RescueMunchkin

No experience in a short body, but my post was to find out what trim position his indicator shows when trimmed for final to help judge the indications. I have hydraulic flaps which you can only really adjust when deploying based on number or pumps, retracting is a toggle. Full flaps for me is about 3.8 pumps and I'm always having to trim nose up after extending flaps at all.

@ProtoFly when you trim for full flap landing (75-80mph), where do you find your trim at? My landing trim is exactly my marked take-off trim

My 67 F is the opposite - I have to trim down quite a lot after takeoff (take-off trim indicated, 2 pumps of flaps - half extended to take-off setting), then trim nose down much more after retracting flaps.

I'll get you a picture of the back of my engine when I can..hopefully tomorrow

What does yours look like? Mine uses the tempest aa48110-2 filter and I thought that was the original setup. Also, thank you for spelling Rajay correctly

I trained in a M20 that had the PC system and really disliked it. Having to hold the override button down during approaches or maneuvers is a real PITA. I may be in the minority on my opinion, but if I was not instrument rated and primarily fly in VMC, I would rather not have PC. Having to deal with the burden of it for the off chance that I fly into IMC is not worth it to me. There could also be increased risk of complacency from a non instrument rated pilot being cavalier about flying into IMC because the false sense of security that the PC will keep them safe.

Looking at the pilot/operator incident report for the gear up landing incident, I found what was stated in the Operator/Owner Safety Recommendation section to be very strange (in addition to the mis-spelling of his name in that paperwork) "Fly with an instructor until I feel that I have the proficiency that I had before, I missed into KTTD twice with the old ADF (MDA of 1040 feet) approach and elected to land into KPDX, 300 foor ceiling. It worked great!" This gear up incident was at Minden, NV, so the statements about missed approaches and landings with low ceilings in a different state makes him seem like something strange is going on with him, unless someone at the NTSB messed up with the paperwork organization.

He departed using the north bank transition (transition through the PDX Class C surface area to the west), so it also sounds like he used the same transition to return back to KTTD. Without the ADS-B track available, we can't see where he ended up going, but this transition he used is pretty standard for heading westbound out of KTTD or inbound from the west.

Troutdale is supposed to be towered, but they are low on resources there and are sometimes untowered during daylight hours. Looks like they were towered when the pilot departed - at approx 2138 UTC the KTTD controller advised 1VM to contact PDX Tower after departing and over the north bank (WA side of the Columbia River) All times approximate in UTC 2211 - 231VM calls TTD tower to advise he's over the north bank inbound for landing. Tower tells to advise when over the Washougal River. Google maps shows the Washougal River is just about abeam the RWY 25 threshold 2214 - 231VM calls TTD tower to state he's crossing the Washougal River. TTD tower tells 231VM to enter right base and clears to land RWY 25, winds 270@8. 231VM asks tower to repeat, tower does so more slowly and succinctly and adds that winds are 270@7. About 1 minute later, 231VM calls and advises he's lost power. Tower points out some blue hangars and asks if he's able to make it. 231VM responds "No I can't" About 45 seconds later, TTD controller calls Helicopter 48A and asks if he can offer assistance flying over the downed aircraft.

Yes, I meant that there's nothing from yesterday showing up at all, not that I checked yesterday (my statement was ambiguous)

I was curious to see how long he'd been in the air for, but both flightaware and asdbexchange are showing no activity on the tail number yesterday. Anybody know of a better way?

To get 2g at 60 degree bank, the plane as to be staying a the same altitude...so doesn't that imply that if descending in a 60 degree bank, the plane will be <2g of loading?

Doing the math from ground speed and descent rate based on the data from the picture you posted, I'm calculating that between 17:01:58 and 17:02:01, the descent rate was 251.8 knots (1 fps = .5924 knots) and with the ground speed of 162 knots, the speed of the plane relative to the ground was 299 knots. If I use the average descent rate between 17:01:41 and 17:02:01 and the GS of 213 knots, the speed of the plane relative to the ground was 231 knots. I agree we don't know what caused the break-up, but I also think that either scenario is plausible and can cause this outcome. Before this thread, I wasn't aware that rolling wings level from an overbanking dive would tend cause a potential over-G condition because of trim, so all of this is great info.

The track shows a tightening turn implying overbank most likely due to disorientation, but I don't think it definitively proves the plane suffered over g. It only shows ground speed, and when a plane is diving into the ground at that rate of airspeed and angle relative to the ground, the ground speed would only be a fraction of its air speed. So a breakup due to tail flutter from overspeed is possible.

It's just my guess based on my very limited flying experience that this Bonanza broke up mainly because of exceeding Vne instead of over-G. Reason for that is with a constant speed prop, it's very hard to tell when the plane is getting fast, but g forces can directly be felt by the pilot. Edit.... Thinking about this a bit more, the spiral divergence recovery trim causing over-g can be very difficult to recognize during disorientation... But the V tail Bonanzas seem to easily damage their tails if exceeding Vne, so that's additional risk to consider.

OK, but I'm also imagining that seat of the pants would allow the pilot/passengers to feel those kinds of g-forces pushing them down into their seat and a pilot who is aware of their sensations would want to pitch down to compensate for that anyways?

I watched the youtube video posted above and am having trouble understanding why the recovery they stated is to push forward on the yoke. Here's what's happening as I understand it: After rolling to 45 and letting go, the plane gets faster and the bank angle wants to increase. They recover at 60 degrees of bank or 140KIAS, whichever comes first Recovery is to roll back to wings level and push forward on the yoke, but why push forward? Wouldn't pushing forward cause even more increase in speed? Or is it that the trim of the aircraft is trying to cause too much pitch up and potentially overstresses the airframe if pitch is left unchecked?

Maybe I'm in a minority here, but I have to deal with staying under Class C shelves when I depart, so I have to either pull back throttle or go blasting balls to the wall at 1500 ft MSL for several miles, which does not seem to me to be good for fuel economy or the engine. I think when I'm ready to climb up to cruise altitude in the future, I'll try the full throttle method, but when doing this, are you guys also leaving mixture full rich until stabilized at cruise altitude? In most of my 25/25 climbs, I've been pulling mixture back to ~150 degrees ROP

I was taught the 25/25 when I trained in an M20G with the O-360. My current plane is a M20F with the IO-360. I've not really paid much attention to the EGTs or CHTs in 24-25/25 climb other than to validate they aren't getting high enough to be concerning. My POH also says to climb at 26/26, but I (maybe incorrectly) assume that running 24-25inMP would be gentler on the engine despite it taking longer to get to cruise altitude.

What are the pros and cons of full throttle climb from sea level? I was taught 25/25 and trim for 500fpm climb once clear of obstructions and have been using it to be easier on the engine (I'm never in a rush when flying).

Are you assuming climb at Vy? I usually can't do a straight climb because of airspace shelves but have been doing cruise climbs targeting 500fpm when I want higher.

If you're referring to aircraft insurance, wouldn't the pilot being not legal to fly be a cause for the insurer to refuse any kind of payment?

The Rajay manual says to go full throttle and full rich mixture when in operation. Is that worth doing with the kind of fuel burn of full rich at 12k?

Off topic but why do so many spell it Ray Jay? It's spelled Rajay

Could be because you had so much time in a Complex? Also maybe different insurers have different requirements. I went with Avemco because it was a lot less with my relatively low experience. Another plus with Avemco is they apply discounts immediately and prorate the premiums. I got my IR a week after I bought the plane and that was my first phone call after passing - they knocked off 10% right away.