WardHolbrook

Quote: jetdriven If you are concerned about safety, take that 1500$ and spend it on a tailwheel rating then finish it up with a full aerobatics course. Then take your wife out for a 100$ steak.

FWIW, here are my 2 cents... If you really need the enhanced low-speed performance and handling for your particular mission then by all means go for it. However, if you're based at an airport with the typical "way more than enough runway" and you typically fly to airports with "way more than enough runway" then what's the point? You own a Mooney because it is fast and efficient. Why screw around with that? The only arguement for them, outside of that would be the benefits from the reduced stall speed in the event of an off-field landing and that could make it somemthing to look at. It's not like you're flying a twin where any reduction of Vmc is a significant safety enhancement.

Quote: DaV8or Oooh. Sounds ominous. I know my annual won't be cheap. In addition to the usual inspection, I have a list of squawks to address and I know I need to replace the bushings/bolts in the tail assembly and would like to change to the 40:1 gear set as well as put in the seatbelts I bought last year. Oh boy, I'm in for it!

My first flying job was out of Las Vegas flying air tours to and through the Grand Canyon. We were flying about 800 hours ber year. It's tough showing folks a 17 mile wide canyon unless you've got at least 17 miles visability. I knew plenty of guys with thousands of hours and their ATP that had never seen the inside of a cloud.

Quote: Shadrach Ward, fltplan.com lets you customize speeds, fuel burns and climb rates... My fudge factor is largely do to the fact that I don't have all of the numbers completely dialed, and I don't always fly exactly what I plan. It's very close as long as I fly what I plan. You should check it out. It's free and available anywhere you have internet access...

Quote: Shadrach I use fltplan.com I have the average FF for all of the aircraft that I fly programed in. It seems to be remarkably accurate. Time wise it is usually accurate within 10 minutes take off to touchdown. It's pretty close even if you use their stock performance numbers... Wht's the deal with flightsoft?

I'm wondering how many of you guys use a flight planning program such as Flitesoft to help you pick the optimum routes and altitudes for your flights? With a little bit of effort to set them up, these programs are essentially spot on accurate and take all of the guess work out of choosing the most efficient altitudes.

Quote: jax88 I live in San Antonio and I need to get to either coast and the upper midwest. Lots of trips to Vegas, other semi-regular trips to Florida, and the typical vacation trips around the country. Only me and the co-pilot/wife.

Quote: jax88 It's official, I'm in the market for something faster than my '75F. Leaning toward a 252, still considering the bigger engine models (Rocket, Missile, Eagle, Bravo). Any leads on available aircraft would be appreciated.

I just saw some photos. So very sad. I'm just glad that no was was seriously hurt.

Quote: richardheitzman I'd buy AmSafe Seatbelts before a Garmin. Sorry couldn't help but plug my product. Still in development for the M20J and the rest of the M20K's. Earlier models are next.

Or you could always just get a wench and let her pull the airplane in and out of the hangar.

Quote: flight2000 Thank you! The worst part of the surgery has definately been that @%#$& catheter. It's been a long two weeks and you can tell I'm pretty bored.

Quote: Shadrach Thanks Ward, Although no need to second all of my typos... I need to more careful when posting before my morning coffee... Good luck with getting the tube out tomorrow! I'm sure things will go well. Godspeed!

Quote: maropers ...My low flight time fiance asked if it were alright if she closed her eyes for the landing... I said go right ahead - I do.

Quote: Parker_Woodruff As a side note, please note that your 1.x Vso calculation needs to be based on CAS, not IAS. Not a big deal in most Mooneys, but a huge deal in a C172 or many other aircraft where the difference between CAS and IAS can be huge on the low and high ends of the Airspeed arc.

Quote: Vref My personal Philosophy: 1)little experience on the plane.....fly the numbers as instructed This appies to all aircraft and also applies when you have a lot of experience in type. 2)bit more experience.....discover some more flight envelope You shouldn't be flying any airplane if you're not comfortably proficient in the entire performance envelope. 3)a lot of experience......fly the full flight envelope (or whatever feels right that day...) Experience does not allow you to "manipulate" the controls better ("fly the full flight envelope"), it allows you to fly smarter. I think the trick is feel the aircraft....and not compute the Vref "Feeling" the aircraft is another term for flying by the seat of your pants. Definately not the smartest way to fly high performance aircraft like Mooneys and a sure fire way to find yourself in serious trouble as you climb up the aircraft performance ladder. Mooneys (and all other high performance airplanes) are quite predictable in their performance. Do the math, fly the numbers, the results are predictable and consistant. Amen.... Luc PS....jeeeeeeee a lot of excitement here, ..

Quote: Shadrach Larry, I think that if you use the equations posted in this thread, you will find that your landings improve. Try to master full flap landings. Landing full flaps will be gentler on equipment (especially brakes on shorter runways), and offers superior visability on final because of the inherent pitch change. One thing that bothered me when I was green was the difference in feel at slow speeds. Mooneys tend to be firmer in roll than in pitch during most flight ops. However, as the plane gets slower the control harmony changes. This can feel foreign after spending time at higher speeds. This leads to the urge to fly a bit faster because it feels it feels too soft or "mushy"... A good exorcise is to go up and fly around @ 1.1 and 1.2 Vso in landing configuration, and don't forget your feet, the aileron/rudder interconnect is typicaly not enough in slow flight. Practice slow descents and shallow turns. Take an instructor with you the next time if it makes you more comfortable. Good luck!

