Mooney down with fatalities

[Tony Armour]

Reported now, the pilot and his mother and the pilots two children. His mother and one child were deceased at the site. I haven't heard about the pilot and the other child's status. I was thinking about going to the  hospital if the pilot was able to recieve visitors. Any thoughts on this ? Not sure what I can do other than offer  assistance. My biggest help would be transport of folks and that's not a good offer right now. 

[AaronDC8402]

Tony, I'd suggest starting with leaving a card or letter, etc. with contact info at the hospital for the pilot and/or family. 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Hank said:

Every 24 months for IFR operations. It's part of the pitot static certification. 

Thats another reason to maintain 1.3 times the value shown, so that if it's off a little, I'm still safe. The odds of it getting off by 15 mph without noticing are pretty slim.

Unless it is being specially asked for the airspeed indicator is not calibrated.  The pitot system is sometimes leak checked, but not always, the FAR and the Canadian CAR don't really address pitot leaks only static.  I'd say that a good avionics shop will do both.

Those Mooney owners with electric gear and an airspeed driven anti retraction system should be having a leak check preformed by their maintainer during gear retraction at annual inspection. If of course they're paying attention.

Clarence

[201er]

1 hour ago, bonal said:

Both important but I standby my statement and fwiw what do we all talk about when discussing pattern and landings we talk airspeed not AOA now we have some fancy device to help us do what we should already know how to do. Why do you feel the need to insult 

I'm not trying to insult. But it is the mindset you express that I believe is the very cause of these recent accidents and many many like them.

An Angle of Attack indicator isn't telling you what you already know. It is telling you most directly what you need to know. Everything else is a guessing game based on secondary sources, manuals, and mental mathematics.

I'm not merely advocating the angle of attack gadget, I am saying that we need to fundamentally change our understanding of slow flight to be entirely thought of in terms of angle of attack and could care less about airspeed values. 

[MB65E]

201-That, and the knowing that an unloaded airplane can't stall! I think more people should have glider and tail wheel intros early in their primary training. I'm thankful I did. I think teaching AOA is important. I like the way you phrased it. Not another gadget but getting back to the basics. 

Still sucks we loose so many each year. 

-Matt

[bonal]

When you call someone inept you make a personal insult you could have made your point by just explaining your views on the angle of attack and it's something I am well aware of and how stalls develop as a result of separation of airflow over the wing. Let me ask if you would fly your airplane with an inop ASI and no functional back up. Well would you. 

[Danb]

Like most of us old grumpy pilots, there's a reason we're old grumpy pilots, I have a checklist/do list/ flow method for most stuff. Most of us have a take/off, go/no go procedures. For the sake of this thread my T.0 flow is:

REACT

R- rpm-mp-turbo ok.   ¥

E- engine inst. ok.        ¥

A- airspeed.                  ¥

C- u on centerline.        ¥

T- take off point established in the event the take off needs to be aborted ¥

these are scanned or in my plane it's a flow which in a very short period of time or used up runway, I can see if all the stuff right now seems good enough to lift off.

utilizing this along with a similiar mind set by  Guitarman I also establish my OUT in an event of a failure such as at 300 feet look straight away for the best possible landing site even is if there is none, fly the plane to the best possible outcome. Sorry for the long diatribe but another little tidbit that must be done on each and every flight.

 

 

[201er]

28 minutes ago, bonal said:

When you call someone inept you make a personal insult you could have made your point by just explaining your views on the angle of attack and it's something I am well aware of and how stalls develop as a result of separation of airflow over the wing.

I did not call you inept. I said the entire "airspeed airspeed airspeed" mindset is inept. Don't feel so proud, the majority of pilots/instructors share this mindset and the stall accident rate fails to diminish!

[201er]

43 minutes ago, bonal said:

Let me ask if you would fly your airplane with an inop ASI and no functional back up. Well would you. 

No, of course not. How would I know when it's safe to put the gear down? And that would be illegal.

