FloridaMan

Sweet, looks like I get points for something cool, thanks Phil.

Here's another issue of The Mooney Flyer for September.In this issue, we cover 1) How Mooney Can Return as a Market Leader, 2) A Throttle Cable breakage on a go-around, 3) Mooney Tale from the Right Seat, 4) Night Flying, 5) A USMC Colonel's first 10 hours in a Mooney, 6) Hot Starting Those Big Continentals, 7) Pattern Entries, and much more...http://www.vintagemooneygroup.com/Mo...tember2012.pdfhttp://jdpricecfi.com/FLIPSep12/index.htmlPhil

I'm not qualified to comment on the subject in regards to the horizontally opposed engines, but my understanding of the rotating the prop on the old radials like you see in films is that oil would pool in the bottom cylinders and if you didn't "walk the prop," you ran the risk of doing something similar to hydrolocking the engine and doing major damage. I couldn't imagine that being an issue on our engines.

Every landing I've made has been me crossing the threshold targeting 80 mph and am usually spot-on; no less than 75 and if I'm doing 85, I consider it way too fast. In regards to the power, it was a slip of words; I should have said "maintain my glide," which, really, is what I meant. I know, I know, "how do you say airspeed when you mean altitude?" Well, they're both there and they're something I needed to keep up. But yes, pitch for airspeed, power for altitude. I knew I'd sink right through the glide path as soon as I added rudder if I wasn't ready for it. Let's see it. I think a GoPro is a wonderful investment and a borderline necessity for us. Not to derail my own thread, but i didn't see this video posted anywhere on this site from the crash from inside the cockpit. Watching the propellor turn large pine trees into toothpicks was impressive. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=835_1344412426

I've reviewed this one a few more times. I'm glad I videoed it and I intend to keep that GoPro running during my flights for this reason. The tendency in viewing the video is to focus on the cowling and runway. I watched it again focusing on the horizon. The plane yawed sharply to the right just before it bounced each time. You can see it if you focus on the end of the runway. The addition of power on short final wasn't needed at my glide, except that I was about to induce a lot of drag from putting in rudder to straighten up for a textbook sideslip approach and needed to keep my airspeed up. You really can't tell how windy it is, but you can clearly see the white caps on the water. I approached with full flaps, and I think a combination of running out of (or not using enough) rudder and experiencing the issues with full flaps and gusty crosswinds. The landing that I succeeded at I came in with less flaps and didn't have as much trim dialed in, which I believe caused me to use less backpressure in the flare than I really needed, resulting in me landing flat. I still maintain that the botched landing was not flat. I've also reviewed GPS data of my approach and go around. Both final approaches were around a mile with turns being made at standard-rate.

Quote: mooneysteve We are still in the hospital. Stoney Brook, nice people. even gave me a laptop to use. We are pretty banged up, I mostly from carrying my bride through the woods. For the record, nobody got us out of the plane, I unbelted my bride, removed her from the the plane as it was burning and carried her through the woods until a safe distance. If I had waited for the "hero from the web\news" we would be f#ckin toast. Im no hero, just doing my job, wanting to live another day.

Can we get some pictures of the area where the plane went down? I'm curious what it went into.

This is mine. Hopefully they sell well enough that next year they release their entire synthetic vision panel as a clip-on.

asdf

"An approach to an abnormally narrow or unusually long runway may produce the visual illusion of an approach which is too high whereas an approach to an unusually wide or short runway may produce the visual illusion of an approach which is too low. " http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Runway_Visual_Perspective You can clearly see the PAPI is white/white and it's a 2864x150 ft runway. I make my share of mistakes, but the evaluation that the approach was flat is not correct. That first landing was also not a 3-pointer; the second one I carried less flaps and I didn't compensate with backpressure in the flare and could have done a better job keeping the nose off. Winds were in and out coming in. Anyone that lands at these airports right on the water knows that things can get shifty when you get into ground effect. There was a thread about that particular runway on this site here: http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.cfm?mainaction=posts&forumid=1&threadid=2486

Quote: carusoam ... I am a big fan of your airport, I visited briefly last spring. Prior to my arrival, somebody had unceremoniously 'washed' a mooney there. Think, decide, act.....or go around. There isn't enough runway left to repeat the cognitive part, at this runway.

I think there's some miscommunication going on between robert and jetdriven here. I think jetdriven's comment was meant for me, and I may have actually done a go around when I did my initial training with Bruce Jaeger -- I specifically remember doing flaps-up ops. My plane has manual gear, so that wasn't necessary, and we did our stalls at 9000 ft with minimal altitude loss ~50ft IIRC. I used the bicycle mount for the GoPro and mounted it on that bar where the compass is mounted. I've also filmed flights with it stuck to the rear side window, but the suction cup seemed to distort the "glass" a little. I like that angle better though because it allows me to see and review how I handle the airplane.

