Vortex Generators on a Vintage Mooney?

[N207LS]

Has anyone had any experience?  I am considering adding them to my 1968 G model.  I have done some preliminary research and the cost is quite low ($1450), the plane does not suffer a loss of speed, and the slow flight handling/stall speeds are reduced significantly.  Sounds like a no brainer to me. 

I have read Jim Kerr's analysis on his 252 (www.n252q.com), but was looking for some feedback from a vintage Mooney owner with them installed, or someone who has considered the stc for their plane.

Thanks!

[kellym]

Quote: N207LS

Has anyone had any experience?  I am considering adding them to my 1968 G model.  I have done some preliminary research and the cost is quite low ($1450), the plane does not suffer a loss of speed, and the slow flight handling/stall speeds are reduced significantly.  Sounds like a no brainer to me. 

I have read Jim Kerr's analysis on his 252 (www.n252q.com), but was looking for some feedback from a vintage Mooney owner with them installed, or someone who has considered the stc for their plane.

Thanks!

[Piloto]

A hangar neighbor had them installed in his Baron and had them removed after his 5 year old grandaughter had her thighs cut helping wash the plane. The crying and the blood was more than enough reason for his action. I think they pose no hazard on a high wing plane but on a low wing you could get injuries. Aside from the above Mooneys are pretty slow when coming to landing. You do not want to be too slow particularly during crosswinds.

José

   

[KSMooniac]

No need whatsoever for them on a Mooney IMO.

[eaglebkh]

Are there more benefits than just lowering the stall speed?  Besides, exact management of speed is a necessary skill for Mooney pilots - just avoid slow flight.

[N207LS]

According to the VG company, there are improved hanndling characteristics as well as the reduced stall speeds.  The plane will supposedly handle much better at slow speeds (at or near stall speed...)  Maybe some short field performance?   Not real enthused since I have read all of the posts concerning the speed loss...  I really don't want to lose speed (my plane has $20k+ in speed mods)...

Aaron

[Mooney_Allegro]

I personally would not install them on my plane as it would be much more difficult to wash the plane around all of those strips, plus the potential to cut yourself like in one of the above posts.  I also think it looks ugly to mess up a smooth wing with them.  The Mooney looks really good without them, vintage or newer.

[aviatoreb]

Has anyone here actually installed vortex generators on their Mooney?  I see here lots of speculation as to what they would do, and suggestions that it is not needed.  But from my perspective, when landing, crisper handling and slower is better - yes Mooney can be benign, but an even safer margin is always better.  It is definitely a more is better thing when it comes to landing safety characteristics.  That would be worth $1500 to me.

So - from anyone who actually did it - not speculation as to what we think it would do - do they perform as advertised on a Mooney?  Slower speeds, crisper handling.  And what is the actually cost to cruise speed. N252Q reports no noticed lost in cruise speed.  Anyone else?

Thanks.

[WardHolbrook]

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.

[KSMooniac]

I think there is NO WAY it cannot result in a loss of cruise speed on a Mooney.  Sticking those on a fat Cessna wing is completely different than putting them on a laminar-flow Mooney wing.  Not needed, either, as Ward mentioned above.  

[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. 

[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. 

[aviatoreb]

Quote: WardHolbrook

 No more call please. We have our winner.

I'd only add one more item to the list, but it will cost a bit more than the $1500 - go get a glider add-on. Those three items will increase your skill and ability (and safety) as a pilot.

[DaV8or]

I think it is a fair question and appropriate for this forum - has anyone actually done the experiment and taken the bullet for the team?  I bet SOMEONE has.  Has anyone installed vg strips on their mooney that they can state by direct observation with their airplane rather than conjecture if they do or do not reduce cruise speed?  A simple question of experimental result, not speculation.

[jetdriven]

I think upgrading the machine for more safety would be a great idea.  Takeoff and landing accidents are almost always the result of training, so Im not sure how  much lowering your stall speed by 2-3- knots is going to help you there. 

Now if you really ewant to improve safety margins with equipment, I can think of a few we have come up with.   SHoulder harnesses retrofits, standby vacuum, electric secondary attitude indicator, onboard weather avoidance,  split avionics busses, moving map avionics are a good start.

