Transitioning from M20C to M20M Bravo

[Lukon]

What’s it like to fly a Bravo after you’ve been flying the M20C for a couple hundred hours?

I love my little Mooney for local stuff, but the wife gets annoyed at 4:30 trip times to Sun Valley and Aspen. it looks like the Bravo could knock a bit over an hour off the trip.

 

[donkaye]

6 hours ago, Lukon said:

What’s it like to fly a Bravo after you’ve been flying the M20C for a couple hundred hours?

I love my little Mooney for local stuff, but the wife gets annoyed at 4:30 trip times to Sun Valley and Aspen. it looks like the Bravo could knock a bit over an hour off the trip.

 

It might be compared to the difference between driving a VW bug and driving a Lincoln Continental.  The C grosses out at 2575 while the Bravo grosses out at 3368; a nearly 800 pound difference.  The C is light on the controls and can be landed short like a Cessna 150.  The Bravo is a lot heavier on the controls, and with experience can be landed short, but not as short as the C.  For longer trips over various terrain the Bravo brings more capability and options.  Much more can be said, but this is a good start. 

The above statements come from having done trainings with students in both airplanes and having owned a Bravo for the past  27 years.

[carusoam]

I went C to O...

nice seats and interior...

full IFR panel...

VFR to IFR...

Happy family...

The economy prices things strangely some times...

Bravos often show some stellar Spectacular... pricing...

Expect to get some decent TT for that... I can make a good recommendation if you don’t know a good Mooney CFII with tons of Bravo experience...   ^^^^

go for it!

Best regards,

-a-

[Danb]

Transitioning to the Bravo is a bigger step than most would think.

I transitioned from two J’s and about 15-20 years and 2000+ hours in my 201’s,

My transition took about 4 eight hour days learning the systems including avionics and about 20 flight hours and 30 landings in souths Florida and the keys for crosswinds. I believe the transition with a Mooney CFI was well worth it. The differences in flight characteristics are remarkable. We recently had a discussion about various stalls in a Bravo master the slow flight differences and go from there. Like Don I’m in the camp believing the Bravo is the best Mooney made, enjoy the ride.Luke 
 

[Hank]

Why would anyone want to transition out of a C model? Unlike Anthony's, many Cs do perfectly well flying both IFR and IMC.

Adding almost 100 hp, a turbo, onboard oxygen and much more complicated avionics will reset you to Student Pilot mode. All of the speeds will be faster, from Stall to Cruise, and the downside of any mistake will be higher (just compare overhaul prices for Stupid Pilot Tricks . . . . ). The sight picture is very different in the long bodies, something like 5° nose up while parked. Compare fuel burn required to save that hour, then drive your wife on those routes once and she will appreciate all Mooneys!

If you do make the jump, be careful and hire a good CFII with lots of Bravo time, and fly together until you are comfortable.

And of course, we expect lots of pictures and writeups of the training, and your impression of the difference. We will need to see the smiling, happy wife inside the luxurious, spacious Bravo, too.  

[irishpilot]

I just did the M20E to Bravo transition. They are both Mooney's but different planes. Since the C and E are similar in size and capability, you are looking at a similar jump. The Bravo is made for long XC and that is where it shines. I regularly fly 700NM XCs 2-3 times per month (non-stop both E and W). I couldn't count on that with my old E at that rate without the tools in a Bravo. As an example, yesterday I flew from Destin, FL to Montgomery, AL, then to San Antonio, TX.

The Bravo has redundancy: two batteries, two alts, two static, etc. It also has FIKI, O2, Turbo which allows for easy access to the FLs and the ability to get through an icing layer, should you need it. I don't plan on flying in ice, but have the system as an added tool.

Bravo differences: heavier on the controls, heavier gross weight, flies faster, lands faster, longer fuselage, more complicated engine management, easier to fall behind the aircraft, fuel burn double of a C model.

My wife is a destination gal and didn't really like the M20E because it was small inside and we couldn't take much with our kids in back. She likes the Bravo much better because we have more luggage space and rear seat space. We can hold half tanks, weekend bags, and still go a long ways and be under gross (kids still small).

Others are spot-on with ensuring you get the training and are comfortable with the systems and pacing you'll need in the Bravo. If you have more specific questions, please PM me.

Fly Safe,
Safety Forum Mod

[steingar]

Flew an Ovation for an our or so, way heavier than my C, a bit faster, not by that much.  I was actually trying to do a bit of IFR training, but I had my hands full of airmanship issues.  Nothing a few more hours in the cockpit would cure.  That said, I've no need of such a ship.  My C floats my boat just fine.