But could I fly a plane with an inop ASI? Certainly. I've had several ASI failures that could not have been distinguished before flight and I managed just fine. Why? Because I fly by reference to angle of attack and not airspeed! Airspeed is just one indirect indicator of angle of attack. Pilots are very shallow minded to put so much emphasis on a single, indirect, and failure prone means of keeping an airplane flying.

I use a combination of angle of attack indicator, pitch attitude, air speed, ground speed (with knowledge of wind), stall warning, seat of the pants, wind noise, and other information to derive angle of attack. It is like a six pack scan but all in regards to angle of attack information. Therefore, I am not banking on a single instrument or number for one of the most vital bits of information I need to safely and effectively fly the airplane.

I am not criticizing you or speaking to you directly but to the common adage that you are simply repeating. I object to the airspeed-centric mindset and the system that promotes it. It is my opinion that this mindset (and fundamental misunderstanding of angle of attack) that leads to a good half of all general aviation accidents.

[bonal]

Ok you win happy now

[DXB]

3 hours ago, 201er said:

I'm not merely advocating the angle of attack gadget, I am saying that we need to fundamentally change our understanding of slow flight to be entirely thought of in terms of angle of attack and could care less about airspeed values. 

 In absence of calculated or directly measured AOA, you seem to imply that the average private pilot can be taught to know what the airflow over the wing is doing at any given moment. I seriously doubt this. I imagine Bob Hoover has such a built in AOA indicator in the circuitry of his brain, but I never will. I'd best watch my airspeed for now, and not make any moves where a given airspeed ceases to provide a margin of safety.  

[Andy95W]

2 hours ago, 201er said:

I am not criticizing you or speaking to you directly but to the common adage that you are simply repeating. I object to the airspeed-centric mindset and the system that promotes it. It is my opinion that this mindset (and fundamental misunderstanding of angle of attack) that leads to a good half of all general aviation accidents.

We get it.  You have an AOA device and you use it effectively.

For those of us who don't have AOA, what -centric mindset should we have, if not airspeed-centric? 

[Hank]

Perhaps the problem is that sometimes the pilot gets busy, accepts various instructions, doesn't think them through and tries to perform without looking down at the ASI. Some things, like "turn it in tight," should only be attempted when well above stall speed, but it's something that I never do and so far haven't been asked. For me, in the pattern, a steep turn is 30°; I generally don't go beyond standard rate, and didn't even as a VFR pilot. Call it 1/2-3/4 mile spacing from the runway. Mixing with big iron 6 nm out is really strange to me, but I've never had a problem with it.

Which reminds me, I need to practice some straight in approaches, they aren't something I do very often, and the whole descent thing without glideslope or VASI/PAPI takes getting used to. I'm usually told which jet to follow, and turn base as soon as I identify  it, and it's usually clear if the runway with all any wake turbulence well dissipated by the time I'm in position behind it.

[bonal]

Ill be sure to let my primary instructor, a man that flew medium bombers and a tour in UH1's in Vietnam and has well over 10000 hours without being an ATP and who could fly the pants off of almost any one on this site. That his airspeed centric mindset is bravo Sierra and needs to be re thought. But to be fair he drilled me on angle of attack every bit as much. My mistake was to have failed to mention both. But the only tool other than my ASI and a mental awareness is my AI which of course isn't going to tell me what's happening to the air that's passing over my wings. As for accident rates well we really can't compare because we don't have much history of training that only speaks to AOA and thinks airspeed awareness is for when to drop the gear and deploy the flaps.  I seriously doubt that any stall spin accidents were the result of an excess in airspeed. But you obviously know more about it than I (and I don't doubt that's true) so I'll just keep on trying to learn as much as I can from the sharper pencils in the box and keep inept thinking to myself. 

[gsxrpilot]

I learned to fly without ever looking at the ASI once in the pattern.  After just 350 hours in my Mooney, I still only check the ASI to verify I'm slow enough to put the gear down. I just started working with a CFI on a Commercial rating. On our first flight together he asked me what my typical speeds were on downwind, base, final, etc. I had to say I didn't know. He said, "Ok, just show me how you land." After rolling it on and easily making the first turn off, he suggested that the speeds were good, and I should just know what they are. I just prefer to look out the window. 

