cliffy

We all watch the weekend landings at our airport and invariably 3 or 4 out of 5 Mooneys land fast and PIO down the runway for 1000' or more before touching down on all 3 wheels at the same time. As do ALL the Cirrus airplanes. I took a friend flying last Saturday (he owns an E model) and after we got back he said he needs to try slowing down more before he crosses the runway end. Said he was crossing the numbers at 70 KNOTs ! I do it at @65 MPH in my D/C

These are numbers for a K correct? :-)

Only the first M!0 Mooney Mite used truck engine mounts

Rubber also hardens with age. Causing fuel tank leaks???? Naw- because we all land smooooth! :-)

Now that's interesting I didn't know that chart even existed. Thanks. Just thinking out loud here- Seems that short bodies might be less effective trying to stop rotation with a higher polar moment (adding charlie weight) than medium or long bodies due to the shorter moment arm and/or the shorter rudder. It comes to follow then IF one wants to move the CG aft with weight (and suffer the lower Useful Load ) in a short body then weight in the baggage compartment might be a better idea (also lowering the allowable baggage in that compartment). Another thought would be to add weight on the radio shelf aft of the baggage pit. This might be a better idea than the baggage pit itself. Lower polar moment than tail mounted but already planned for in the certification- radios or weights? What difference does it make? More weight needed due to shorter moment arm than tail mounted but everything is trade off in airplanes. Just postulating for ideas from the brain trust.

Good to go Don't change a thing Enjoy it!

Discussion at the airport today about charlie weights in Mooneys Were they all the same weight or did they change with s/n? Anyone know?

Grant- You say it was done in 2010 and "should have been checked then" - Just for your own peace of mind, go back in your log book and find the entry and see if a balance check was actually signed off then.

I would also suspect the cooler installation because of the upper screw you show in the picture has no edge distance to hold the top corner in place (with totally rusted screw). If someone was in there and didn't replace the hardware in that condition they need to go back in and redo it. Not trying to be harsh but work needs to be done around that cooler.

How many Mooneys get checked at each annual for the proper "over center" torque values with the proper tools? If yours doesn't (or your mechanic doesn't have the special tools) then you need a different maintenance shop! Its quick, its easy- WITH the proper tools. NO excuse for not doing it every year. Vintage Mooneys today are basically scrap if this happens.

Here's a first breakdown of what transpired-

Not so the 727! Hardest landing I've ever been in was a 727 where the Capt didn't flare. We went back in the air 35 feet, dropped most of the masks and 6 ceiling panels. We missed hitting the hard landing indicators by 1/8th of an inch. Its an interesting story from long ago. Touche' :-)

Plain old house floor wax works well on the control shafts. Wipe it on. let it dry for a minute and polish it off. The big yellow cans that Johnson made are no longer available. When lubing any of the rod ends be sure to see if the move and rotate a little and are not frozen to the ball itself.

JMO- The right gear failed at the wing spar trunnion due to hard landing- The right spar failed due to damage from the gear failure and contact with the ground The rest is lucky history for those involved Airports wouldn't normally "close" for the kind of weather shown here. Challenging but not unheard of. Observations of no flare probably correct. 1100 FPM is a valid data point. We don't know at this time if the proper airspeed was calculated (ref + ?) or if it was maintained throughout the approach. We don't know if the bottom fell out right at the end , or if the controls were activated to counter that fall out, or if the throttles were pushed up at the end to gain speed. All of this will be on the data recorder. Pilot inputs at the end will play a big part in the causal determination. Mechanical compromise due to corrosion in the gear mount will be looked at. As will pilot's history and competency. Just my postulation- for most of the commercial aviation history we were effectively "skimming the cream" off of the pilot pool barrel. Now for a generation or two we have been digging deeper into that barrel, at times scrapping the bottom of the barrel, to fill the pipe line. The deeper you go the closer you get to the competency line. Even when I was flying 121 years ago you always had 1 or 2% of the pilot pool at any airline that really needed to be doing something else but flying as is evidenced by many of the historical accidents we have all read about over the last 50 years. Chief Pilots always spent 90% of their time on 10% of their pilots. Its just a fact of life. NOT EVERYONE IS CUT OUT TO BE A PILOT- even if they can get through the training. The deeper you go into the pilot pool barrel the more chance you will have of pulling out a dead fish. I'd really like to see a chart of the number of jet rated pilots, year by year, over the last 50 years. And the same chart with numbers of ATPs. When the numbers were low you could pick and choose (mostly military pilot pool to draw from). Now with the high numbers needed? ALL the training in the world can't replace experience! (Used to be that one sat side saddle for 2-5 years then right seat for another 3-6 and then you got the left seat. Now there are lots of 90 day wonders in comparison. We now have many who have never hand flown a sweep wing at high altitude (due to RVSM). The sim just don't cut it for this. I used to make all my copilots on IOE hand fly at altitude to get a feel for it. One refused - he didn't make it through IOE. Again JMO from 60 years in the business. Shields are up.