donkaye, MCFI

I don't. I recognize that flying slowly means different control pressures, but I just smoothly use whatever control "Pressures" are required without thinking about any difference in "feel". Nor does that matter. Just do what it takes using whatever control "Pressures" are necessary, not using abrupt jerky movements I see so many people exhibit in the beginning of my training with them.

It's good to practice slow flight. That's one of the reasons it is part of a Wings Program Activity that I use: A070405-08. Having said that, a good landing requires the correct airspeed for the weight AND proper slope management. If you come in flat at 2° or less to your aim point, you are not going to have consistent good landings. There's not enough flare angle for the transition to the landing attitude.. If you come in at 4° or greater, the flare rate is too great to smoothly control the flare without possibly ballooning. The aim point should not move during the approach. Once you have the 3° site picture imprinted in your mind, combined with the proper approach speed, every landing should be a masterpiece. The proficient pilot feels comfortable flying through the complete dynamic range of the airplane. If you don't, then go up and fly the dynamic range until you do feel comfortable. You, your passengers, and your insurance company will appreciate it.

Having seen the results of bent blades when a prop is not turning and comparing the picture to that of the accident airplane's prop, the pictures look similar. I've also seen pictures of props after gear up landings when the prop had been spinning. They have curled blade tips. Therefore, it appears to me that the prop wasn't spinning in the accident airplane implying the engine wasn't running. Awaiting the results of the NTSB investigation...

Still: Impulsivitity and Invulnerability. "New" to him airplane, previous issue, marginal weather ==> Don't Fly

I've been thinking about this accident a lot since I read about it here on Mooneyspace yesterday. In my opinion this was an accident that shouldn't have happened, no matter the ultimate physical cause. For nearly 4 weeks and 4 pages of numerous thoughts this plane and circumstance has been discussed. Some very sharp people have entered the discussion. Yet it was clear to me at least, though the OP asked for assistance in his first post, he had his heart set on flying that airplane--no matter what. I have found the instrument rating provides a close look into the personality of an individual. Personality traits are magnified and by the conclusion of that endeavor it is not difficult to identify areas that could be problematic to future flying adventures. Although certainly no psychiatrist, I like to go over the 5 hazardous attitudes and discuss any one I think might cause a potential issue for the student in the future. Obviously this needs to be done tactfully. However, in 31 years of instructing I've still had 2 former instrument students kill themselves as a result of the hazardous attitudes I discussed with them. One was "resignation" and the other was "anti-authority". If I were to hazard a guess at this one, it would be a combination of a small dose of "impulsivity" mixed with a large dose of "invulnerability". I hope the lesson of this tragedy, is that we all carefully look through the lens of the 5 hazardous attitudes before we push the throttle forward.

I put a Surefly on the left Mag of my Bravo. Works great. No need for 500 hours inspections on it. No hot start issues. I would still feel uncomfortable with dual Sureflys.

It should work now.

After some years of flying all of us have had experiences that cannot be had on the ground or adequately described. This past week we had an unusual for October weather system come through the Bay Area. I had a student finishing up training for his Instrument Rating and we were finally able to get some significant time in the clouds. After the days' training I flew back to San Jose. The IFR flight was at 6,000 feet and it turned out to be just on top of the clouds. I decided to video some of it. You can really get the sense of speed, as I was indicating 170 knots. BTW, my student passed his checkride later that day. https://youtu.be/v8VPCZS_JFI

Why did the Seller sell the plane right after purchasing it? Same issue and didn't tell it to you? I wouldn't consider flying in that plane until I had a definite reason for the engine failure. What kind of confidence in the plane can anyone have in such a circumstance? Suppose the engine had quit right after takeoff at 400 feet. You had a lucky day.

This has been fatiguing. I started this as a way to provide what I have experienced to be the safest way to do a go around. It has been mucked up by folks who think they know what they're doing but from my perspective don't. So the folks I was trying to help are left confused by much of this red herring nonsense. Too bad.... Just a couple of more things. The lock up on the Rocket trim was caused by using electric trim and running it to the stops on approach. If it had been hand trimmed I don't believe it would have locked. As mentioned above, the Rocket is very nose heavy with the 305 HP engine so with 2 people in front it usually needs be trimmed full up on approach. It took a lot of manual force on the center manual trim wheel to break it loose, but we did manage to do it. Finally, of course you don't raise the gear until until you are at least 50 feet agl to prevent sinking when you do start to bring the flaps up (after the gear). Now think about it. Regarding drag--you are about to touch down, you are in ground effect which reduces induced drag by nearly 50% and near the stall, you add full power and start to climb out of ground effect. You bring up the flaps to T/O position first. The nose pitches up, the stall speed increases, you lose the benefit of ground effect, then p-factor, torque, slip stream increase, you're aggressively trying to trim down, the plane loses lift and starts to sink, and you are in danger of stalling. Does that sound like the wise thing to do? And by the way, the flap motor moves much quicker than the trim motor on the Mooneys I have flown. I'm sure it was designed that way to slow things down on a possible trim runaway situation. In the end, if you want to work harder and have a greater chance of losing control of the plane, by all means bring the flaps up first. If you want to be a more proficient pilot, my advice might be worthy of consideration.

The trim wheel got stuck in the full up position and required a significant amount of pressure to release it.

You've got to be kidding. What happens when you raise the flaps? The nose pitches up, which is exactly what we're working to prevent.

I'd like to relay one other experience that occured last Monday on a Rocket checkout. After doing all the air work and all types of takeoffs and landings, I had the student do a go around. The gear came up, then the flaps were raised too quickly before trimming down, then the trim got stuck full up. It took both hands pushing hard forward to keep control of the plane. While pushing hard on the yoke, we both finally were able to break the trim lock and return to normal flight. Of course had we not been able to break the trim lock there were other things we could have done, but the point here is that in our particular high performance airplanes, raising the flaps without significantly trimming down first could result in loss of control by less experienced pilots. Therefore, back to gear up first WHILE trimming down. When you feel a slight downward force on the yoke, only then reduce the flaps.

There's no argument. Do what you want--in my opinion at your own risk. I gave my opinion that developed over 33 years and over 11,000 hours of flying Mooneys. The pitch up moment, p-factor, and torque on flap reduction is significant, especially in the long body. I don't know why the Ultra POH changed back from the Type S, but whoever made the change made a mistake in my opinion.

No. This.20080402_APPROACH FOR LANDING -CAUTION- The airplane must be wit.pdf20080402_APPROACH FOR LANDING -CAUTION- The airplane must be wit.pdf20080402_APPROACH FOR LANDING -CAUTION- The airplane must be wit.pdf20080402_APPROACH FOR LANDING -CAUTION- The airplane must be wit.pdf