Landing speed

[ArtVandelay]

That does not speak favorably to his confidence or competence in your airplane.  I would find a new CFI.  Did he have you do slow flight and full stall recovery?

New FAA regulations don’t required full stalls:
“Acknowledge the cues and recover promptly at the FIRST indication of an impending stall (e.g., aircraft buffet, stall horn, etc.).”


Tom

[N201MKTurbo]

14 minutes ago, ArtVandelay said:

New FAA regulations don’t required full stalls:
“Acknowledge the cues and recover promptly at the FIRST indication of an impending stall (e.g., aircraft buffet, stall horn, etc.).”


Tom

Yes, my CFI still believes that the first indication of stall is the earth spinning over your head!

Not really, but he does like to mess with me. The other day we were doing approaches and on the missed he says "Show me a lazy 8"? I'm like WTF? I haven't thought about those in a few years, so I leveled out, found a road did one and continued on the missed....

Looks like an overhand knot on flight aware. 

[ilovecornfields]

I haven’t seen it said yet, so I’ll say it...AOA indicator. Even @donkaye has one and he wrote the book (or I guess filmed the video) on landing a Mooney. It you do your approach and landing at the same indicated AOA, that should automatically compensate for changes in weight.

I can’t comment personally on this because I haven’t calibrated mine yet...

[Shadrach]

1 minute ago, ArtVandelay said:

New FAA regulations don’t required full stalls:
“Acknowledge the cues and recover promptly at the FIRST indication of an impending stall (e.g., aircraft buffet, stall horn, etc.).”


Tom

I am aware of the reg change and I happen to think that this was a poor decision on the part of the FAA.  Nevertheless, there's nothing that says an instructor can't accompany a student during stall practice, only that full stalls are not required for flight review.  My instructors have always asked for stall and slow flight demonstratio.  I am sure I could have refused and still gotten a sign off, but my goal is to demonstrate proficiency to both my CFI and myself. The "cues" of impending stall happen at different speeds, the horn is way ahead of the buffet which happens ahead of the break. If your guy thinks 1.3 is too slow, he's likely not the guy to go do slow flight with.  

[skydvrboy]

I just ran my numbers through @Shadrach's spreadsheet and they are pretty much spot on for what I do.  On normal landings I fly final at 70 mph when real light, or 80 mph when real heavy.   From there I just estimate where I'm at in between.  It works out to 1 mph for each 10% of capacity for passengers and fuel, but I never think of it that way.  Average load is 75 mph, above average, somewhere between 75 & 80, etc.

For short field (which I consider less than 2000') I subtract 5 mph and don't go in with over average size load.  So my short field finals are flown 65 mph to 70 mph.

Also, I don't have any idea what my "over the threshold" speed is, by then I'm looking at the runway and glancing out the side to judge height and stay on center line.  I can't say I've never had a bad landing, but this approach has worked very well for me.

On a side, I'm going to throw out a bold statement.  If you don't at hear the stall warning at all when landing, you are either doing it wrong or your stall warning is INOP.

[ArtVandelay]

A lot of you are quoting real numbers which is meaningless without knowing you model and weight. I assume different models have different stall speeds, I know J changes between years because of the winglets I believe.


Tom

[jaylw314]

5 minutes ago, ArtVandelay said:

A lot of you are quoting real numbers which is meaningless without knowing you model and weight. I assume different models have different stall speeds, I know J changes between years because of the winglets I believe.

Really?  I was under the impression that the wingtip fairings were purely cosmetic, and the fence was just to block the glare from the wingtip lights.  I was quoting POH Vs0 for an '86J with the wingtip fairings, is yours different?

[jaylw314]

37 minutes ago, skydvrboy said:

On a side, I'm going to throw out a bold statement.  If you don't at hear the stall warning at all when landing, you are either doing it wrong or your stall warning is INOP.

Why?  The stall warning just goes off at a certain angle of attack that's intended for level flight, I'm guessing ground effect changes how the stall warning works.  I mean, I agree in principle, but that just seems kind of an arbitrary measure.

I think a statement everyone will agree on is that it is wrong to land with so little angle that you land on your nosegear first. 

[ArtVandelay]

Really?  I was under the impression that the wingtip fairings were purely cosmetic, and the fence was just to block the glare from the wingtip lights.  I was quoting POH Vs0 for an '86J with the wingtip fairings, is yours different?

