M20FanJesse Posted July 10, 2018 Report Posted July 10, 2018 I knew about the Mooney Mite but honestly didn't know this existed. Does anyone have any experience flying one? https://www.wingswap.com/listing/10220 3 Quote
HRM Posted July 10, 2018 Report Posted July 10, 2018 Sister to the Ercoupe! What a beautiful little bird. Big plus is that you can fly with the hatch back IIRC. 1 Quote
carusoam Posted July 11, 2018 Report Posted July 11, 2018 Any engine details or airframe and engine times to go with that?, Jesse? Thought it was a single seat mite, not the mooney two seater... possibly a next step for @M20Doc‘s new trainees... Best regards, -a- 1 Quote
M20FanJesse Posted July 11, 2018 Author Report Posted July 11, 2018 8 hours ago, carusoam said: Any engine details or airframe and engine times to go with that?, Jesse? Thought it was a single seat mite, not the mooney two seater... possibly a next step for @M20Doc‘s new trainees... Best regards, -a- Yup! Right under the name of the Ad will always be the airframe time and engine time. AFTT: 2226, SMOH: 437 I thought that too! But no, its a two seater. I wonder how it compares to an ercoupe 1 Quote
carusoam Posted July 11, 2018 Report Posted July 11, 2018 Wow, so much detail to take in... I was in a rush to see the pic. The pics are so nice... distraction set in... then I forgot to go back for the other details... I see the continental cylinder covers... Am I missing what engine is in there? Or buyers should know? When mine goes up for sale it will be listed with an IO550(n) 310hp with a TopProp...and 30k hours... Best regards, -a- 3 Quote
M20FanJesse Posted July 11, 2018 Author Report Posted July 11, 2018 6 minutes ago, carusoam said: Wow, so much detail to take in... I was in a rush to see the pic. The pics are so nice... distraction set in... then I forgot to go back for the other details... I see the continental cylinder covers... Am I missing what engine is in there? Or buyers should know? When mine goes up for sale it will be listed with an IO550(n) 310hp with a TopProp...and 30k hours... Best regards, -a- I bet its probably a C90. Not sure why he didn't include that! and wow thats insane! How many engines did you go through? Quote
carusoam Posted July 11, 2018 Report Posted July 11, 2018 That’s how many I intend to go through... I’m on #2 currently... I won’t be selling for a while... Best regards, -a- 2 Quote
HRM Posted July 11, 2018 Report Posted July 11, 2018 3 hours ago, carusoam said: I won’t be selling for a while... Forever? 1 Quote
Guest Posted July 11, 2018 Report Posted July 11, 2018 6 hours ago, M20FanJesse said: I bet its probably a C90. Not sure why he didn't include that! and wow thats insane! How many engines did you go through? According to the Type Certificate it’s a C-90. Clarence Quote
tony Posted July 12, 2018 Report Posted July 12, 2018 http://www.steveweaver.com/n9513v.htm looks like he has only owned it for a year. Quote
kpaul Posted July 12, 2018 Report Posted July 12, 2018 1 hour ago, tony said: http://www.steveweaver.com/n9513v.htm looks like he has only owned it for a year. Also appears the current owner only put 23 hours on it Quote
aviatoreb Posted July 12, 2018 Report Posted July 12, 2018 On 7/10/2018 at 12:12 PM, M20FanJesse said: I knew about the Mooney Mite but honestly didn't know this existed. Does anyone have any experience flying one? https://www.wingswap.com/listing/10220 Looks fantastic! 1 Quote
BKlott Posted July 13, 2018 Report Posted July 13, 2018 In 2001 I looked at an M10 that was for sale nearby at Winterhaven. The bucket seats on that particular airplane felt like they had no support at all. I felt like I was sitting on a concrete block. Killed my interest real quick. Not sure if that is a common issue or not as I have never sat in another one. It looks like it could be a fairly economic airplane for local flights and $100 hamburger runs. Yes, it has a 90hp Continental. A fairly inexpensive entry price with low times and decent paint are plus factors. The lack of tinted glass with UV would be an issue for me in Florida. Additionally, the ADS-B bill is coming due as well. This Saturday, weather permitting, I am scheduled to take some dual in a Mooney A2-A Cadet. I am really looking forward to it as the Ercoupe officionados claim that the A2-A was the best of the breed. Only about 59 of them were built by Alon and Mooney combined before Mooney switched from the split tail to the conventional tail configuration. This will be a rare treat...a true bucket list event! 1 Quote