[WardHolbrook]

I appreciate what you are saying. However, historically, I'd guess that more pilots have died in certified aircraft as a result of lack of skill and proficiency than have died as a result of dieing in "unsafe" airplanes. Things like VGs are great and have their place, but they can't compensate for lack of skill or discipline in the cockpit. History has shown time and time again, that training enhances safety more than "things". Take for example the greatest two current examples: The MU-2 and the Cirrus. The MU-2 went from having the worst safety record of all the turboprops to having the best. The only change they made was to change training requirement to fly the thing. Compare that with the safety record of the parachute-equipted Cirrus. That chute hasn't helped much has it? Things like tail-dragger, aerobatic and glider training introduce and reinforce skills that transfer directly into all areas of your flying and will do more to enhance safety than any aerodynamic band-aids that you glue to your wing. As always, this is just my opinion and of course, YMMV.  

[Shadrach]

Quote: aviatoreb

 No more call please. We have our winner.

I'd only add one more item to the list, but it will cost a bit more than the $1500 - go get a glider add-on. Those three items will increase your skill and ability (and safety) as a pilot.

[sleepingsquirrel]

Aircraft Spruce has several examples of DIY vortex generators  for far less money than $1400. The great hope for  three blade propeller types is that there are vortex generators for your props! this could actually make the three blade prop as efficient as a two blade propeller! I put vortex generators on the hood (bonnet ) of my 1976 Midget once. It was cool looking and without NASA rocket science to support performance increases, I did get more attention from the chicks!

Lear jet/ vortex generator=MG Midget/ vortex generator/1000= Chick magnet

I'm still thinking that hail damage(dimpling) could provide just as much boundry layer control as round rivet heads as vortex generators. (later Mooneys have round rivets , I'll bet just about where laminar flow was seen to become seperated)

I think that things seen as perfomance enhancers on HIGH SPEED aircraft i.e. winglets,vortex generators,flush rivets, find their way to GA because they look sexy and fast because FAST airplanes have them. Leaving bird poop,smashed bugs, on the leading edge will do as much to keep the boundry layer attached as vortex generators at the speeds Mooneys are operating. I once saw a clipped wing Cub with end plates ? This was before jets had winglets.

Remember , there is no such thing as a HAIRLESS flying squirrel, insects have vortex generators, but as these are much smaller than our Mooneys, they operate in air that appears much stickier to them than at our R number. They need turbulent flow to reduce drag.

I'm betting that vortex generators are seen on some airplanes in our realm of flight because of poor airfoil selection in the first place. It's a cheap fix instead of retooling/redesigning.

I did consider putting them on but I've been married now for 24 years and my wife doesn't think I need a chick magnet.

I reserve the right to eat crow, or change my mind, all statements above have an element of truth, but how much is a can of Mooney sub atomic dimpling wax worth?

[Shadrach]

My take on VGs is this:  They are not a new whizbang...they have been around for ages and I am quite sure that Mooney is aware they exist.  They have opted to not install them for a reason.  I am guessing that the reason is that they are unnecassary and counter productive to the desired performance specs.

Here's what I'd do if I were you. Go out and see how short you can land with out them and see how it compares to book. When you get to consistant book numbers for shortfield landings you should reassess your need for more performance. Something tells me you won't want or need them.

P.S. Many pilots are uncomfortable flying mooneys slowly, however the planes don't seem to mind it at all... 

[aviatoreb]

So you're saying the flow separation is closer to the leading edge during cruise and moves back as you slow down?

[aviatoreb]

Quote: sleepingsquirrel

I reserve the right to eat crow, or change my mind, all statements above have an element of truth, but how much is a can of Mooney sub atomic dimpling wax worth?

[aviatoreb]

Quote: Shadrach

My take on VGs is this:  They are not a new whizbang...they have been around for ages and I am quite sure that the Mooney is aware they exist.  They have opted to not install them for a reason.  I am guessing that the reason is that they are unnecassary and counter productive to the desired performance specs.

Heres what I'd do if I were you. Go out and see how short you can land with out them and see how it compares to book. When you get to consistant book numbers for shortfield landings you should reassess your need for more performance. Something tells me you won't want or need them.

P.S. Many pilots are uncomfortable flying mooneys slowly, however the planes don't seem to mind it at all... 

[KSMooniac]

Quote: aviatoreb

Thank you friends for humoring me.

[Parker_Woodruff]

If short strips are your thing, just fine tune your piloting skill to get the aircraft in and out (within the performance charts of course!)

When I had mine, I was in/out of a 2000' hard surface (F50) no problem.

[sleepingsquirrel]

Quote: aviatoreb