Marauder Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 Clarence I make this to mean you have a useful load of 1477 lbs! 130 gals x 5.82 lbs/gal = 756.6 + 720 lbs of people = 1477 lbs. You can't be referring to a Mooney unless you are deliberately overloading it. What are you flying? I think I heard him mention he flew something like a Comanche with the 8 cylinder (I think). He will be along to confirm.
carusoam Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 The tandem twin (8 cyl Lycoming) in his avatar... It would go faster if the tail wasn't on backwards! Just sayin' -a-
smccray Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 You might eventually discover that an F or early J with 1025-1050 lbs of useful load can make a trip non-stop that a heavier and faster plane cannot. I've done some trips with 4 folks + bags for 450-500 NM and launched with 44 gallons for example, because at 46 I'd be overgross. Or a later J with the gross weight increase . My '87 has a 1024 lbs and as a 205 it has a higher gear speed than a standard J model- 140 kias. 1
KSMooniac Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 Yours is rare I believe, with that useful load and the gross weight increase. Best of both worlds, except lower takeoff and climb performance at 2900 lbs vs. 2740. I'd still take it, though!
Guest Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 Clarence I make this to mean you have a useful load of 1477 lbs! 130 gals x 5.82 lbs/gal = 756.6 + 720 lbs of people = 1477 lbs. You can't be referring to a Mooney unless you are deliberately overloading it. What are you flying? Cris, While my plane was not made by Mooney, its a Piper Comanche 400. Rumour has it that Piper copied a Mooney which Al parked at Lockhaven one night. It does with brute power what a Mooney does with more refinement. Mine weighs 2100 pound and will carry 1500, it will take off shorter than any long body, climb faster, carry more and not burn much more than many long bodies. I do miss the nice light flight controls of my Mooney's so I'm restoring a Mooney Mite. Clarence
carusoam Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 We're going to need to use some refined numbers for comparison... Data from a 310hp version of the long body would be my preference. T/O distance... 800' Clarence, what does your 400hp monster do at SL? Best regards, -a- 1
Cris Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 Cris, While my plane was not made by Mooney, its a Piper Comanche 400. Rumour has it that Piper copied a Mooney which Al parked at Lockhaven one night. It does with brute power what a Mooney does with more refinement. Mine weighs 2100 pound and will carry 1500, it will take off shorter than any long body, climb faster, carry more and not burn much more than many long bodies. I do miss the nice light flight controls of my Mooney's so I'm restoring a Mooney Mite. Clarence Ah ha now I get it. I was thinking you were responding to the OP's original question re a Mooney. My bad I always wanted a 400 Hp Commanche but back in the day I could not justify the fuel burn, probably still can't LOL
Guest Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 Cris, The fuel burn in cruise is not really a lot more that some here are posting for Ovations. If I ignore take off power fuel flow 35 GPH for two minutes, after that cruise numbers 18-20 at 185-195 KTAS. On a cost per mile per bum it's not bad. Compared to my old E model it's noticeably higher. Clarence
gsengle Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 In my FIKI ovation 1 I plan on 175 kts 6500ft burning about 14.2 gph lean of peak in cruise. Roughly six hours endurance. 1
Recommended Posts