You may be correct, they changed the table, and added KCAS, which I misread, I have 3 versions:
77: 55 kias
86: 54 kias, 53 kcas
96: 55 kias, 53 kcas
All for 33°/2740



Tom

[Shadrach]

56 minutes ago, ArtVandelay said:

You may be correct, they changed the table, and added KCAS, which I misread, I have 3 versions:
77: 55 kias
86: 54 kias, 53 kcas
96: 55 kias, 53 kcas
All for 33°/2740



Tom

Interesting, the 96 has a MGW of 2900lbs. They just randomly quoted te stall at 2740? 

[ArtVandelay]

9 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Interesting, the 96 has a MGW of 2900lbs. They just randomly quoted te stall at 2740? 

No, they have a table with 2300,2500,2740 and 2900 weights.

[Shadrach]

1 hour ago, jaylw314 said:

Why?  The stall warning just goes off at a certain angle of attack that's intended for level flight, I'm guessing ground effect changes how the stall warning works.  I mean, I agree in principle, but that just seems kind of an arbitrary measure.

I think a statement everyone will agree on is that it is wrong to land with so little angle that you land on your nosegear first. 

It's not arbitrary, the stall vane is actuated as that portion of the wing approaches critical AOA. in ground effect the wing produces more lift for a given AOA.  The wing will stall at a lower AOA (seems counter intuitive). This actually helps reduce the pitch angle required for a "full stall" touchdown.  I think that most good landings are preceded by the stall horn.  When I transitioned to the Mooney I showcased my ability to grease  the plane on to the runway smoothly. My instructor was so impressed he pulled the yoke back to show me how much energy I was still carrying. The plane had enough energy for the mains to leave and be flared again.  I was smooth but sloppy on airspeed. 

[Hank]

2 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

Why?  The stall warning just goes off at a certain angle of attack that's intended for level flight, I'm guessing ground effect changes how the stall warning works.  I mean, I agree in principle, but that just seems kind of an arbitrary measure.

I think a statement everyone will agree on is that it is wrong to land with so little angle that you land on your nosegear first. 

The stall hirn goes off a few knots (5?) before the wing stalls, regardless of where the airplane is. It's audible below, filmed out the windshield with a point-and-shoot digital camera.

 

[PT20J]

I find a good "cross the fence" speed is 1.3 V_so and I set this up by 1/4 mile final. I can go slower, but never really need to as I can make the mid-field turnoff 1500 feet from the threshold at the home drome with brakes at this speed or roll to the end without brakes, and this speed gives some margin for gusts and maneuvering. This speed does vary with weight, but not as much as some of you are doing. Stall speed varies as the square root of weight. At 2300 lbs in my '94 J it's 49 KCAS and at 2900 lbs it's 56 KCAS according to the POH. To be most accurate, you should use calibrated airspeed and convert to indicated at the end of any calculations. This converts to 1.3V_so speeds of 66 KIAS to 74 KIAS - an eight knot spread. 

As for airspeed add for gusts, I use the technique Richard Collins advocated years ago: Watch the airspeed fluctuations and just adjust speed so that the minimum excursions don't go below your target speed.

Skip

 

[gsxrpilot]

7 hours ago, skydvrboy said:

On a side, I'm going to throw out a bold statement.  If you don't at hear the stall warning at all when landing, you are either doing it wrong or your stall warning is INOP.

Was your stall warning sounding when you landed with the Caravan last year at Oshkosh? 

I can land my 252 with the stall horn blaring or roll it on at 90 knots. It's all just a matter of how much runway you have available and are willing to use. Other than that, the landings are just as good.

[skydvrboy]

24 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

Was your stall warning sounding when you landed with the Caravan last year at Oshkosh? 

I can land my 252 with the stall horn blaring or roll it on at 90 knots. It's all just a matter of how much runway you have available and are willing to use. Other than that, the landings are just as good.

Good point, but I wouldn't exactly call  that a "normal" landing.

[gsxrpilot]

2 minutes ago, skydvrboy said:

Good point, but I wouldn't exactly call  that a "normal" landing.

Fair enough :-)

[jaylw314]

1 hour ago, gsxrpilot said:

Was your stall warning sounding when you landed with the Caravan last year at Oshkosh? 

I can land my 252 with the stall horn blaring or roll it on at 90 knots. It's all just a matter of how much runway you have available and are willing to use. Other than that, the landings are just as good.

Likewise, in trying to land with a 12 knot direct crosswind, I decided to approach at 80 KIAS to keep enough rudder authority.  Not a peep from the stall warning, but with 5500' of runway, I figured I had plenty.  Again, admittedly not a normal landing

[MoonFlyer68]

12 hours ago, ilovecornfields said:

I haven’t seen it said yet, so I’ll say it...AOA indicator. Even @donkaye has one and he wrote the book (or I guess filmed the video) on landing a Mooney. It you do your approach and landing at the same indicated AOA, that should automatically compensate for changes in weight.