[RogueOne]

1 hour ago, steingar said:

Flew an Ovation for an our or so, way heavier than my C, a bit faster, not by that much.  I was actually trying to do a bit of IFR training, but I had my hands full of airmanship issues.  Nothing a few more hours in the cockpit would cure.  That said, I've no need of such a ship.  My C floats my boat just fine.

So you literally stated that a few more hours in the cockpit would NOT cure your airmanship issues...

I am glad you are happy with your C.

[steingar]

28 minutes ago, RogueOne said:

So you literally stated that a few more hours in the cockpit would NOT cure your airmanship issues...

I am glad you are happy with your C.

Oops, typo there, thanks for pointing it out.  Something a few more hours wouldn't cure.  Still a Mooney, just flies a bit different.  Like transitioning from a Cessna 172 to a 210.

[rbridges]

for me, the differences in flying to Aspen in a C or M model is this:

owning a C model, I can afford to have a good time in Aspen

owning an M model, I sleep in my plane at the airport.

[Hank]

1 hour ago, rbridges said:

for me, the differences in flying to Aspen in a C or M model is this:

owning a C model, I can have afford to have a good time in Aspen

owning an M model, I sleep in my plane alone at the airport.

This small fix would be my case. Every night, everywhere . . . . .

[rbridges]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

This small fix would be my case. Every night, everywhere . . . . .

Well, at least the M model has more length so we can stretch out. 

[Boilermonkey]

300hrs in a C. Flew a Bravo yesterday. It was beautiful and a dream...until the flare. Bounced pretty good...flared too high....different sight picture. Greased the second try. It's a lot more like flying a twin in terms of speed management. Landing is fine....just get on the speeds and get a custom to the picture.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[carusoam]

Small details make the difference...

repetition makes it look really easy...

experience covers all the bases...

TT covers all the details, until the experience kicks in...

I bought, DK’s guidance... to get back in the groove once...

PP thoughts only, not a CFI...

Best regards,

-a-

[Bravoman]

My M is the only Mooney I have ever flown. Maybe in some strange way it made transitioning to it easier.

[Bob_Belville]

Bravo/Ovation owners: I wonder what you consider a minimum runway length in a long body? (I was looking at visiting Annapolis MD yesterday. Several airports with 2500' runways are more convenient than BFW. I'm fine with 2500' in my E.)  

[Jeff_S]

As noted above, the sight picture for landing (and taxiing!) a long body is significantly different than the shorter Mooneys.  Realize that your resting attitude on the ground is 5° nose-high. (Some might be slightly more or less...mine has the A/C in the back which may add a bit more to this effect.) So your landing flare has to be about 8° to avoid hitting the nose wheel first. Don Kaye has posted a lot on the landing techniques for the long bodies, so he could say a lot more than he did above.

I remember when I was transitioning, the best visual training I got was from Richard Simile.  He said I should liken the landing to a bird of prey, reaching out it's talons to capture its next meal. In this case those talons are your wheels, and you want to feel like you are nose high and just letting those wheels reach down to the ground in your flare.  That's really a good way to think about it.  Speed control is critical in all Mooneys, but even more so in the long bodies as they will float forever if carrying too much speed.

Finally, I've found that carrying a breath of power over the threshold is essential to a greaser.  I used to land my J pretty much power-off, but trying this in the Ovation yielded pretty bad results. A touch of power down to the flare helps smooth things out for me.

[daytonabch04]

52 minutes ago, Bob_Belville said:

Bravo/Ovation owners: I wonder what you consider a minimum runway length in a long body? (I was looking at visiting Annapolis MD yesterday. Several airports with 2500' runways are more convenient than BFW. I'm fine with 2500' in my E.)  

I've got about 100 hrs in my Bravo and the shortest I've taken it into is 4000 ft.  Personally, I probably wouldn't feel comfortable taking it in shorter, but I'm sure it's doable.  I look for airports with 5000+ ft if I'm going on a x/c.

Edited October 21, 2019 by daytonabch04

[irishpilot]

I've got about 100 hrs in my Bravo and the shortest I've taken it into is 4000 ft.  Personally, I probably wouldn't feel comfortable taking it in shorter, but I'm sure it's doable.  I look for airports with 5000+ ft if I'm going on a x/c.

I fly mine into 1T8 for mx work and it's 2890'. I taxi clear at the halfway point. Short field landings light weight aren't too bad in the Bravo's. It's the takeoff distance, especially with a 50' obstacle. Run the POH numbers heavy weight vs light. That's why I takeoff light and early, even at a 700' field elevation.

Fly Safe,
Safety Forum Mod

[Bob_Belville]

53 minutes ago, daytonabch04 said:

I've got about 100 hrs in my Bravo and the shortest I've taken it into is 4000 ft.  Personally, I probably wouldn't feel comfortable taking it in shorter, but I'm sure it's doable.  I look for airports with 5000+ ft if I'm going on a x/c.

