Mooney 231 versus 252

[benpilot]

 

+1 Fantom. All great planes. I have my checkride in 2 weeks. Wish me luck. I've had to really work hard on my steep turns and soft field takeoffs/landings to PTS standings. 

I've done a lot of bay tours and Bravo transitions which is good experience in busy airspace near KPAO. 

[BigTex]

+1 Fantom. All great planes. I have my checkride in 2 weeks. Wish me luck. I've had to really work hard on my steep turns and soft field takeoffs/landings to PTS standings.

I've done a lot of bay tours and Bravo transitions which is good experience in busy airspace near KPAO.

Good luck! What aircraft you you using for your Private training?

[Earl]

When I bought my 252 I went for that model specifically because of a recommendation from a long-time Mooney veteran specifically because it fit my mission of speed and economy.  I needed a fuel efficient IFR platform for business travel which is almost always just me so I don't need the additional carrying capacity of some other models.  However, I am seriously thinking of doing the Encore conversion for the added gross weight and performance.  I need to replace my #2 Nav/Comm as well and may do both concurrently.

 

Unfortunately I bought at the top of the market and have watched the 252's drop in value. Has not been a pleasant experience but I put a lot down so I have plenty of equity in the plane so I am not worried......yet.  

[KSMooniac]

Sounds like this blog has transitioned into training and experience.  I have over 1000hrs, half complex/HP, and am looking at a few 252s.  While I think I won't have much difficulty making the transition to a turbo I would love to take a training course to make sure I'm operating the aircraft correctly at various power settings.  I've been referred to Flight Training Inc with Trey Hughs in TX but it seems to have shut down.  Does anyone know of a similar operation? 

 

The single best source to learn all about piston engine operation (turbo and NA) is the Advanced Pilot Seminars (www.advancedpilot.com)  They just had a live version of the course this past weekend, so you would likely need to wait until next spring to catch the next live one.  There is a web version, but you miss the live Q&A and seeing the test stand demonstrating the concepts presented in class.

It is the best money I've spent as an owner.  Period.

[mike_elliott]

 

 

I will probably have a few hundred hours by the time I buy a plane. I take my checkride next month and I have 150 hours in Cessna and Pipers. I've been working on my weak points and no rush to buy a 252 or Bravo today. Next step is get checked out in the Mooney 20F and log 50 hours in it with experience and IFR rating.

 

 

Good plan. Getting your IR in a hot rod like a Bravo is just that much harder, as things happen real fast. The F is an Ideal platform for this rating. Your transition to a mooney with more speed will also be easier.

[benpilot]

 

I am doing my private pilot checkride in either a Piper Warrior or Piper Archer II. I started in a Cessna 152 and did half the training in a 172 but prefer the Piper low wing to Cessna high wing. I have no regrets because if I need to take my father on a trip, I can rent a Cessna 172 since he is disabled and would have a tough time climbing into a Mooney. I don't plan to take him a lot of places so thats not really a long term factor. I've done a bunch of training in both aircraft with steam gauges. Love the Piper it reminds me of a slower Mooney! Most likely I will get checked out in the club Mooney 20F and may do my instrument and commercial ratings in it unless I buy a plane right after my PPL which depends on many factors. Right now its cheaper to rent but since I love flying buying could work well in the long run and the freedom is priceless to have full access to my dream bird. 

[BigTex]

Nice way to go. I started my flying in a Cherokee 140 and finished up in a Warrior. I did my discovery flight many years ago in a Cessna 150 and after taking my first lesson in the 140, I never looked back. Some said it's the AC unit in the 140 but really it's the manual flap system. I just love the control I get with manual flips. Maybe that's why I now fly a Mooney with a Johnson Bar!

[benpilot]

 

@BigTex, thanks yeah I do like the manual flaps in the Piper even though they do take a bit of getting used to them. At least they work even if electrical system fails unlike the electric flaps in the Cessna. Whats funny is that the Piper has N for neutral for takeoff trim like a car setting. After flying Piper, fitting in a Mooney should not pose an issue for me since they are close in cabin size I think.

[RJBrown]

Damn....I'm soooooo glad that's settled You left out two words in your opinion, RJ....

 

FOR YOU.....

 

The best model is mission, individual, location, and budget specific, among many other variables.

 

If for you it's a Rocket, great, but that doesn't make you a total idiot for buying an MSE, any more than it makes anyone of the thousands of other Mooney drivers uninformed for owning their rides.

 

Suggesting otherwise is, IMHO, just self serving silliness.

And after all that I didn't even get a TLS driver to take the bait.

The perfect plane in my not so humble opinion is a Rocket, better?