carusoam Posted July 13, 2018 Report Posted July 13, 2018 BK, pics are required... Best regards, -a- Quote
KLRDMD Posted July 13, 2018 Report Posted July 13, 2018 On 7/11/2018 at 8:44 AM, M20FanJesse said: I wonder how it compares to an ercoupe 130 lb. The M10 has a gross weight of 1450 lb where many Ercoupes (Ercoupe 415-C and -CD) meet the light sport limit of 1320 lb. Quote
BKlott Posted July 14, 2018 Report Posted July 14, 2018 (edited) Just returned from my adventure to Florida's East Coast today. Had the unique opportunity to fly a Mooney Cadet A2-A. This was a Mooney built version of the Alon Aircoupe right before Mooney changed over to the conventional tail configuration. This one has the spring steel landing gear and, like most Alons and Mooneys, it has the rudder pedals as well. One of the things that I was very interested in was the cruise performance. People who have them state that they will cruise 120 mph to 124 mph. In fact, the manual also quotes 124 mph at 2,475 rpm. We leveled off at 2,300 ft msl, set the power at 2,400 and it indicated just over 115 mph. I'm confident that the true airspeed was closer to 120 mph given the heat we were dealing with today. Remember, we didn't push it at 2,475 rpm either. No matter what, 115 mph indicated air speed on 90 hp isn't too shabby. The Seats, well, there wasn't much to them. They did NOT feel like a concrete block but they were a far cry from my two year old thick foam, leather covered seats in my 172. It was comfortable to sit in the airplane, especially when you're doing the flying and your feet are on the rudder pedals. The passenger, well, may need to move their feet and legs around a bit to stay away from the controls and still be comfortable. The airplane will climb out at what seems like an inordinately high angle of attack when doing a short field takeoff. It will climb quite nicely at 70 mph, which is close to the Vy speed. I was using 80 mph for better cooling and visibility. There was no need to fool around with higher angles of attack in this hot weather. One thing that I did not like was that airplane had some vibration in it. It was very noticeable. Enough so that I even asked the CFI if this roughness was normal? He commented that he's gotten used to it and didn't really know what was behind it. Then I remembered something that my Dad told me years ago. He flew the post-war Ercoupes in the 1940s giving instruction in them and he had an opportunity to fly a number of them. He said that some of them were real vibrators and others were not. He said that there seemed to be a wide variation in the Ercoupes from one to another. He speculated that maybe it was a quality control issue at the Erco factory. He could never figure out if it was out of balance propellors, bad mounts or what. Now I know what he was talking about. It is a shame because it detracted from the flight experience in what would otherwise be a really nice, fun little airplane to fly. Dad used to say that he would only buy one IF he could "get a good one". Anyway, it was a fun day, 1.2 hours of cross country there, 1.2 hours back and an hour of local flying in the Cadet. Another item off of my bucket list. Hope you all had great flying too! Edited July 14, 2018 by BKlott 2 Quote
