Greasing landings with long bodies

[Shadrach]

57 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

Well, Bonanzas are the easiest airplanes in the world to land. Very forgiving with hefty landing gear which absorbs a lot. I told a friend that they were easy and one has to work hard to ecreu up a landing. He said, "oh sure," so I put him in the left seat of one and proved it to him. He couldn't believe it.

And yes, Mooneys are less forgiving of slop than some, perhaps even most, definitely not all, other light GA aircraft. 

I'm not sure what we are arguing about. We seem to be in violent agreement about substance. Perhaps you are just more religious about Mooneys than I. 

 I didn’t know we were arguing…I thought this was a discussion! I took your post about speed control in “all aircraft” as an equivocation. I don’t think Mooney’s are as forgiving as a Bonanza or a high wing Cessna or Piper Lance or the Grumman Tiger or any of the other 15  airplanes in which I have time(admittedly moderate amounts). It seems we’re in agreement. I don’t think Mooney’s require any special skill to land, but they do require some. 

 The discussion about getting too slow irks me a bit because I have flown with many Mooney pilots. I have never flown with one that flies too slow in the pattern. I have flown with and seen many who fly too fast. YouTube is full of Mooney  approaches with surplus speed (Piper Painter excluded).  Some have been posted here with folks crossing the threshold in excess of 100MIAS. Three of the local fields near me have had multiple Mooneys depart the runway’s end over the last several decades. We’ve had members suffer the consequences of RLOC where speed was most certainly a factor.

Many are speculating that an ATP and his passenger came to grief in WV because he just wasn’t flying fast enough.  That may be true, but it doesn’t change my observation that a majority of mooney pilots with an airspeed issue have the opposite problem.

Edited October 30, 2019 by Shadrach

[TGreen]

14 hours ago, PT20J said:

Round out close to the runway and reduce power to idle and hold it off until the mains touch.

What he said.

[Hank]

20 hours ago, PT20J said:

It’s not that hard. Rudder keeps the nose aligned. Aileron counteracts sideways drift.  Fly a constant descent angle at 1.3 Vso controlling airspeed with pitch and descent rate with power. Round out close to the runway and reduce power to idle and hold it off until the mains touch.  

The first part works well for me, but if I keep power on until the flare, I'll go off the end of the runway. Maybe not at my new home, 5400', but I spent 11 years based at either 3000' obstructed or 3200' fields. I pull power to idle on final when I know I have the field made. This is often 100+ agl. Are long bodies really that different? FYI, i roll wings level on final at 85, slowing to 75 - 5 per 300 lb below gross by short final, usually about the same sppt the throttle goes to idle. In my C, it's mph, but many here do similarly in KIAS.

Edited October 31, 2019 by Hank

[PT20J]

29 minutes ago, Hank said:

The first part works well for me, but if I keep power on until the flare, I'll go off the end of the runway. Maybe not at my new home, 5400', but I spent 11 years based at either 3000' obstructed or 3200' fields. I pull power to idle on final when I know I have the field made. This is often 100+ agl. Are long bodies really that different? FYI, i roll wings level on final at 85, slowing to 75 - 5 per 300 lb below gross by short final, usually about the same sppt the throttle goes to idle. In my C, it's mph, but many here do similarly in KIAS.

Landing is really about energy management. Engine thrust and airspeed are two forms of energy that you have control over. To fly a constant descent angle to the runway at a constant airspeed (neglecting for the moment destabilizing atmospheric forces such as wind shear and thermals) you need a constant power setting. Entering ground effect tilts the lift vector forward and increases lift and reduces induced drag. But, flaring increases angle of attack which increases induced drag. It also increases lift, but the airspeed is decreasing which decreases lift so if you get the flare right, one effect will counteract the other. So as you flare, lift is constant, drag is increasing, and the airspeed is decreasing. Reducing power to idle at this point hurries up the process and touchdown happens soon afterwards. Notice how an airliner lands next time you are unfortunate enough to be crammed in the back of one. For a jet, pretty much every landing is a short field landing. If you are floating a lot, you are too fast. 

The problem with reducing power at 100 feet is that reducing power causes pitch down moment that you have to counteract with elevator which complicates the whole process by destabilizing the approach. The only reason to do this is having too much energy (speed + power) so you reduce the form of energy most readily controllable (power). Try flying the final slower with constant power (varied only to compensate for wind shear or thermals) and doing a coordinated flare and power reduction and see if it doesn’t work for you. There’s nothing magic about it - it’s just physics. 

Cheers,

Skip

[Hank]

While my descent angle to the runway is pretty constant, my airspeed is not--crossing the numbers at 85 mph will, at 100' per mph of airspeed, make me float almost 3000' . . . . My airspeed is decreasing from the base-to-final turn to the turn off of the runway. And no, i don't want to fly the entire final leg at 70 mph, my low weight speed over the numbers! 

Do long body pilots really fly at pattern speed all the way to the numbers? I don't even do that on an instrument approach, I start slowing down as soon as I break out, but those are longer runways where I can give up 1000' without worry. 

[Shadrach]

13 minutes ago, PT20J said:

Landing is really about energy management. Engine thrust and airspeed are two forms of energy that you have control over. To fly a constant descent angle to the runway at a constant airspeed (neglecting for the moment destabilizing atmospheric forces such as wind shear and thermals) you need a constant power setting. Entering ground effect tilts the lift vector forward and increases lift and reduces induced drag. But, flaring increases angle of attack which increases induced drag. It also increases lift, but the airspeed is decreasing which decreases lift so if you get the flare right, one effect will counteract the other. So as you flare, lift is constant, drag is increasing, and the airspeed is decreasing. Reducing power to idle at this point hurries up the process and touchdown happens soon afterwards. Notice how an airliner lands next time you are unfortunate enough to be crammed in the back of one. For a jet, pretty much every landing is a short field landing. If you are floating a lot, you are too fast. 

