HRM

Semantics: he should have said 'Mooneyscaping'. I'll bet her tail is looking awfully pretty...best part of a Mooney

When the engine quits you become ballistic (in more ways than one). I use my gear like speed brakes, when close to 120 I drop 'em and instantly I am at 120 and dropping. Why you would lower your gear after an engine quit is beyond me unless the GUMPS sequence is so thoroughly into your mind you can't help it (engine failure is an immediate indicator that some sort of landing is imminent). When close to the ground; i.e., shortly after TO, so many factors come into play that are working against you that I don't think you can speculate at what altitude you might be able to get the turn in. Presumably, since you are in TO phase, you have a headwind. That's helping with lift, but without an engine it's also trying to slow you to a stall. Once the turn commences it becomes a crosswind and then a tail wind. If you are basically doing the kamikaze to get back on the ground, two things are certain. You will maintain useful airspeed and you will get to the ground very quickly. At issue is where. One thing I will point out with my E is that the engine is often off (well, idle) when I land a squeaker. Mooneys like to float and I'd be happy to take a wham, bam, thank you ma'am bouncy landing if the engine quit. Of course, with the gear up there would not be a lot of bounce

That is an excellent paper.

This has been some great discussion, but at the end of the day, I'd love to channel Langewiesche and get his take on it. For me, it's time for a re-read of 'Stick and Rudder'.

The 'pucker factor' here is a steep, nose-down attitude in order to maintain enough airspeed to avoid stall. As someone else put it, the airfield is flat and has all sorts of landing surfaces other than runways (taxiways, parking areas, the ramp, etc.). So what if you take out a few (expensive) lamps On sale for just $219.99 at Sporty's.

So, apparently a new thing is the notion that the 'Impossible Turn' is indeed possible. The prophet of the concept is American Airlines ATP Brian Schiff who not only has done it, but practices it. See the attachment link for his worksheet. Apparently the FAA may be warming to the concept. Anybody done this in their Mooney? Possible Turn Worksheet (PDF)

...and here's this morning's flight. Tried to get up before the heat set in. Was gorgeous and had my usual love-hate relationship with clouds...

I've beaten you all, 44 years in August! ...and people wonder why I call my E The Mistress.

I say the same about The Mistress (N5976Q). It is just uncanny to me how an airplane 'knows how to fly' and corrects the ignorance of her pilot. Good times! Again today she put the step down for me, that's how I know she approved of my landing

What about getting a big-ass plastic garbage bag and pull it over the vert stab?

There's a reason that you get certain ads...probably indiscretion in browsing

Memorial Day flight. Yes, heavy spider webs on the prop (see prior post) since I hadn't flown her for, what, 6 weeks? Anyway, started right up and flew like the beautiful bird she is. This is the bayous and waterways at the (GOM) coast near KBPT. She even lowered the step for me meaning that she approved of the landing

Flew today and realized I really need to get in the air more often... Blowing off the cobwebs.mov

THAT IS ONE GORGEOUS PAINT JOB!

I think the operative factor here is related to the volumetric measure of your cojones. The Brittain System is most forgiving (unlike the Max 8) of pilot override actions. My experience with a failed aileron servo was a somewhat aggravating pull that was easily overcome and removal of the PC button cut it out completely. Of course, I then had no PC. In my experience it is always obvious when the Brittain is not working. When it IS working is not always obvious--I had a CFI/I remark to me during a training flight that I had "Excellent rudder skills." He had no idea that the PC was doing all the work. IMNSHO, an AP should always be viewed as a convenience and never an essential element of pilotage. So, what you need to be prepared for is the fact that it will fail, period. When that happens is left to probability. So you slap some "Rapid Rubber Repair" on the servo and go flying on a beautiful VFR day. If it works fine, you are done--but you must always be prepared for it not working in the future. Far too many pilots are dependent on equipment rather than basic "Stick & Rudder" skills to the point that when the equipment takes control of their aircraft they fail to realize what is happening and, even worse, they do not know how to take the control back.

Probably not legal, but you might make an "Owner Produced Part" argument.

The kids got it right...never pass up the chance to do quality sim training!

Looking forward to the follow-up.

Not to question the master, but I had a bent rod recently (must be going around) and it tore up the rocker arm, cylinder had to go. I did have a fun time (literally!) fixing it...learned a sh*tload about the engine. Had a colossal scare when we thought the cam had a crack, turned out to be oil sheen. Don't ask. Now she is running like a champ. Happy ending!

Their website is still alive, have you tried contacting them?

The Mac runs Berkeley Unix in the background and easily handles Linux in VirtualBox. Ditch the antiquated Windoze and Linux boxes and buy a Mac.

...and that's the most fun thing of all to get back on.

Not with Jordan. I checked and the difference was significant.

Interesting. Mines seven years old and I have yet to see red. Of course, the shop has an investment in the ECI instrument and each inspection is pure gravy.

I can't remember what the mod cost, but Jordan Prop (KSAT) charged me $4,200 in 2012 for a prop overhaul and that included the mod. They picked up my prop and then brought it back to me looking like it came from the Hartzell factory.