Mooney handling characteristics/flight near Napa CA

[MooneyMitch]

Yes indeed!  One of the reasons I love the Mooney is because it reminds me of being in a sports car...... like this one 

[SantosDumont]

I've never flown in a Bonanza, but plenty of Cessnas.  After flying in the Mooney for a few hundred hours, flying a Cessna felt like I was flying a marshmallow.

[johncuyle]

On 1/5/2020 at 3:09 PM, eskalada said:

Thank you for your replies. At this point it’s clear that I need to get into one and actually fly it, not just once around the pattern. If there is a Mooney owner in the greater SF Bay Area that would be open for a flight, I’m good for fuel and lunch, plus good conversation! These planes are very hard to find to rent, that’s why I’m putting this out there.

I'm not sure why people equate heavy controls to handling like a truck.  I own a truck (1987 GMC Sierra) and two cars (1994 Chevrolet Corvette and a 1995 Mazda Miata).  Of them, the truck has the lightest clutch, lightest springs on the gear lever (but is harder to put into gear, the synchros were probably shot 100k miles ago) lightest springs on the throttle, softest brakes, and lowest effort steering.  It handles like a truck.  The Miata has the heaviest steering since it was a power setup that I converted to a manual.  It handles like a sports car.  The Corvette has the heaviest everything except steering.  It handles like a sports car.  Trucks have light controls, vague controls.  Sports cars have heavy controls with tons of feedback and respond to them instantly.  The Mooney flies like a sports car, not a truck.  

[TGreen]

How much hand flying are y'all doing? Gotta confess, except for pattern work and the occasional training flight where I make myself hand fly, my autopilot is on from 400 agl after takeoff until I am on short approach or entering the pattern. 

[MooneyMitch]

And my truck handles like a luxury sedan.  

 

[johncuyle]

30 minutes ago, TGreen said:

How much hand flying are y'all doing? Gotta confess, except for pattern work and the occasional training flight where I make myself hand fly, my autopilot is on from 400 agl after takeoff until I am on short approach or entering the pattern. 

My AP is inop so... all my flying.

[carusoam]

Handles like a truck... something I first heard in the 70s...

To describe turning the wheel... and the truck continued to bounce down the road, before responding...

Today’s trucks... turn the wheel 90°+ to go around a sharp corner... (Tahoe)

90’s Corvette... point the top of the steering wheel to where on the road you want to be... it goes there... very linear... very predictable...

cars/trucks... you hold the wheel there for the entire corner... feather the throttle for added enjoyment.
 

My Mooney... snap the the yoke 90° momentarily... add an appropriate amount of rudder at the same time... you will be in a steep turn before you start to count.  If you hold it to go around a corner, like a truck... it won’t end very well...

 My M20C would do the same...

 

Handles like a truck... is a fancy way of throwing a barb...  

I got to fly a V-Tail bonanza.... with cable controls... I was so looking forward to the dead spot that often comes with loose cable systems... fortunately this V-bo is owned by an awesome mechanic... and it’s cables are nice and tight... not showing any of the dead spot I was so looking to point out... 

Drives like a Cadillac... is another one of those lost definition things...  so soft suspension, it won’t go around a corner without screeching tire sounds... and heeling over towards the outside of the turn...

No new Cadillac drives like that...

PP thoughts only, not a race car driver...

Best regards,

-a-

[RobertE]

I’ve got a J model in Angwin.  Just send me a message if you’re interested in a test flight.  I’m retired and available most days.  

[Hank]

7 hours ago, carusoam said:

cars/trucks... you hold the wheel there for the entire corner... feather the throttle for added enjoyment.

My Mooney... snap the the yoke 90° momentarily... add an appropriate amount of rudder at the same time... you will be in a steep turn before you start to count.  If you hold it to go around a corner, like a truck... it won’t end very well...

 My M20C would do the same...

Throttle feathering works so much better with rear-wheel drive . . . But even my Altima does well acceleratig out of sharp-ish curves.

My M20-C, though--as long as I've owned it (since 2007), I keep the yoke turned until ready to roll wings level. Makes it weird to fly a Cessna again, where I turn the yoke to establish bank, go back to neutral, then turn the yoke the other way to roll wings level. My Mooney is much more car-like but the yoke turns much less in either direction to make a turn.