As someone smarter than I said, an unloaded wing will not stall. It's all easily done just looking out the window.

*assuming VMC ;-)

[donkaye]

21 minutes ago, N1395W said:

We get it.  You have an AOA device and you use it effectively.

For those of us who don't have AOA, what -centric mindset should we have, if not airspeed-centric? 

AOA is really nice and I have one on my glare shield, but after between 20-24 thousand Mooney landings (mostly in teaching.  I did 110 2 weeks ago with 2 transition students), when one G (as in landing), pitch attitude (3°) and airspeed (determined by power setting) are most important.  At one G and a 3° nose down attitude until the flare, there is just no way you are going to stall the airplane.  Also, if you are turning with a bank angle greater than standard rate in the pattern, you are making your life more difficult than it needs be by rushing the landing and making your perspective change too rapidly.

Certainly with experience you can accommodate short approaches which require a steeper bank angle on the turn to final, but not until you have your basic landings down pat.

[Ftlausa]

To say that focusing on airspeed makes one inept is stupid and unhelpful in my mind. I don't have an AOA indicator, so I cannot comment on their use.  But I do know that you do not need one to avoid a stall spin in the pattern. 

You avoid a stall spin by keeping the load on the wings under the stall speed for the given load.  Pitching up certainly increases the load, but you don't have to pitch up to stall the plane in a steep bank or when cross-controlled.  To reduce the load, I do what Don commented on above -- I am pitching down  - even if slightly, in the turns in the pattern to reduce the load on the wing.  But, I also fly the numbers in the pattern - 100 downwind, 90 base, 80 final, and 70 over the numbers.  If you do that, it will be very difficult to stall spin the airplane. Even with a 60 degree bank in the turns (which there is no reason to do), you will stay slightly above stall speed (at least for the J).

Someone else commented above about having glider and tail wheel training -- which I do have, and highly recommend.  I would also recommend basic aerobatic training, during which you purposely spin the aircraft and enter cross-controlled stalls.  That training gives you a better feel and respect for the flight envelope and helps you avoid going outside of it, except on purpose.       

I am glad that there are those that have AOA indicators that they find helpful, but they are not a panacea nor a basis to ignore the other factors that prevent stall spins, including airspeed.   

  

[Brian Scranton]

The craziness of a go around is where all this really happens, right? Low, slow, full flaps, trimmed for 70 (pretty high trim setting)...then you go full power, experience a predictable but alarming left yaw, huge pitch up...I can see how shit can get real, real fast. You don't need an AOA or ASI to know you need to push the nose over, add right rudder, get some airspeed so the horn stops blaring, see a positive rate, gear up, milk the flaps, fly the airplane, then communicate. We train on this, over and over as new pilots...and I have already scared myself on a few go arounds by not doing exactly what I just outline above. But...I am almost positive I won't screw up a go around again.  

[steingar]

A real tragedy to be certain.  The pilot should have briefed his departure.  He should have already known where he was going if things went south.  I always brief mine, and I hope you brief yours.  Sometimes my brief is "if the engine takes a dump I'm going to have a really bad day".  But I bet crashing under control into trees is better than an uncontrolled stall spin.

[donkaye]

9 minutes ago, Brian Scranton said:

The craziness of a go around is where all this really happens, right? Low, slow, full flaps, trimmed for 70 (pretty high trim setting)...then you go full power, experience a predictable but alarming left yaw, huge pitch up...I can see how shit can get real, real fast. You don't need an AOA or ASI to know you need to push the nose over, add right rudder, get some airspeed so the horn stops blaring, see a positive rate, gear up, milk the flaps, fly the airplane, then communicate. We train on this, over and over as new pilots...and I have already scared myself on a few go arounds by not doing exactly what I just outline above. But...I am almost positive I won't screw up a go around again.  