It’s simple math… 1.2 Vso is a good “across the fence” speed. That’s what the factory and demo pilots use. That’s 75 ias at max gross weight; but it’s only 67 ias at lighter weights. Most of us aren’t out shooting T & Gs at max takeoff weight and we’re down nearer the lower figure at the end of our flights. If you’re using the max landing weight number when you’re light, you’re already 7 mph fast. If you're using 1.3 Vso, you're even faster. By the time you add a little for this and a little for that, it’s real easy to see how guys end up 10 or 15 mph or more above the ideal speed. That efficient Mooney wing loves to fly and that’s just exactly what it does when you get it down into ground effect at 1.2 Vso + 10 to 15 mph. No wonder Mooneygirl made the observation “of all the Ambassador events we have been to, we have seen our share of Mooneys floating floating floating.” Like I said before, this is where you end up using bad techniques to compensate for bad techniques – like raising the flaps in the flair. The idea of changing your approach speed to reflect your weight may be strange for some of you, but it is SOP in larger aircraft.

Quote: Shadrach Actually Scott, You can not know that it means what you claim. My very anecdotal evidence leads me to believe that they are not researched notions, but rather OWTs mostly passed from CFIs and or senior aviators to the plebes coming up through the ranks. I've learned a lot more in the last 5 years since I stopped taking as gospel, everything that any airman senior to me said, and started doing a little investigating of my own. Whenever, someone gives me an aviation "truth" my first question is why?... If they can't tell me, then I will vet it on my own. We are BTW very close in terms of logged TT and TIT... I did start flying a Mooney rt seat when I was about 12 though. If you review the accident stats, you will most certainly find that far more Mooney pilots have succeded in departing the end of a runway with the wheels locked and tires screeching then have managed to come up short.

Quote: Shadrach No one is not being nice or happy from what I've read; if I ruffled a few feathers, so be it. However, there is a lot of the info being posted on here is based on emotion and dogma, not pilotage/physics. I learned to fly with all of the OWTs and have partners and friends who climb at 25/25, dump flaps in the float, are afraid to run tanks dry, know that LOP burns valves, and land with a touch of power because it's smoother (did I miss any?)... The truth is... not my truth or your truth, but the repeatable scientific truth that is based in physics is reposted below. Both Immelman and I posted the numbers originally... 2740lbs Vso= 54 knots = 62mph 1.2 x 54KIAS=65KIAS = 75mph 1.3 x 54KIAS=70KIAS = 81mph 2000lbs Vso= 48.5KIAS =56mph 2000/2740 = 0.723 Square root of 0.723 = 0.898 0.898 x 54K= 48.5K 1.2 x 48.5KIAS = 58KIAS = 67mph 1.3 x 48.5KIAS =63KIAS = 72mph One can make a case for 1.2 or 1.3 x stall (I personally think 1.3 is overkill), but 1.4+... That being said, throwing out replys that are devoid of explanation while providing no reference to weight does not teach anyone anything. "It works for me" is not a really useful answer. If you would like to get book numbers for short fields the following technique is based on my own experience and what I've been told Al Mooney recommended. I have verified its efficacy a number of times. Full flap steep descent with the wing unloaded at approx 1.1 x Vso for weight. About 40-50ft above the TD point, apply back pressure. The stall horn will sound at the first hint of back pressure in the decent, but the plane will not fall out of the sky. Continue applying back preassure steadily so that that yoke is full aft at the same time that mains are about 1' off the runway. The plane does not float, ground effect helps to arrest the descent and nothing more. The plane is firmly but not abusively planted and the flaps come up immediatly on touch down. I maintain back pressure while braking throughout the roll which is pretty short. .... See. I am so happy!

Quote: KLRDMD It seems many pilots don't adjust speeds based on weight. They simply know, and parrot gross weight numbers. Yet they rarely fly at gross weight. Primary CFIs don't emphasize this, maybe because in the training environment there isn't a lot of variation of weight. However, when transitioning to their Mooneys, if the pilot chose a Mooney knowledgable CFI, maybe they would have been taught to based speeds on weight. I've also found, and cannot explain, that many on this board prefer less than full flaps for routine landing. Again, I would hope that a Mooney knowledgable CFI would discuss this during the transition training. Unfortunately, I've also found that many consider the insurance mandated dual instruction time when moving to the Mooney as a penalty versus an opportunity to learn - maybe all the above are related ?

30 years ago I ran a tank dry with my brother and his wife on board. To this day, my sister in law still talks about how close we all came to dieing when our engine quit. Personally, I don't hesitate doing it at all; but I swap tanks at the first indication of fuel pressure fluctuation. I've only had problems one time getting an engine restarted after running a tank dry. It was in a Beech Sierra and it seemed like it took forever to get it going. It was long enough that I called up center to let them know that my engine had quit. It finally caught and we continued on. It's not so bad with the Mooney fuel system - two tanks. But on some Pipers and many twins you can have up to 6 tanks. If you don't make an effort to get all of the fuel out of them it's pretty easy to end up with a scenario where your 60 minute reserve is spread out over several fuel tanks. That's not a good position to be in if you ever have to dip into your reserves. That tends to be a stressful time any way and you don't need to be adding to it by the distraction of having to swap tanks every 5 or 10 minutes because your reserve is spread out all over the airplane. Oh, and one more thought... Fuel gauges are notoriously inaccurate. It's not a bad idea to find out what the gauge reads when the tank is really empty. Drawing down to the fuel pressure flucuation is good enough.

Quote: richardheitzman Here is the link http://www.weepingwings.com/mx/hm.asp?id=home Some things not mentioned. You lose useful load, you lose airspeed, and they are somewhat expensive to repair if anything gets damaged.

I saw an iPod app that some guy put together that had the power settings for the IO-360.