[Stephen]

On 1/5/2020 at 5:37 PM, Andy95W said:

If you go flying in a Mooney in order to feel how heavy the controls are, then you’ll feel how heavy the controls are. All I can add is that after a short while (like about 100 hours) all you have to do is think about where you want the Mooney to go and it just seems to do it. You don’t even notice the controls or that you’re even giving control inputs.

And on the other hand, I’ve flown 4 different Beechcraft types and they were all sweet to fly. 

This was my experience as well

[Stephen]

8 hours ago, RobertE said:

I’ve got a J model in Angwin.  Just send me a message if you’re interested in a test flight.  I’m retired and available most days.  

@eskalada  .. looks like Robert is looking to hook you up. A you are seeing, MS members are a great bunch and quite generous. Welcome aboard!

[Stephen]

14 hours ago, MooneyMitch said:

Yes indeed!  One of the reasons I love the Mooney is because it reminds me of being in a sports car...... like this one 

Mitch,, did this make it into the Favorite Ride / Favorite Plane thread? If not, please post cause she's a beauty. 

 

[Ibra]

On 1/5/2020 at 9:35 PM, Niko182 said:

Bo - light on the roll and the pitch. Heavy on the rudder

M20 - light on the pitch and rudder. Heavy on the roll.

You are right in the sense that the Bo are just big draggy boxes that are highly overpowered to their airframe, this make load of torque on the rudder but give a lot of pitch authorithy (also in roll as the tail is what makes an aircraft turn once ailerons are neutral), the Monney are far more slick on their travel axis aerodynamic, so don't like much to roll/turn as you would wish but they just go straight 

 

No hours flying the Bo, but look at the Mentor variant it has 500hp and barely delivers 200kts cruise, it needs a load of rudder to stay in the axe but it is a delight for a quick 360 rolls/loops, a Mooney on same power would make 470kts(550mph) straight and will never roll/loop 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 7, 2020 by Ibra

[Skates97]

22 hours ago, TGreen said:

How much hand flying are y'all doing? Gotta confess, except for pattern work and the occasional training flight where I make myself hand fly, my autopilot is on from 400 agl after takeoff until I am on short approach or entering the pattern. 

 

22 hours ago, johncuyle said:

My AP is inop so... all my flying.

No AP and mine is a converted D so it doesn't even have the positive control. However, trimmed out it is very easy to fly with minimal input.

[Niko182]

22 minutes ago, Skates97 said:

 

No AP and mine is a converted D so it doesn't even have the positive control. However, trimmed out it is very easy to fly with minimal input.

In my opinion, autopilot makes the biggest difference when you start flying IFR. it makes a lot of the tasks require multifocusing instead of multitasking.

[FloridaMan]

On 1/5/2020 at 3:47 PM, eskalada said:

Hello everyone,

I am new to this site and would really appreciate feedback on this question. I am looking to purchase an M20J. I am extremely excited about finally owning a Mooney, it fits the bill In every way. This is my question. Many of my non Mooney pilot friends tell me that Mooneys are great aircraft but handle like trucks, meaning, I believe, that pitch and roll inputs are on the heavy side, as compared to a Bonanza for example. In other words, they are fast and efficient  aircraft that are not that fun to fly. Is there any truth to this statement, or is it just jealous Bonanza pilots trying to find an edge over Mooneys. I would assume that if Mooneys had this issue, after so many decades In production, it would have been addressed in later models. But I have heard this from multiple sources so I thought it would be good to bring the question here. Thank you in advance for your feedback.

Depends on the model. My M20F is very light on the controls and the Rocket feels like a truck in comparison, but gives a much better ride in turbulence at the same time. 