And yes after stepping out of N231NH I was more than disappointed by N1079V.

Isn't self serving silliness what we are here for?

[fantom]

Damn....I'm soooooo glad that's settled Isn't self serving silliness what we are here for?

Apparently so, even as bad advise isn't. And I realize humble isn't part of your vocabulary, RJ.

[M016576]

Good plan. Getting your IR in a hot rod like a Bravo is just that much harder, as things happen real fast. The F is an Ideal platform for this rating. Your transition to a mooney with more speed will also be easier.

Not to hijack, but I think it's best to get your IR in the aircraft you intend on flying in instrument conditions... A student adapts most quickly when they have nothing to fall back on IMO (relative speeds, etc). Besides, when else will you get as in depth training on the aircraft, speeds, procedures and panel as during your initial instrument training?

As for "too much aircraft", student jet pilots in the Navy get their initial instrument qualification in the T-45C.... A 400kt jet. Before they fly that jet, they get qualified in the T-6 II for about 70 hours, which is a ~250kt turboprop. That's their first airplane... In many cases, ever. Granted, that's military training, but students adapt quickly to flying at those speeds... And develop their skills quickly. Personally, I think that intentionally starting in a slower mooney is kind of a waste of money if you intend on buying a faster model later.... But that assumes that you stay on top of your training, and fly on a regular basis. Honestly, I see plenty of owner/pilots of 550,000+ aircraft I wouldn't trust with a C152.... Not because they *couldnt* be capable... Just that they don't spend the time and training to be capable. Just my humble opinion... Training dollars are money well spent....

[Marauder]

Good plan. Getting your IR in a hot rod like a Bravo is just that much harder, as things happen real fast. The F is an Ideal platform for this rating. Your transition to a mooney with more speed will also be easier. Not to hijack, but I think it's best to get your IR in the aircraft you intend on flying in instrument conditions... A student adapts most quickly when they have nothing to fall back on IMO (relative speeds, etc). Besides, when else will you get as in depth training on the aircraft, speeds, procedures and panel as during your initial instrument training? As for "too much aircraft", student jet pilots in the Navy get their initial instrument qualification in the T-45C.... A 400kt jet. Before they fly that jet, they get qualified in the T-6 II for about 70 hours, which is a ~250kt turboprop. That's their first airplane... In many cases, ever. Granted, that's military training, but students adapt quickly to flying at those speeds... And develop their skills quickly. Personally, I think that intentionally starting in a slower mooney is kind of a waste of money if you intend on buying a faster model later.... But that assumes that you stay on top of your training, and fly on a regular basis. Honestly, I see plenty of owner/pilots of 550,000+ aircraft I wouldn't trust with a C152.... Not because they *couldnt* be capable... Just that they don't spend the time and training to be capable. Just my humble opinion... Training dollars are money well spent....

You left out a major factor that pertains to military aviators and one that rarely is true of GA pilots. There is a weeding out process as you know in the military. You don't get to fly anything and everything you want. You qualify for that privilege. And you guys spend a lot of time in training and training missions. In GA, with the right amount of money and time, you will get your license and be able to fly anything you can afford. Our weeding out process can be found in the NTSB reports. Just way too many examples of GA pilots getting in over their heads and paying the ultimate price flying an airplane they had no business being in. Your operative phrase is "stay on top of your training". Unfortunately, if you look in many GA log books, you will find that this is not happening. And a reason, in part, why are accident statistics are what they are.

[gjkirsch]

And after all that I didn't even get a TLS driver to take the bait.

The perfect plane in my not so humble opinion is a Rocket, better?

And yes after stepping out of N231NH I was more than disappointed by N1079V.

Isn't self serving silliness what we are here for?

I thought it beneath us Bravo drivers to respond.  After all, the entire market has by the valuation difference.

[Shadrach]

The Rocket is the best Mooney ever flown. Blah, Blah blah, gush, gush....After being out performed in every category at least the Bravo can brag about rear legroom.

I've never flown a Rocket so I'll have to trust your opinion! What truly amazes me is how many Mooney folks on this site believe that there is a difference in rear seat leg room between the mid-bodies and long bodies... It's been states twice in this thread alone.

Ima preddy sure der ain no differens mane!

[fixnflyr]

Why can't you reduce the power settings on a Rocket and get close to the same fuel burn as a 231 or 252 if you really want to go slow? I guess it boils down to the specific fuel consumption per horsepower efficiently difference in the 360 and 520 engines. Same speed equals same drag that requires same power, relatively speaking. I just bought a rocket 2 months ago and have flown it over 50 hours. Savannah GA to Cody WY in 8.4 hours with one fuel stop. I am loving the 210+ cruise speed.

