or so just fixing ovation mechanical or electrical gremlins in a plane that has current problems. how extensive are the problems, and how much will they cause you to loose focus on what you are trying to accomplish, that is getting instrument rated ?
  2. someone asked about the reference to pulling the prop back, It actually states in this POH in regards to glide distances to pull prop back to increase the glide ratio.. http://www.avsoft.com.au/ext/m20tnpoh.pdf
  3. Where I wanted to go with this, I know ForeFlight will give glide to land rings while in flight. But I don’t know of any flight planning tools that will plan a route close to airports based on a glide ratio ? in other words, if the flight planning software knows glide ratio, and bases it on current winds aloft , which of course will naturally introduce potential error, it could automatically plan the flight path to have an airport close enough. if you use my example of 2 miles for every 1000 ft, say you plan 10,500, that would give a path of about 20 miles from airports. Figuring terrain near sea level, which would also add complexity. possible in some areas, probably not realistic in remote areas. Also probably not possible for IFR flight planning.
  4. So, it seems the general numbers are roughly 11:1. given that number a quick number to keep in the back of my head would say for every 11000 ft of lateral movement, you would loose 1000 ft vertically. So that translates with a little safety margin added to about 2 statute miles laterally for every 1000ft AGL loss. yes, all the tables state with a windmilling prop. So I guess they assume you will not have any oil pressure to feather the prop ? Or is it more efficient with it windmilling?
  5. I’ve looked at a couple of the online POH for the m20j models, it appears the best glide ratio is different depending what manual you look at, or possibly it may be calculated differently based on gross weight vs 2300 lbs? I’ve seen 12:1 also 10:1 in the Poh I’ve looked at. I was wondering what people are actually seeing for glide ratio in the m20J. No mods
  6. All good info gang. I have two of the Montague bikes, one for me, one for the wife, we currently fly a 172, but are interested in the Mooney for it’s shorter cross country times. My post is mainly for help in discovering the capabilities of the Mooney to carry more than just passengers. For us , the back seats seldom carry people, but most often the bikes, and camping gear. So, it sounds like if I were to leave the rear tire on, and only remove the front tires on the bikes, I could still fold the front seats forward and fit them through the passenger door , to the rear seats ? it seems like it would depend if the model we fly in has the rear foldable seats, if not sounds like the only clean way is removal of the rear seat backs, so I’m not sure if that is always possible ? still appears the F model would allow for more room, given my bikes are only about 12 to 13 inches wide, the extra 10 or so inches of the stretched fuse could really help. we typically fold the Cessna rear seats down, and both bikes fit, we strap them down so they can’t shift in flight. it is super fun to get out on the bikes at the destination field, and be able to get into new towns and pedal around. The new scooters are of interest, now that battery power is capable of longer runs with these, however the weight can add up quickly, especially with two, plus gear as your baggage . I see some of the posts, some are not familiar with the Montague, as someone mentioned, there big plus is, they are full sized bikes with decent hardware, and ride very strong and solid, they have full size 26 tires, the fold process is very simple and quick, I pull the front tire and fold, use Velcro straps around the frame to pull and keep the bike together for travel, Montague actually makes bags for their bikes, however they are a little pricey, but built for the task. I put detachable pedals on ours, which really helps, as the pedals tend to snag on seats or make it difficult to place flat. I have the x70 model and one they made years ago for the Hummer, it’s paint matches a yellow hummer, I believe the bike was originally designed for the military to strap the bike to a parachuter, to jump , land , and deploy on a ground based mission .
  7. Ok, that’s good info, so I can fit them in the short body c and e models. thank you.
  8. I have two folding montague bikes. wife and I like to have these for our trips will two of these bikes fit in a m20c or m20e ive have transported them in a 63 c172d with the rear seats folded down successfully. will I need the m20f or j model ? not sure what options I have for rear seat folding or rear back removals, I’ve seen some posts on this, but not sure if the c and e models would work with the shorter fuselage They are each 36″ x 28″ x 12″ once folded and loaded about32 pounds each
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.