I disagree with the POHs of many Mooney models regarding the go around procedure, and feel they should change it.  Instead of power up, flaps to T/O position, trim down, gear up, balance of flaps up, it should be Power up, trim down, GEAR UP, flaps to T/O when little upward pressure on the yoke, at Vx or Vy balance of flaps up.  I say this because the drag of the gear is comparable to the drag of full flaps.  Putting up the gear first while trimming down takes the pressure off the yoke and makes for a more stable and SAFE go around.

[201er]

Just now, donkaye said:

I disagree with the POHs of many Mooney models regarding the go around procedure, and feel they should change it.  Instead of power up, flaps to T/O position, trim down, gear up, balance of flaps up, it should be Power up, trim down, GEAR UP, flaps to T/O when little upward pressure on the yoke, at Vx or Vy balance of flaps up.  I say this because the drag of the gear is comparable to the drag of full flaps.  Putting up the gear first while trimming down takes the pressure off the yoke and makes for a more stable and SAFE go around.

I don't know where your flap control is, but on the J it is near the power levers. Push the throttle in and a finger flick on the flap switch has you going around in no time.

[donkaye]

10 minutes ago, 201er said:

I don't know where your flap control is, but on the J it is near the power levers. Push the throttle in and a finger flick on the flap switch has you going around in no time.

Right, and with the consequential pitch up and left turning moment that causes some to lose control of the aircraft.

[201er]

Just now, donkaye said:

Right, and with the consequential pitch up and left turning moment that causes some to lose control of the aircraft.

What does it have to do with flaps? Are you talking about the momentary loss of lift? Since the flaps are electric, it takes a little time for them to retract so you can counteract that with a matching pitch adjustment.

[kpaul]

Just now, donkaye said:

I disagree with the POHs of many Mooney models regarding the go around procedure, and feel they should change it.  Instead of power up, flaps to T/O position, trim down, gear up, balance of flaps up, it should be Power up, trim down, GEAR UP, flaps to T/O when little upward pressure on the yoke, at Vx or Vy balance of flaps up.  I say this because the drag of the gear is comparable to the drag of full flaps.  Putting up the gear first while trimming down takes the pressure off the yoke and makes for a more stable and SAFE go around.

Pitch-Power-Ball-Flaps-Gear-Flaps. It’s easy and covers all important items during a go-around. I would bet if you asked any Air Force pilot this is what they would rattle off. The first three are done simultaneously, pitch up, power as required (full power is not always needed) and center the ball (always needed). Flaps-gear-flaps, is useful if at full flaps, however since the Mooney does not have a catch for partial flaps, you could skip that and go to gear-up once you know that you will not touch down, then flaps up incrementally as airspeed and altitude increase.

[Bob_Belville]

38 minutes ago, donkaye said:

I disagree with the POHs of many Mooney models regarding the go around procedure, and feel they should change it.  Instead of power up, flaps to T/O position, trim down, gear up, balance of flaps up, it should be Power up, trim down, GEAR UP, flaps to T/O when little upward pressure on the yoke, at Vx or Vy balance of flaps up.  I say this because the drag of the gear is comparable to the drag of full flaps.  Putting up the gear first while trimming down takes the pressure off the yoke and makes for a more stable and SAFE go around.

Don, for our older models sporting manual gear, manual pitch trim, and hydraulic (manual) flaps and 180-200 hp, I think a somewhat different sequence is preferable. Since the left hand is completely occupied dealing with pitch/AOA/IAS the right hand has to choose between throttle, trim wheel, Johnson bar, and flaps - only one of which can be touched at a time. (The right foot is busy holding hard right rudder.) In my mind the gear has to wait until the plane has been trimmed to at least Vx, preferably Vy without flaps. That requires holding the nose down by force, first to allow acceleration to Vy, dumping flaps, while re-trimming the pressure off the yoke. I do not ever want to be swinging the Johnson Bar while I'm holding a lot of pressure on the yoke. Under normal loads and density altitudes, a vintage Mooney will easily climb to pattern altitude with the gear down. Drag is not such a big issue at Vx or Vy.