 When I get the LOP figured out.........

Fixnflyr

[M016576]

You left out a major factor that pertains to military aviators and one that rarely is true of GA pilots. There is a weeding out process as you know in the military. You don't get to fly anything and everything you want. You qualify for that privilege. And you guys spend a lot of time in training and training missions.

In GA, with the right amount of money and time, you will get your license and be able to fly anything you can afford. Our weeding out process can be found in the NTSB reports. Just way too many examples of GA pilots getting in over their heads and paying the ultimate price flying an airplane they had no business being in.

Your operative phrase is "stay on top of your training". Unfortunately, if you look in many GA log books, you will find that this is not happening. And a reason, in part, why are accident statistics are what they are.

You're spot on. I guess the benefit of buying a "starter mooney" is that you can evaluate whether or not you want to dedicate the time and training ($$$) it takes to move up to the faster aircraft!

I get ahead of myself sometimes... As bad as it sounds, I forget about the guys that don't make it through the training... Even so, with a skill based attrition process, regular check rides, continuous training and single piloted IFR flight, we (as a military member) still lose pilots on a fairly regular basis. The safety programs have helped, but this (aviation) is still an intrinsically dangerous business.... Risk mitigation, good training and a realistic outlook of your skills is the best we can do to keep ourselves and our passengers safe (military or GA). Excellent points!!!

[M016576]

You left out a major factor that pertains to military aviators and one that rarely is true of GA pilots. There is a weeding out process as you know in the military. You don't get to fly anything and everything you want. You qualify for that privilege. And you guys spend a lot of time in training and training missions.

In GA, with the right amount of money and time, you will get your license and be able to fly anything you can afford. Our weeding out process can be found in the NTSB reports. Just way too many examples of GA pilots getting in over their heads and paying the ultimate price flying an airplane they had no business being in.

Your operative phrase is "stay on top of your training". Unfortunately, if you look in many GA log books, you will find that this is not happening. And a reason, in part, why are accident statistics are what they are.

To add on... And this just hit me, and it's a sad fact, the cost just to train in a faster, more technologically advanced aircraft is just that much more as well..... And unfortunately, all the more critical. I can see pilots "skipping out" on training opportunities because of the extra cost associated with the hotter aircraft. Hard to concentrate on your missed approach procedures if you've got $$$ cha-chinging through your mind....

[mike_elliott]

Not to hijack, but I think it's best to get your IR in the aircraft you intend on flying in instrument conditions... A student adapts most quickly when they have nothing to fall back on IMO (relative speeds, etc). Besides, when else will you get as in depth training on the aircraft, speeds, procedures and panel as during your initial instrument training?

As for "too much aircraft", student jet pilots in the Navy get their initial instrument qualification in the T-45C.... A 400kt jet. Before they fly that jet, they get qualified in the T-6 II for about 70 hours, which is a ~250kt turboprop. That's their first airplane... In many cases, ever. Granted, that's military training, but students adapt quickly to flying at those speeds... And develop their skills quickly. Personally, I think that intentionally starting in a slower mooney is kind of a waste of money if you intend on buying a faster model later.... But that assumes that you stay on top of your training, and fly on a regular basis. Honestly, I see plenty of owner/pilots of 550,000+ aircraft I wouldn't trust with a C152.... Not because they *couldnt* be capable... Just that they don't spend the time and training to be capable. Just my humble opinion... Training dollars are money well spent....

 

Ill stand behind what I posted. Getting the instrument rating will be easier in an F model than a Rocket or Bravo. Now Ill support what you said. You should train on the platform you are going to be using. This training is going to be required whether you have the IR already or not. One should go thru a complete training regiment anytime they transition from one platform to another, to include instrument work, speeds, power settings, etc. In fact, this all will be easier if you don't have to be learning the instrument basics at the same time. A lot of the instrument training is really systems training, and that varies aircraft to aircraft. Systems training is required for every aircraft you fly, IMHO.

[BigTex]

I started my instrument training in a Cherokee 180. I was rolling along when I purchased my Mooney and thought I would just pickup where I left off in my plane. Man, who was I kidding.

Learning a new plane and its systems along with instrument training was virtually impossible. I was really regressing. Things are so much simpler in a fixed pitch, fixed gear aircraft. Simple things like proper glideslope intercepts turned into quite a challenge in the Mooney. I had to stop training until I was completely comfortable with the plane and its systems.

That being said, there's no doubt that obtaining an IR in the 180 would be much easier. But at the end of the day, the objective is to use your plane in IMC. With that end game in mind, it only made sense to continue training in my Mooney... After I figured out how to fly it!

