Checkride Question: How To Determine T/O-Landing Distances On Vintage Mooneys??

[kurtsnyder]

I have my commercial checkride scheduled for tomorrow and I'm starting to feel the stress. I called the examiner this morning to get info on the CC portion and he told me to calculate takeoff and landing distances and runway length required. I told him that my airplane is 50 years old and the owner's manual doesn't have that data. I don't think he wanted to believe me. So he told me he was going to look into it. I talked to him about an hour later and he said that he called the FSDO and that the inspector was confused and wasn't sure if my plane even qualifies to be used on an FAA checkride. Crazy, eh? So I looked at the PTS again and the M20B DOES qualify to be used on a checkride. So, the examiner asked me how I know if I have enough RWY for take off and landing and that I had to answer that tomorrow.

 

So that's my question. How do I know? I've flown the airplane at gross many time in hot weather and a 4000'-5000' RWY has been plenty long. I've even landed and departed at a 2000' grass strip a couple of times (not at gross) and been fine. How do you think I should respond to the DPE?? Thanks!!

[Hank]

Kurt--

You can always check the Download page here, there are three C-model Manuals there. My 1970 one has a Takeoff & Landing Distance table; there's also one for a '65 model and one with no year shown.

For what it's worth, my C is based on a 3000' field with trees at both ends, and I fly in and out at gross with no problem, even in the summer. Field elevation is 567 msl, but with temps 90+F, Takeoff flaps clears everything by comfortable margins when heavy (loaded with bags for vacation, or 4 people going to lunch). Normal loads do not require Takeoff flaps, but then again in my Manual you will see it says, "Flaps--Takeoff or as desired."

Good luck on your ride!!

[Bob_Belville]

I have an Owners Manual for a '66C. Part IV Performance data, page 29, is a chart of take off and climb data. Ground run, total dist to clear 50', rate of climb rate and best speed are shown for 2200# & 2575# and for sea level, 2500', and 5000'. Each elevation has a line for std temp and extreme high and extreme low temps. 

 

So, there are 18 ground roll distances and 18 distances to clear 50' and interpolation to any temp and to weight is possible.  

 

FWIW, @ 5000' field elevation and 80F @ 2575# the chart shows 3275' to clear 50'.All other data points are under 2310' to clear 50' and under 1915 ground roll. 

 

* WIND CALM, HARD SURFACE RW.

 

Here's a M20C OM (1962-1963-1964) uploaded to the MS site:

http://mooneyspace.com/files/file/6-mooney-m20c-poh/

 

Go to page 29 (page 36 of the pdf file)

 

You might have to address the differences between your B and a C. There were quite a few but the engine is the same.

 

Engine: No change.

Propeller: Changed to Hartzell 74" Constant Speed HC-C2YK/7666-2 Propeller with Hartzell governor, D-l-4.

Cowl flaps: Reduced flap opening (engine cooling resubstantiated).

Exhaust system: Changed to Hanlon & Wilson exhaust system (lighter weight, more efficient heat muff, and reduced back pressure).

Battery access door: New

New power relay.

New radio speakers.

Landing light: 100 to 250 watt.

Floorboards: redesigned, lightweight floor.

Seats: Redesigned seats with safety belt attachment to seat structure instead of floor. New rear seat back structure.

Interior: New

Instrument panel: New T-formation arrangement of the flight instruments directly in front of the pilot; with radio equipment in the center of the panel. Garwin cluster gauge; combined fuel and manifold pressure gauge.

Wing flaps: Increased maximum flap deflection to 33 degrees and established a take-off setting of 15 degrees.

Empennage: Reduced all skin thickness one gage (and reduced counterbalance weight accordingly).

Engine controls: Changed throttle, mixture: prop pitch, and cowl flap controls to new flexible push-pull controls manufactured by H&E Aircraft.

Rudder: Increased rudder travel to 23 degrees, both right and left. Also added a spring-loaded interconnect between the aileron and rudder controls (where these control tubes cross under the floor). This interconnect gives a slight aileron correction at extreme rudder throw which improves the lateral-directional stability.

Flap control: Changed from a mechanical system to a hydraulic actuating system with a simple hand pump for actuation. New indicator combined with trim indicator.

Trim control: Trim actuator was redesigned to give a new arrangement of drive components in a new housing (which simplified floor construction). Also added a new mechanically actuated trim indicator which also houses the flap indicator.

Control wheel: Changed from aluminum alloy to magnesium alloy.

Nose gear: Strengthened retraction link to accommodate new nose gear loads.

Main gear: No change.

Weight and Balance:
1. Increased gross weight to 2575 pounds and changed aft C.G. limit to sta. 49.0. (See Aircraft Specification No. 243 for C.G. Envelope.)
2. Reduced airframe by 50 pounds. Reduction was accomplished in the following areas:
Windshield and windows, interior, propeller, floorboards, empennage control surface/skins, rear seats, step, fairing, tail skid, trim system torque tubes. 

[aviatoreb]

I have my commercial checkride scheduled for tomorrow and I'm starting to feel the stress. I called the examiner this morning to get info on the CC portion and he told me to calculate takeoff and landing distances and runway length required. I told him that my airplane is 50 years old and the owner's manual doesn't have that data. I don't think he wanted to believe me. So he told me he was going to look into it. I talked to him about an hour later and he said that he called the FSDO and that the inspector was confused and wasn't sure if my plane even qualifies to be used on an FAA checkride. Crazy, eh? So I looked at the PTS again and the M20B DOES qualify to be used on a checkride. So, the examiner asked me how I know if I have enough RWY for take off and landing and that I had to answer that tomorrow.