The problem with reducing power at 100 feet is that reducing power causes pitch down moment that you have to counteract with elevator which complicates the whole process by destabilizing the approach. The only reason to do this is having too much energy (speed + power) so you reduce the form of energy most readily controllable (power). Try flying the final slower with constant power (varied only to compensate for wind shear or thermals) and doing a coordinated flare and power reduction and see if it doesn’t work for you. There’s nothing magic about it - it’s just physics. 

Cheers,

Skip

Indeed if I have passengers, I fly at a constant power setting that yields about 65KIAS down to 100”.  When alone, I try to be power off right after I drop the gear abeam the numbers using pitch only to control energy and induced drag. I find that it’s good practice to get acquainted with managing energy this way. Letting the airplane slow to the high point on the drag curve is dramatically more effective than a forward slip.  

[carusoam]

for conversation only.... 

90, 80, 7x... (full weight, flaps down, stall speed 58)

x based on weight, wind, configuration (use the DK matrix)

Any slower... ideal conditions, and light weight, good speed control.

Power based on weight, TPA... checked/adjusted at each key location... adjustments are always removing power...

I am a fan of continuous radius turns from downwind to final... lower bank angle this way... but the keys are less defined...

If you get the throttle pulled all the way out... this is a set-up for 1k’pm descents... somewhat less than stable...

If you dial in a turn and a half of throttle... this adds enough power for a stable landing.. from short final...

Dial the power back out when the runway is made...

interesting enough. how much power is the 1.5 turns of throttle.. it is the same throttle position for engine start.. enough to overcome a lot of friction. float a loooong way. and land super lightly...

As for speed brakes.. they are effective, sort of..if high and fast, deploy them.. but they are much less effective at such a slow speed...

 

PP thoughts only, not a CFI...

Best regards,

-a-

[Steve Yucht]

100kts, 90kts,80kts (downwind, base, final) quickly dialing in up trim to slow to 68 over the numbers (higher if gust factor is needed or at max weight).  Power off on short final if possible.  If it looks like I'm sinking fast in the flair I'll twist in 1.5 turns of throttle.  My O2 has VG's so she handles well in slow flight and doesn't fall even if the stall horn goes off in ground effect.  Low time Mooney rookie who just finished my transition training.  Take what I say with caution.

[McMooney]

On 10/30/2019 at 2:26 PM, TGreen said:

What he said.

works for me

 

[carusoam]

Steve,

Who did you TT with?

Best regards,

-a-

[Steve Yucht]

carusoam, I transitioned with Rob McGuire at KGNV.  Great guy and would recommend him to anyone in the area.

[Mufflerbearing]

I can't really express how much I love my long body Mooney.  Going through my flight training I have had the opportunity to fly several different kinds of planes.  C152, C175 tail dragger, Champ tail dragger, C172 and my Mooney.  After spending time doing a lot of take offs and landings in my plane, I have become rather proficient and it is about the numbers.  I have learned this plane really loves to fly fast and doesn't want to give it up.  But, if I am mid field, deploy the gear,  abeam the numbers, I go first step flaps and hold altitude until I drop to 90 kts before dropping the nose, this really helps the rest of the descent.  As someone said, making one turn from downwind to final is nice.  Going full flaps at base further drops speed and then nose down crossing numbers about 78 kts, flare and kiss.  This works really well for me.  I do have speed brakes but don't use them in the pattern.  I am looking forward to taking my check ride soon!

When talking about buying a plane prior to getting my license there were nay sayers, of course.  There are plenty of people saying not to take the test in my Mooney.  It's too hard.  This is the plane that I will be flying, so why not?  Yes, it has taken me a little more time, but if I figured in transition time, it all works out.  So, when I get my license, I'll have my high performance, complex and have the endorsement for tail wheel too.  Good times!

[carusoam]

I think we credit George(?) for the discussion of making one shallow banked turn from downwind to Final...Full flaps to go with that...

There are few things of value to go with the standard pattern with square corners...

This helps to keep the stall spin devil away...   as stall speeds increase with bank angle... and the two distinct corners have a lot of transition into a steep turn... if things get away from the pilot...

Anyone have a reference for the presentation that was given at last year’s Mooney Summit?

Best regards,

-a-

[PT20J]

The most efficient landing pattern is the 360 overhead, and the continuous turn to final is just 1/2 of that. I too like to put all the flaps in at the beginning of the descent -- it simplifies things and makes it easier to judge descent angle since the body angle isn't changing.

Skip

[HB-JAN]

On 11/14/2019 at 2:20 AM, Steve Yucht said:

100kts, 90kts,80kts (downwind, base, final) quickly dialing in up trim to slow to 68 over the numbers (higher if gust factor is needed or at max weight).

I also prefer these speeds. At these speeds you have the best ratio between stall speed and bank angle, in any configuration.
So it can also handle a bank angle of 45°, if necessary. (best regards from Switzerland, we have tight patterns here ) 

 

Jan 

[Mufflerbearing]

On 11/17/2019 at 3:58 PM, PT20J said:

The most efficient landing pattern is the 360 overhead, and the continuous turn to final is just 1/2 of that. I too like to put all the flaps in at the beginning of the descent -- it simplifies things and makes it easier to judge descent angle since the body angle isn't changing.

Skip

I will give that a shot tomorrow!  Just was taught differently. 

[carusoam]

The square box is traditional, and has some advantages...

The long shallow turn skips the multiple transitions into deeper banks and adds some buffer from a stall/spin scenario...

use caution in crowded traffic patterns... make sure everyone knows what you are doing... no surprises...

PP thoughts only, not a CFI...

Best regards,

-a-