[benpilot]

 

@mike_elliot,

 

I spoke with a fellow club member who told me slower planes are better for IFR ratings due to more time to setup instrument approaches and so forth. But thinking would behoove me to train for the instrument rating in the actual plane that I buy and fly long term to develop the best experience on the systems familiarity. If I do end up with a Mooney instead of a Bonanza or Socata, then I will find a qualified Mooney instructor for dual training. Since I want a newer plane rather than a vintage craft, late model Mooney are a great buy now. I checked and used Bravos and first generation Ovations/Eagles are selling for under 250k compared to what they sold a few years ago. 

 

+1 BigTex, I agree! Learning the aircraft systems first is key then IFR training second.

[Raygun15E]

I'll pile on to the military training bit.

 

In the T-38C, students get 17 flights (4 at night), and at least 6-9 EP/Instrument/Nav simulators before their checkride. I'd have to check the syllabus for exact numbers. This should give an idea how much instrument training goes into Phase III of UPT. I think sims are a major advantage the military has in training pilots over the average GA pilot. It is very easy to practice many more approaches and other procedures quickly without all the drone time usually required between.

 

Of course, chairflying certainly helps and is FREE!

 

As far as the military also losing pilots. Yes we do and we also usually accept more risk due to mission requirements. OTOH, there are still some "pilots" that sneak thru training and the normal weeding out process...

 

Just my two cents.

[mike_elliott]

My students that train for their instrument ratings in slower (<160 Kt) mooneys have an easier time of it than the students in Rockets, Ovations and Bravos. In a number of cases, some of these students have moved from J's to Bravo's etc and the transition was painless for them. It is SO easy to bust altitude in say a Rocket when you are first training, it becomes frustrating and takes longer to "get it". It can certainly be done, however, just that it will be a bit more of a process for you, skynewbie, in a plane that will cost more to get it done in. I agree with bigtex, transition training must precede instrument training to be the most effective. Combining them as he tried is a bit of a wakeup call for most pilots.

[fantom]

I'll pile on to the military training bit. As far as the military also losing pilots. Yes we do and we also usually accept more risk due to mission requirements. OTOH, there are still some "pilots" that sneak thru training and the normal weeding out process... Just my two cents.

That's worth a lot more than two cents! Several thoughts that come to mind regarding the differences. There is an extensive weeding out process before UPT acceptance. And all candidates are recent college graduates, used to the learning process, highly motivated given the stuff they had to go through to get there, and the commitment they've signed up for in years if not dollars. The training is full time, total emersion, with excellent instructors, and about ten hours of ground school for each flying hour. Measurements, testing and check rides about weekly, with fair but 'tough love' feedback, and lots of knowing peer pressure. In GA one can be sloppy and usually have lots of time to correct the situation. Given the speeds, high tech environment, and mission profiles, there is little, if any, room for sloppiness or undisciplined flying in the military. When you get the launch order you go, no matter what. Given all of this some guys still skate through, BUT they aren't in the advanced T-38c that Raygun15E is training the best of the best in, nor are they being assigned to our most advanced fighters and bombers. God bless you guys for what you do for the rest of us.

[KSMooniac]

I just did a VFR XC flight with a friend in his Rocket yesterday, with me in the left seat.  I'm ~1100 hour private pilot, IR, and maybe 800 in Mooneys so far with most of that in my J.  Previous Mooney experience in C, E, and F models prior to purchase, including 7-8 hours of time in an F with my CFII while I was training for my IR in a 172.  Moving up from the 172 to instrument work in the F was a major step at the time!  More power setting options, configuration options, and systems to manage than a 172.  My CFII was a longtime Mooney owner and CFII and was wonderful throughout my training, and I feel it is very important to get appropriate experienced instructors for any transition training.  Once you're comfortable in your plane, then any ol' CFI/CFII can give you a workout, BFR, or IPC, but you're always better served getting a type-specific instructor and especially for the transition.

Now, having said that, after hundreds of hours of time in Mooneys, stepping into the Rocket was not a trivial change!  It is another step-change in complexity and especially power.  Things happen very quickly, and I think training for the IR in such a plane with a low-time private pilot would be pretty difficult.  Maybe if you have power settings worked out for all configuration and are very comfortable with the plane it might work reasonably, but there is just so much mental work going into the early phases of the IR training that I'd fear doing it in a very high performance plane might be counter-productive.  

 

Mike's comment above is spot-on IMO, and worth considering as a long-time Mooney owner and CFII.

[John Pleisse]

Best investment...252....best deal...1979 231.