GordieM1 Posted December 30, 2018 Report Posted December 30, 2018 I have owned and flown an M10 for several years now. They are two place with a Continental C90-16F at 90 hp. Gross is 1450 pounds with an empty weight of ~1000 lbs. Mine, in summer in Florida with me (215lbs) and full fuel (24 gallons), will climb at 500-650 fpm. In the winter it's 850-900 fpm. At full gross, I can get 450 fpm even in the summer. I cruise at 2300 rpm, ~100 mph, at 6.1 gph. I have no issues whatsoever with the seats being uncomfortable and the seats go back far enough for pretty much even the tallest pilots legs but there is not much canopy clearance over my head. I have climbed to 12000ft and the logs show a climb to 15000. At 10000, at 2300, I am burning 4.1gph with a 71/53 cruise prop. Best climb vx is 73mph with max vertical vy at 64 mph. Stall is around 50, I say around because the high angles of attack required to stall makes the ASI goofy. Approach speeds are 75mph with speed bleeding off pretty quickly in flare. Engine off glide ratio is 6:1. If the motor quits, look down as that's where you are going to land. You can fly with the canopy open but cruise speed drops 5-7 mph. I have updated mine. I have a lightweight Skytech starter, a 40 amp alternator, removed the vacuum pump and installed two Garmin G5s, EI engine analyzer, EI fuel flow meter, Garmin 796, Appareo Stratus EG ADS-B out, King kx-125 nav/com with Ki 214 VOR loc/gs., Stratus 2 ADS-B in with ipad Pro running Foreflight, Whelen nav/strobes on wings and rudder, new Millenium cylinders, spin on oil filter, and . It is a good instrument trainer but I would really not be interested in flying in any serious IMC conditions. I have taken 500-600 mile trips in it and it works perfectly unless you are in a real hurry. Mine is serial # 690001, the very first M10. 10 Quote
carusoam Posted December 31, 2018 Report Posted December 31, 2018 Welcome aboard, Gordie. Fantastic first post! Best regards, -a- Quote
Mcstealth Posted January 21, 2019 Report Posted January 21, 2019 On December 30, 2018 at 12:21 PM, GordieM1 said: I have owned and flown an M10 for several years now. They are two place with a Continental C90-16F at 90 hp. Gross is 1450 pounds with an empty weight of ~1000 lbs. Mine, in summer in Florida with me (215lbs) and full fuel (24 gallons), will climb at 500-650 fpm. In the winter it's 850-900 fpm. At full gross, I can get 450 fpm even in the summer. I cruise at 2300 rpm, ~100 mph, at 6.1 gph. I have no issues whatsoever with the seats being uncomfortable and the seats go back far enough for pretty much even the tallest pilots legs but there is not much canopy clearance over my head. I have climbed to 12000ft and the logs show a climb to 15000. At 10000, at 2300, I am burning 4.1gph with a 71/53 cruise prop. Best climb vx is 73mph with max vertical vy at 64 mph. Stall is around 50, I say around because the high angles of attack required to stall makes the ASI goofy. Approach speeds are 75mph with speed bleeding off pretty quickly in flare. Engine off glide ratio is 6:1. If the motor quits, look down as that's where you are going to land. You can fly with the canopy open but cruise speed drops 5-7 mph. I have updated mine. I have a lightweight Skytech starter, a 40 amp alternator, removed the vacuum pump and installed two Garmin G5s, EI engine analyzer, EI fuel flow meter, Garmin 796, Appareo Stratus EG ADS-B out, King kx-125 nav/com with Ki 214 VOR loc/gs., Stratus 2 ADS-B in with ipad Pro running Foreflight, Whelen nav/strobes on wings and rudder, new Millenium cylinders, spin on oil filter, and . It is a good instrument trainer but I would really not be interested in flying in any serious IMC conditions. I have taken 500-600 mile trips in it and it works perfectly unless you are in a real hurry. Mine is serial # 690001, the very first M10. Welcome to the forum. Great write up. Please tell us some M10 stories. Quote
