Monroy Long Range

[Hector]

Oscar has a C that travels far too. I think he has used a 20 gallon ferry tank/bladder. For the VERY occasional long trip it might be an option? Might want to do a search or pm him.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Piloto]

2 hours ago, Steve Dawson said:

I'd like to hear more about how and what you did to prepare for the 49 spins.

Steve

The spins were required due to change in the angular momentum of the wing when mass (fuel) is increased. This change affects the roll rate and spin recovery. To minimize these effects I decided to add the fuel in the mid wing section instead of tip tanks. Flutter was also another factor to consider.

For spin testing I rigged the Mooney with a removable door hinge pin so it can be removed quickly for crew ejection. Each crew member (myself and FAA test pilot Lucy Young) had parachutes. About 100 pounds of sandbags in the baggage area and myself seating in the back to bring the CG completely aft. In the event of not recovering I would move forward to bring the CG forward.

The 49 spins was required to test the different possible configurations (recovery) for left and right rotation. Aside spin testing there was also in flight high speed dives (beyond red line) tests and on ground GVT (Ground Vibration Test) to verify flutter free. The GVT showed wing only flutter at 600kts. I didn't tested other airframe components. Structural integrity was also tested by pressurizing the tanks.

At the same time I was working with Allied/Signal (later Honeywell) on the B7J7 FCC (Flight Control Computer) testing and trying to get the BE-200 JAA approval. But never had to spin those.

José

[Steve Dawson]

Thanks Jose. I've heard from a couple of people that have spun the aircraft (M20J's) and have had problems bring it back to control so can you tell us is there much more to spinning a Mooney compared to a 172?

[PTK]

On February 24, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Piloto said:

Yes, back in 1985. Quite an experience getting them FAA approved. 49 spins with full fuel (100 gals) and sand bags for aft CG for flight testing. 

José

Any discount on the kit for a group buy José?!

[Piloto]

5 hours ago, Steve Dawson said:

Thanks Jose. I've heard from a couple of people that have spun the aircraft (M20J's) and have had problems bring it back to control so can you tell us is there much more to spinning a Mooney compared to a 172?

Recovery is tricky and depends on the angular momentum. Allow at least 1,000 feet for recovery. I had to practice before the cert test to comply with the recovery requirements (within one turn of anti spin controls inputs).

José

[Piloto]

4 hours ago, PTK said:

Any discount on the kit for a group buy José?!

Free shipping and no tax.

[carl]

Lucy Young is an American naval officer. In 1980 she became the first woman to qualify in Naval Air Combat Maneuvering ,

Then Airlines , & FAA

[carl]

May 26, 2009

Mooney Ovation 3: Turbo Performance Without The Turbo

The Ovation 3 is the fastest normally aspirated production single ever—period

"The Marshall Mooney also features the Jose Monroy 130-gallon, long-range tanks, in case you're one of those strange folks who likes to endure for 10 hours at a time. The bottom line is an airplane that can fly much longer than most pilots are willing to sit,"

 

 

[M20F]

12 minutes ago, carl said:

May 26, 2009

 

The Ovation 3 is the fastest normally aspirated production single ever—period

I think Clarence might take exception to that statement.

[orionflt]

19 hours ago, Piloto said:

Free shipping and no tax.

I'm in, just have to get the house finished first.

 

Brian

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, M20F said:

I think Clarence might take exception to that statement.

Not wanting to burst anyone's bubble, I'll remain silent.

Clarence

[gsengle]

I like the idea of the tanks but I already have six hours endurance in a stock R and boy you feel full fuel weight at 90gal!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Piloto]

2 hours ago, carl said:

Lucy Young is an American naval officer. In 1980 she became the first woman to qualify in Naval Air Combat Maneuvering ,

Then Airlines , & FAA

She definitely had a thrill spinning the Mooney. Charming girl.

José

[Bob_Belville]

40 minutes ago, Piloto said:

She definitely had a thrill spinning the Mooney. Charming girl.

José

Did you have to certify in more than one model? Which one was used?

[Piloto]

6 minutes ago, Bob_Belville said:

Did you have to certify in more than one model? Which one was used?

Each model have different main tank configuration. This required different feed and venting requirements for the kits and flight testing. The STC covers M20C, M20E, M20F, M20J, M20K, M20L, M20M, M20R and M20TN models.

[Bob_Belville]

10 minutes ago, Piloto said:

Each model have different main tank configuration. This required different feed and venting requirements for the kits and flight testing. The STC covers M20C, M20E, M20F, M20J, M20K, M20L, M20M, M20R and M20TN models.

C and E main tanks are different? Fs and Js?

[Awful_Charlie]

Just re-awakening this topic, as I'm interested in the loading positions for the extra fuel.  My CofG is too far forward for my liking, and I find the forward limit more restricting than the aft limit. I could just add another charlie weight, but if the LR option moved the loading point back that might offer more flexibility.

Is there a CofG change for fuel in the sub 89USG loading José? Any change of figures please?

[DVA]

I had a wonderful conversation with Jose recently on this topic and about the Bravo M. The tanks are located at 71”, and it is advisable to add that station to your W&B as it will help put the CG a bit aft when the LR Tanks are full. For the 20M you have 15G per side, so you get 90lbs at that location for a while in flight.

Jose will correct me if I’m wrong, but here’s what I recall (again, this is about the M20M)

• When the fuel in the wing is below apx 20gal, the LR tanks are essentially empty and the aircraft will act in all ways (fuel gauges, W&B, etc) as if the LR tanks were not even installed.
• The LR tanks will begin to fill slowly (note: non-linearly) after about 20gal is added to the wing.
• The wing gages (if you have them) are suppose to read accurate only the ground, and they should be accurate up to about the 20 gal mark.
• After 20 gals, the LR tanks will begin to fill as the wing fills; they don’t fill “first” or “last”, they fill as the wing fills.
• As an example, if the wing gage read 30gals, there will actually be more than 30gals in the wing because after 20gals, the LR tanks begin to fill. How much more than 30gals is a calculated guess for the most part that involves a little interpolation. But the Good News is that you do have more fuel than the gage shows. (I’m sure Jose can be more precise on this point,  if needed)
• As you continue to fill the wing, the internal gages begin to read non-linearly; On the fuel gages “11"=11gals, “22"=apx 22gals, “33"=44gals, and “F”=59 gals.
• When you pass about 45 gals in the wing, the LR tanks will essentially be full - 15 gal - and will contribute fully to the 71” station at 90lbs. You should include this in your W&B calculation as it will move the very forward Mooney CG back aft a bit which will always put you in the envelope if the rest of the plane is configured correctly. (eg. proper rear ballast, if required)

Hope this helps everyone a bit. Please do your own due diligence when it comes to calculating fuel for your aircraft. Gages are notoriously wrong, don’t depend on them - fuel burn rate through a properly calibrated FF meter is your best bet to knowing how much fuel you’ve burned and how much you might have left. Maybe.

Dave

[carusoam]

Welcome aboard, DVA.

 

Best regards,

-a-

[Awful_Charlie]

Welcome DVA Dave, and thanks for the info. Let me digest your notes and see if I can come up with a loading chart in a few days....