 

44 minutes ago, irishpilot said:

I fly mine into 1T8 for mx work and it's 2890'. I taxi clear at the halfway point. Short field landings light weight aren't too bad in the Bravo's. It's the takeoff distance, especially with a 50' obstacle. Run the POH numbers heavy weight vs light. That's why I takeoff light and early, even at a 700' field elevation.

Hum, so far we hear we can land in 4000' and <1500' (half of 2890').

I'm thinking that more data are needed!

[donkaye]

6 hours ago, daytonabch04 said:

I've got about 100 hrs in my Bravo and the shortest I've taken it into is 4000 ft.  Personally, I probably wouldn't feel comfortable taking it in shorter, but I'm sure it's doable.  I look for airports with 5000+ ft if I'm going on a x/c.

I don't want to be demeaning, but the above numbers tell me more training from a Mooney specific instructor may be necessary.  It's a travesty to be limiting yourself to runways no shorter than 2,890 feet and even much, much worse to those no less than 4,000 feet.  When doing the PPP in Santa Maria (KSMX) I would routinely finish up a student at Oceano, (L52) which is 2,325 x 50 feet in the Bravos.  With moderate braking the first turnoff could easily be made.  Although not making it a practice, but just for testing, the ground roll on a properly set up approach in a long body Mooney can be less than 900 feet.  The shortest I've take in an Ovation is 2,160 x 60 feet at Fallbrook, California.  It's an aircraft carrier approach and landing and was dicey.  I wouldn't base any long body airplane there.  So the minimum runway length I would comfortably go into would be 2,300 feet at sea level, but only if you've done it with an experienced Mooney Instructor and he/she feels you are practiced enough to do it successfully every time.  You should easily feel comfortable going into an airport like Palo Alto (KPAO) at 2,443 x 70 feet with a bern near the threshold and 3,000 feet should be an absolute no brainer.   If you are not comfortable with the above numbers, please go out with a Mooney specific instructor and practice until you do feel comfortable with them.

[irishpilot]

Aside from personal experience (mine included), I highly recommend reading and studying the POH. The POH is the standard for what folks should study when asking where they can fly in/out of.

 

I recommend running the numbers for both light and heavy weight, at SL and at a higher field elevation. This will give you a good working knowledge of what fields are availble.

 

Fly Safe,

Safety Forum Mod

 

 

 

[pwnel]

37 minutes ago, donkaye said:

 

I don't want to be demeaning, but the above numbers tell me you both should get more training from a Mooney specific instructor.  

For a second there I wrote off ever owning an M.  Here in the NE all the best destinations are ~2500ft.  (Block Island, Tangier, Fischer, even Alton Bay).  

PS: also why I'm not interested in ever owning a twin or a PA46 Meridian.  (Only the Jetprop makes sense and is my dream upgrade).  Wonder how many Bahamas strips you'll limit yourself out of if you don't want to do < 4000ft

Edited October 21, 2019 by pwnel

[PaulM]

Don Kaye may chime in and say that he will usually train pilots to land at KPAO. (2400).   (and while I was writing this he did) 

 I've landed at KSQL  2600'.    On the best day, I've pulled off a 3000' runway with a 50' obstacle at 1600'.. but that was very light, with a headwind.  etc. 

When I did the transition training all of the fields were 4000".. you need to train with the lengths you want to use, when I first came home to 3000' with a 50' obstacle it took three tries.   Finally hitting 1.3vso on final made it work every time, so 3000' at sea level is my "don't worry about it" length.

Shorter than that will be calculated and have the approach/departure obstacles evaluated, and it will not be a full gross approach.  

Start at a comfortable length, and work to make it shorter safely.  Get the flare closer to the numbers, with moderate braking turn off or stop and measure the length via google maps/foreflight etc. 

I know a Mooney part 135 outfit in NJ that picks up clients from a 2300' airstrip in an Ovation Ultra.  

[FoxMike]

Here is a conservative opinion from a Bravo owner with 2000hrs in model.  You can get a Bravo into strips which the manual says you can safely use.  In the real world, I shop for best fuel prices which are usually located at smaller airports.  Many times I have not been in there before and when I leave the tanks will be full.  Sometimes the runway surface is rough or has patchy ice or something else that is not written up in a Notam.  When I am traveling a leg is 500NM or so and I am not as sharp when I started out.  For all those reasons I try to use runways around 3000'.  It seems a reasonable safety factor is appropriate when you are choosing an airport for a fuel stop.  

If you in a situation where gas at home base is expensive and short strip is a few miles away has a better price nothing wrong with that operation.  I owned an E model years back and know the lighter E model is much better on short strips but I gave that up for a more comfortable cabin.  My advice is to keep yourself comfortable with runway lengths.