 

So that's my question. How do I know? I've flown the airplane at gross many time in hot weather and a 4000'-5000' RWY has been plenty long. I've even landed and departed at a 2000' grass strip a couple of times (not at gross) and been fine. How do you think I should respond to the DPE?? Thanks!!

 

Good luck Kurt!

 

Please report in detail the oral and flying parts of your test.  I am about 2 months behind you to doing my own commercial check ride.

[kurtsnyder]

Thanks, everyone for the kind words and the help! I printed off the takeoff and landing data from the 1965 model It said that it included data from the 62-64 years too. That should be good. My biggest concern now is the weather tomorrow. Not sure if it's cooperate. I'll give a full write-up when I get back. Thanks!

[carusoam]

Expect that the examiner has to ask these questions...

The exact answer won't be as important as the decision process you are going through.

Know the differences between your B and the C in the POH. The '74 POH used to be recommended by the factory for all C models, because of the wealth of data it supplied. Prior years got owners manuals with a pamphlet of information. Have both for legal purposes...one applies directly to your A/F and the one that has the best information.

Add wind, W&B and temperature effects to your calculations....

If you need logic to follow... We've lost only One pilot here, because he was unable to follow the responsibility of runway length calculations, density altitude and wind direction when he needed to.

Fortunately, he won't let us forget....

Expect Airframe icing and VFR flight into IMC to be the other hottest topics of what else can get you killed....

Best regards,

-a-

[Seanhoya]

Kurt -

Good luck today! I am not sure where you are, but the cold weather we have been experiencing back East makes for some short takeoff rolls and epic climb rates.

While I always refer to the POH, the age of our airframes, state of the engines, and general operator error always add a bit of fudge-factor to these calculations.

As technique only, and because I don't have any reason to compel me to do otherwise, I don't land on runways that are less than 2000 feet in my 1968 M20G. In the summer, I will use a good portion of that distance to takeoff.

My POH lacks emergency procedures, so to make up for it, I refer to my aftermarket checklist. In cases where you lack factory provided information, the advice offered above is sound in terms of making decisions for your particular airframe.

Good luck again!

Sean

[N601RX]

I had my F based on a 2,000 asphalt strip for about 3 months this summer/fall and never saw anything that concerned me.  I made a point to only use half of it.  I've also landed/departed on 1,800 grass with no problems.  For short fields I think it is important to have some predefined Land/Go Around criteria/checkpoints and not be making it up as you go.

 

You could provide your examiner some tables that you made yourself based on the actual performance of your aircraft.  That would be hard for him to argue with.

[pinerunner]

I think its good that you have these downloaded tables if the originals are unavailable.  Since you've been in and out of a pretty short strip yourself I would recall as well as possible how it performed, and correlate that with the table. Having owners manual tables based on Mooney test pilot performance is all well and good but its important to know how it performs in your own hands and with that plane. If you have any recollection of the times you did it and can make a reasonable guess at temperature, altitude, and altimeter setting then you could calculate a density altitude, correlate your performance with the chart, and tell the examiner the minimum field length YOU feel comfortable with on a hot muggy summer day in this particular plane versus a cool dry autumn day. Even if you have to guess at the numbers a little it would still be good exercise.

 

I don't recall getting grilled too bad when I went for my commercial ride; they just made me do the maneuvers and it was fun.  You've already passed the written. Be ready to show the  inspector how you think. How did you decide you felt comfortable going into that 2000 ft grass strip?  What if two really fat guys wanted you to fly them out of it? 

 

I think showing that you have and understand the tables but don't take them for granted but rather verify the performance in your own hands would make a great impression.  

[sleepingsquirrel]

Koch chart may be what you need.

[sleepingsquirrel]

http://takeflightsandiego.com/assets/documents/KochChart.jpg

[kurtsnyder]

Thanks everyone so much for the great help! I had to cancel my ride Sunday due to a forecast that ended up being wrong. The weather turned out to be an extremely nice day. What really is frustrating is that the examiner has no openings for 3 weeks. That's the way all the examiners are in the area. I have a job prospect where I'm pretty much a shoe-in according to one of the pilots who flies for the company, but I can't apply until I get this ride out of the way..I am so frustrated!!

[M20F]

FSDO and that the inspector was confused and wasn't sure if my plane even qualifies to be used on an FAA checkride.

That would have been correct for a long time or debated as to whether or not it was correct but not due to performance charts. If it comes up please reference:

http://www.aopa.org/Advocacy/Regulatory-,-a-,-Certification-Policy/Regulatory-Brief-FAA-issues-new-interpretation-of-dual-controls.aspx

[kurtsnyder]

That would have been correct for a long time or debated as to whether or not it was correct but not due to performance charts. If it comes up please reference:

http://www.aopa.org/Advocacy/Regulatory-,-a-,-Certification-Policy/Regulatory-Brief-FAA-issues-new-interpretation-of-dual-controls.aspx

Very good reference!!

[pinerunner]

Let us know when you pass. Mine was back in the 70's and wasn't too bad. They just put me through the maneuvers I'd been practicing.