I can’t comment personally on this because I haven’t calibrated mine yet...

Once you get your AOA calibrated I would be interested to hear how well it works for you. My last 5 years in the Army I was flying a Citation that had AOA. While it was not something I focused on, it was something that was always there and I noticed what it was telling me.

Would not be a bad idea to mount one in my Mooney. I think on the left side of the tube the compass is mounted to. Not center of the field of view but up there where you have it when looking outside. 

[Shadrach]

9 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

Was your stall warning sounding when you landed with the Caravan last year at Oshkosh? 

I can land my 252 with the stall horn blaring or roll it on at 90 knots. It's all just a matter of how much runway you have available and are willing to use. Other than that, the landings are just as good.

You’ve made this point before and I’ll concede that it’s good to be comfortable with different configurations and scenarios.  However, the title of this thread is landing speed. The discussion has been around why landings go badly (which can happen for a number of reasons). I don’t think rolling it on while the plane is still flying is a special skill; many “new to Mooney” pilots gravitate toward that method if left to there own devices. It’s not a good habit and thankfully, most don’t do it at 90kts. The ones that have tried have tattooed the NTSB database. You’re the only Mooney guy I’ve seen claim a 90kt touchdown.  If indeed one wants to “roll it on” at 90kts, how does one maintain a nose high sink rate at >100mph in gound effect? Try to do a high-speed taxi at 90kts (or 80kts for that matter) and tell me how it works out...I’ve heard there’s a great little restaurant in Wheelbarrow City, but I hope I don’t have a reason to eat there! I don’t think you’re really rolling it on at 90kts. I think that you’re crossing the threshold at 90kts and holding it off the runway until you can establish an attitude with an ever so slight nose high sink rate and then touching down in a near flat, near 3 point position at whatever airspeed has yielded said attitude (it ain’t 90 MFKIAS in a 231).   If that is something you need to do while engaged in non standard ops, it’s a fine skill to have. All Mooney pilots should be admonished against nosewheel first touchdowns. No matter the airspeed, the plane needs to be held off until a nose high sink rate can be established. The slower you are the less time you spend in limbo above a runway thats slipping beneath at ~100fps with decreasing control authority while still in the air. I think the suggestion that a Mooney can be landed at almost any speed with enough runway sends the wrong message. 

In my opinion, excess energy on landing is the biggest contributor to RLOC. Not only does that extra energy contribute to the loss of control, it magnifies the aftermath. Flying is easy. High speed taxi is easy. It’s the somewhat woolly transition from one to the other that often causes grief. Best to minimize the time spent in transition.

Edited March 28, 2019 by Shadrach

[gsxrpilot]

9 hours ago, Shadrach said:

You’ve made this point before and I’ll concede that it’s good to be comfortable with different configurations and scenarios.  However, the title of this thread is landing speed. The discussion has been around why landings go badly (which can happen for a number of reasons). I don’t think rolling it on while the plane is still flying is a special skill; many “new to Mooney” pilots gravitate toward that method if left to there own devices. It’s not a good habit and thankfully, most don’t do it at 90kts. The ones that have tried have tattooed the NTSB database. You’re the only Mooney guy I’ve seen claim a 90kt touchdown.  If indeed one wants to “roll it on” at 90kts, how does one maintain a nose high sink rate at >100mph in gound effect? Try to do a high-speed taxi at 90kts (or 80kts for that matter) and tell me how it works out...I’ve heard there’s a great little restaurant in Wheelbarrow City, but I hope I don’t have a reason to eat there! I don’t think you’re really rolling it on at 90kts. I think that you’re crossing the threshold at 90kts and holding it off the runway until you can establish an attitude with an ever so slight nose high sink rate and then touching down in a near flat, near 3 point position at whatever airspeed has yielded said attitude (it ain’t 90 MFKIAS in a 231).   If that is something you need to do while engaged in non standard ops, it’s a fine skill to have. All Mooney pilots should be admonished against nosewheel first touchdowns. No matter the airspeed, the plane needs to be held off until a nose high sink rate can be established. The slower you are the less time you spend in limbo above a runway thats slipping beneath at ~100fps with decreasing control authority while still in the air. I think the suggestion that a Mooney can be landed at almost any speed with enough runway sends the wrong message. 

In my opinion, excess energy on landing is the biggest contributor to RLOC. Not only does that extra energy contribute to the loss of control, it magnifies the aftermath. Flying is easy. High speed taxi is easy. It’s the somewhat woolly transition from one to the other that often causes grief. Best to minimize the time spent in transition.