RHx Posted August 30, 2023 Report Posted August 30, 2023 (edited) I've always been intrigued by the M10 Cadet, as it's seemed an accessible, fairly-affordable way to fly, with the pleasures of an open canopy and sociable side-by-side seating, and presumably better-than-Ercoupe flying characteristics due to Alon & Mooney mods. But after researching Ercoupes for an article I wrote years ago, and discovering the shocking truth about their actual fatality rates, any Ercoupe-derivative looks suspicious. As memory serves (sometimes poorly), the M10 had some key differences from the original Ercoupe: 1.) Stallable/spinnable (the Ercoupe -- despite false advertising -- was, too; just not nearly as readily). This M10 "advance" was done, IIRC, by adding stall strips to the leading edges of the wings, and a more powerful (and different) horizontal tail, allowing more downforce, and thus higher angles of attack. 2.) Engine: the C-90 of the Alon version, vs. the orig. 75-hp of the Ercoupe 415C 3.) Vertical tail: The Mooney-style single vertical tail. 4.) Rudder pedals (though most Alons and many late Ercoupes had them, already) 5.) A nicer panel (derived from the Beech-related Alon?) somewhat akin to the Beech Musketeer. 6.) Different main gear: Spring-steel torsion bars in place of the Ercoupe's trailing-link mains. While the various "improvements" made significant changes, serious problems remained: A.) The Ercoupe wing. Very poor glide performance, given the weight and drag of the aircraft. Reflecting the 'Coupe's brick-like glide path, An NTSB report, comparing various light planes, showed 'Coupes to be THE worst in undershoot accidents of the 33 aircraft models in common use then -- double or triple that of such notorious sinkers as Grumman's Yankee and Piper's TriPacer -- and quadruple that of other noted sinkers by Piper (Cherokee) and Grumman (AA-5). B.) Fuel tank - I can't recall if it was in a header tank (obviously dangerous in a crash) or the leading edges of the wings (also quite dangerous in a crash). Hopefully I'm wrong on both counts, and the M10 had conventional wing tanks behind the spar, but I doubt it. C.) Shock absorption: Unlike contemporary Cessna's, for instance, there was little "crush space" under the Ercoupe pilot's butt to absorb otherwise-fatal impacts in minor/moderate crashes. Note that this is also a distinguishing fault of Piper Cherokees, when compared to Cessna 150/152/172/182. and the fatal crash rates strongly reflect the difference. Add in the rock-hard seat of the M10, and you'd better not smack it in, if you don't want your spine jammed into your brain. It's very important to note that the M10 was based on the Ercoupe, which -- despite blatantly false advertising, and resulting popular myth -- was NOT a safe airplane by any stretch of the imagination, with a FATAL crash rate MUCH higher than, say, the more conventional, leading competitor of the period, the Cessna 120/140. (NEVER confuse "easy-to-fly" with "SAFE-to-fly".) Flying Magazine's safety-issues editor, as I recall, once described it as having one of the worst fatal rates of any modern aircraft, per seat-mile. The NTSB's accident study of 33 most commonly used light plane families of the 1970s backed that up, with 'Coupes showing shockingly bad crash rates due to causes they should have been immune to, including stall/spin accidents (50% worse than traditional Mooneys!) and ground loops (worse than Cubs!) -- and a FATAL crash rate 2/3rds higher than regular M20-series planes. See: https://close1d2.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/BewareTheSafeAirplane.pdf ...and Tables 3 and 11 in NTSB report at: https://libraryonline.erau.edu/online-full-text/ntsb/aviation-special-studies/AAS79-01.pdf Consequently -- as the courts, in the 1970s, began to more strictly apply crash liability to manufacturers of planes with design defects -- the M10 and its crash rate (which I have NOT yet separately researched), or its long-term expected crash rate, may have made it essential for Mooney to discontinue the model. That may also help to explain why -- unlike the Champ, Cub, SuperCub, and Luscombe (none of which have good safety records, either, but are popular sporty taildraggers) -- nobody has revived or imitated the Ercoupe since the M10. ---------------- Edited August 30, 2023 by RHx Add/clarify details, fomatting, fix grammar/punctuation, delete stray lines., add "(NEVER confuse "easy-to-fly" with "SAFE-to-fly".)" Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.