Mitch, The perspective of the GoPro combined with the short fat runway (18 is 2864x150) may make it look like that pattern was larger than it actually was. The pier that I cross is around 2000 feet from the end of the runway. That pier is my prefered checkpoint to be aligned on final for 18, which gives me enough time to make corrections in airspeed and altitude. I was a little fast and high on the PAPI when I chopped the power the first time and configured myself back inline with the PAPI at 80-85mph. From the winds and how I was having to crab to remain on centerline, I added just a touch of power on short final (the PowerFlow exhaust may make it sound like I added a lot of power) to compensate for the configuration change that I was about to make to hold centerline and line up the wheels. Notice the amount of bank I was using at 1:32 vs. the windsock at 1:45 on the go-around; there was clearly wind shear there. For the second approach to 25, I was aligned at 4:43 and landed just over a minute later, putting the final distance at just over one mile. I was low on this coming in from the go-around and did drag the airplane in as it was a tear-drop runway change. Also, I elected to give myself enough room, given the nature of the winds, to make my pattern turns at relatively shallow bank angles to give myself some margin to increase my angle if necessary. I didn't want to find myself planning on 30 degree banked turns and blowing through the legs, forcing a go-around or a steeper bank in gusty winds.

I believe the IO360 is balanced for 2500RPM. I wonder if the RPM limitation has to do with the cooling performance of the stock E/F cowling since, as I understand it, aside from the cowling and windshield, the E/F and J from the firewall forward are not significantly different.

Well, I had to go around for the first time in my plane today. I've put around 50 hours on the tach since I took delivery at the beginning of June. I posted a video of the incident on YouTube and hopefully y'all can provide me with some feedback. I'm thinking that I may have been better off in this scenario going in with less than full flaps. Link to video: The description in the video:

I've got a newer hub, not a Top Prop. I was under the impression that the 24" limitation was for the airplane and not the prop. I run my plane wide open at lower altitudes sometimes on short trips.

Quote: flight2000 Sort of. Still have a placard for this: "No cont. ops. above 24" btwn. 2350 and 2550 rpm" (applies to M20E & M20F only). In cruise at 7K and above, it's a non-issue since we can't get above 24" MP without a Turbo Normalizer or straight turbo. Just down low that you have to pay attention to it. Certainly not as restrictive as the old one. Brian

Isn't English Proficiency required for a PPL in the US?

Rebates? Also, definitely not a fan of requiring real names -- at least unless you're a verified user. I am not on sites like Facebook for that reason.

Also, and I know it's a crappy thing to suggest, but, both on the part of the ferry pilot and you, the buyer, make sure that you have a plan to get the pilot back home in the event something fails. I purchased an absolutely pristine -- definitely one of the, if not the, nicest -- M20Fs a couple months ago. Impeccable maintenance history, et cetera, et cetera. We stopped for fuel halfway back and had to leave it because of a dead magneto. Instantly a relatively cheap ferry flight immediately cost me another 700$ just to get myself and my checkout/ferry pilot back, in addition to the repair. The one thing you can plan on in aviation is that something you did not plan on will happen some time when you don't plan on anything happening. Just keep this factored in.

I wish I could be so lucky. I pay 550/mo for a rusty, leaky hangar. If I take and wipe my plane down with a clean, white dry microfiber towel after two days of hard rain, while my plane's been in the hangar, the 1/4 section of the towel I use will be brown from rust in the moisture on the plane.

I'm trying to figure out if it's even worth going with a used 700. It looks like the harnesses and sensors are all pretty expensive. I'm not sure if you remember or not, but I flew with you (fantom) several months ago when you and Parker were shooting practice approaches at KOBE.

That's what I was getting at. He was only at an "oxygen required" altitude for 30 minutes. I should've been more clear on my thoughts on that, but I assumed the the FARs operate on the conservative side of that sort of thing.

I wouldn't think it would have been Hypoxia. He was only over 14000ft for around 30 minutes and not super high. Not saying there wouldn't be effects, but you're allowed to be at 14,000 without oxygen for 30 minutes and I can't imagine that 16,000 would cause you to completely "lose it" in such a short amount of time. Is it possible it could have been runaway trim, flap or gear failure?

Quote: DaV8or Thing is, there isn't a warning horn to put the gear up. If you're super busy, it's easy to forget. I've done it and I suspect lots of other pilots have too. Usually, the really poor climb performance reminds you... eventually.