I'm in agreement with almost every point you make, and certainly have immense respect for your experience as a pilot and Mooney driver specifically. 

I just believe we can get too wrapped up around being "on speed" or you can't land a Mooney. I'm not a CFI, but have helped quite a long list of new to Mooney, pilots here in Texas who struggle to land their Mooneys well because they are struggling and focused on speed and trying calculate and hit the right numbers on the ASI. When I've suggested they ignore speeds altogether and just land an airplane like they know how to land. All of a sudden, they're squeaking it on. Obviously speed is a factor, I just think it's way over emphasized.

[Shadrach]

14 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

I'm in agreement with almost every point you make, and certainly have immense respect for your experience as a pilot and Mooney driver specifically. 

I just believe we can get too wrapped up around being "on speed" or you can't land a Mooney. I'm not a CFI, but have helped quite a long list of new to Mooney, pilots here in Texas who struggle to land their Mooneys well because they are struggling and focused on speed and trying calculate and hit the right numbers on the ASI. When I've suggested they ignore speeds altogether and just land an airplane like they know how to land. All of a sudden, they're squeaking it on. Obviously speed is a factor, I just think it's way over emphasized.

I’m not advocating fixation. Once you have a feel for the plane there’s little need. It’s the new guys that need to reference that they’re flying too fast on every landing. In the last 6 years I have seen no less than 5 Mooney’s either in the ditch off a runways end or in a shop after being pulled from the ditch off the runways end, I am speaking locally and in person.  Your experienced in type, sometimes we forget what it’s like to be green. When you’re re green, you need a reference to develop the proper feel. If you’re a new guy and you know 1.2 Vso is 60kts and you’re at 80 over the threshold you have a defined ref to shoot for next time. One quick speed check on short final is plenty unless you’ve really screwed the pooch. 

It’s likely also important to me because I use several <2000’ strips.  When I buy my Kitfox, I’ll probabl shut up about airspeed.

Edited March 28, 2019 by Shadrach

[PT20J]

2 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

I just believe we can get too wrapped up around being "on speed" or you can't land a Mooney. I'm not a CFI, but have helped quite a long list of new to Mooney, pilots here in Texas who struggle to land their Mooneys well because they are struggling and focused on speed and trying calculate and hit the right numbers on the ASI. When I've suggested they ignore speeds altogether and just land an airplane like they know how to land. All of a sudden, they're squeaking it on. Obviously speed is a factor, I just think it's way over emphasized.

Exactly! Frankly, I think a lot of people make it sound like there is something exotic or unusual about many aspects of flying a Mooney. It's just another single engine, four place, low wing, retractable gear airplane. As I tried to point out earlier, the range of approach speeds varies with weight - the same as any airplane - but not nearly so much as some seem to believe. Low wing planes float more than high wing, and Mooney's float more than most low wings because the wing is closer to the ground. My observation as a CFI has been that many people try to land too fast regardless of type. Mooneys just float more when you do that making them seem different. A really good exercise is to cover the airspeed indicator and fly around the pattern without it. It's not that hard and will cure you of fixating on the airspeed once you get comfortable with it. Find an experienced instructor and try it if you've never done it before.

Skip

[gsxrpilot]

The very first time I was in the left seat of a Mooney, I had 300 hours total time. The vast majority of it was Cherokee time with a little Comanche and a little Bonanza time. I had a very high time, very experienced CFI with me for the transition training. As we were approaching the pattern for my very first Mooney landing, I asked about the recommended speeds. I'd been reading MooneySpace and was a bit spooked by the criticality of speeds landing the Mooney. I asked the CFI what speed I should look for on final, over the numbers, etc. His answer was to ignore the speed, look out the window and land the plane. 

That landing was good and that method has worked well for me over the last 1000 hours. In fact the only time I watch my ASI on approach is when in formation and it needs to be exactly 90 knots on the approach.

[DonMuncy]

I have become convinced that my inability to land well consistently is my inability to know exactly how high I am. I have flown with a very good CFI who tells me exactly when to flare, and it works better than when I am making the decision. I find myself getting to the correct speed, getting to where I think I am the correct height above the runway, flaring and waiting for it to get to the surface. And often, it doesn't happen when I think it will. I have tried looking down toward the end of the runway, looing at the ground close in front of the plane, and trying to watch out at an angle out the side of the windshield. In each case, sometimes it touches down when I expect it to, sometimes it touches before I expect it to, and sometimes it keeps dropping a second or two longer than I expect.