Jump to content

Flap Extension Speeds


sailon

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Pinecone said:

When was that’s?

Last time I went with tickets was 1966 and you could not combine tickets.

But military could get books with all the tickets being good for any ride

Before my time.  I'm going by this excerpt from the Wikipedia entry, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_ticket:

"The coupons had a face value for use on rides, with an "A" ticket worth $0.10, "B" $0.15, "C" $0.25, "D" $0.50, and "E", $0.85. This meant one could ride any ride if the ticket or a combination of tickets met or exceeded the value of that ride, so one could overpay an "A" ticket ride with a "B" ticket or higher, or present an "A", "C", and "D" ticket together instead of an "E" ticket."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, like I said, in 1966, I do not recall that being the case.

But my last trip was a school trip (private school in SD), and we had a bunch of left over military tickets.   So I just had to buy an entry ticket and burn up the unused tickets from previous visits, as my Dad had orders out of the area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/29/2022 at 6:53 AM, Pinecone said:

Back on the topic of flap extension, is it possible to install the newer 3 position flap switch?  And how much paperwork hassle?

It has a couple of position switches to go with that…

Sooo… expect a bunch of wiring to be required…

Typical of all LBs…

It is nice to have.

Best regards,

-a-

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

According to Bob Kromer, the 252 is the only Mooney with a higher listed speed for partial flaps. Analysis showed that the flaps and structure could withstand the higher speed - there was no change to the airframe. So, why wasn't this carried forward? Because most new airplanes were being shipped with the optional speed brakes which do a better job of slowing down with no pitch trim change and so a higher partial flap speed was kind of superfluous. There was engineering cost involved to change the TCDS and AFM limitations which require FAA approval and the marketing department didn't care, so they dropped it.

Skip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, PT20J said:

According to Bob Kromer, the 252 is the only Mooney with a higher listed speed for partial flaps. Analysis showed that the flaps and structure could withstand the higher speed - there was no change to the airframe. So, why wasn't this carried forward? Because most new airplanes were being shipped with the optional speed brakes which do a better job of slowing down with no pitch trim change and so a higher partial flap speed was kind of superfluous. There was engineering cost involved to change the TCDS and AFM limitations which require FAA approval and the marketing department didn't care, so they dropped it.

Skip

Just to pick a nit or two, the 205 apparently has many of these same 252 changes.  This is from our POH on a 1988 205 (M20J):

 

Limitations_P3.jpg

Edited by ttflyer
pdf to jpeg
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Will.iam said:

On further inspection looks like the kcas is within a knot of each other which could very well be within the read error of the instruments. It’s the kias that differs more and i guess that’s just the error from placement and instrument. 

OK, I screwed this up. My conversation with Bob was about the 205, but somehow I got the 252 in my head when I made the post.

So to clarify: It is only the M20J 205 that has the higher partial flap speed.

Sorry for the confusion.

Skip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, PT20J said:

OK, I screwed this up. My conversation with Bob was about the 205, but somehow I got the 252 in my head when I made the post.

So to clarify: It is only the M20J 205 that has the higher partial flap speed.

Sorry for the confusion.

Skip

Boooo i was hoping i had an extra margin of speed buffer at partial flaps. Not that i would deploy them any faster but once i forgot to retract T/O flaps as i was climbing out and got over 112 before i caught the error and retracted them up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.