[Ibra]

On 1/7/2020 at 11:34 PM, Niko182 said:

autopilot makes the biggest difference when you start flying IFR

It also make a huge difference to your VFR flying when switched OFF, good thing about autopilot is that it push you to think well ahead what heading/altitude (and how to adjust power/speed) to fly before doing anything else or touching anything and that hugely improves the accuracy of your flying when you are back to hand flying

I used to hand fly VFR for hours with zero awareness of my "selected" altitude and heading, just going all over the place while keeping wing level

Keeping wing level is the daunting bit, but everybody can do that with enough 100% concentration, less so in IMC but still, but you are not getting any better at it doing it practicing it for hours or worse you just get tired and lose it 

Edited January 10, 2020 by Ibra

[M20F-1968]

Trimmed, my airplane flies very nicely hands off.  Control inputs flying IFR, if tracking or on ILS, in no wind condition, control inputs are almost imperceptible.   Just nudge the control and you are changing direction.  Fingertip corrections only needed when established and stable.  It is a nice feeling.  The "heaviness" of the controls adds to the airplane's stability.  Thus, it is stable yet very responsive to the smallest of control inputs.

John Breda

[Andy95W]

8 hours ago, M20F-1968 said:

The "heaviness" of the controls adds to the airplane's stability.  Thus, it is stable yet very responsive to the smallest of control inputs.

 

⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️⬆️

This.  +1.

[PT20J]

The heaviness is the airplane’s stability feeding back to you through the controls.  A Pitts has very light controls and a wicked roll rate. You wouldn’t want to fly it IMC. Stability (heavy controls) and agility (light controls) are opposite design constraints. Designers try to strike the best balance for the intended mission. 
 

Skip

[M016576]

41 minutes ago, PT20J said:

The heaviness is the airplane’s stability feeding back to you through the controls.  A Pitts has very light controls and a wicked roll rate. You wouldn’t want to fly it IMC. Stability (heavy controls) and agility (light controls) are opposite design constraints. Designers try to strike the best balance for the intended mission. 
 

Skip

Technically, though, the stability of an aircraft has nothing to do with control feel (at least not in terms of its aerodynamic definition).  Stable aircraft can be made to have a very light control feel.  Unstable aircraft can have a heavy control feel.  What drives control feel is primarily just a function of how the flight controls are attached to the control surfaces.  

Stability is defined as an aircraft’s ability to resist forces that act upon it.... the feel of the controls are an independent subject.
 

Here’s an example: the T-2 Buckeye has a mechanical flight control system with hydraulic boost.  It is an inherently stable design around the roll and yaw axis... if disturbed, the aircraft moves back towards its original state.  With the hydraulic boost working, the controls are very light.  But the aircraft is still quite stable.  If the hydraulic boost is not working, or is deactivated, the control force is much much heavier... but the aircraft is still just as stable as it was before.

another example.... the Seneca has Neutral static stability about the pitch/roll and yaw axis.  This leads to some pretty unpleasant characteristics at times- like a propensity for Dutch roll in turbulence and some wonkey flare characteristics for the uninitiated.  Yet it has a very heavy control feel.  All the heavy control feel in the world does not make the Seneca stable... it just makes it a bitch to fly.

the only thing that changes in regards to the weight of the controls for any given aircraft is the pilots skill/experience at flying the airplane in that configuration.

 

[PT20J]

2 hours ago, M016576 said:

Technically, though, the stability of an aircraft has nothing to do with control feel (at least not in terms of its aerodynamic definition).  Stable aircraft can be made to have a very light control feel.  Unstable aircraft can have a heavy control feel.  What drives control feel is primarily just a function of how the flight controls are attached to the control surfaces.  

Stability is defined as an aircraft’s ability to resist forces that act upon it.... the feel of the controls are an independent subject.
 

Here’s an example: the T-2 Buckeye has a mechanical flight control system with hydraulic boost.  It is an inherently stable design around the roll and yaw axis... if disturbed, the aircraft moves back towards its original state.  With the hydraulic boost working, the controls are very light.  But the aircraft is still quite stable.  If the hydraulic boost is not working, or is deactivated, the control force is much much heavier... but the aircraft is still just as stable as it was before.

another example.... the Seneca has Neutral static stability about the pitch/roll and yaw axis.  This leads to some pretty unpleasant characteristics at times- like a propensity for Dutch roll in turbulence and some wonkey flare characteristics for the uninitiated.  Yet it has a very heavy control feel.  All the heavy control feel in the world does not make the Seneca stable... it just makes it a bitch to fly.

the only thing that changes in regards to the weight of the controls for any given aircraft is the pilots skill/experience at flying the airplane in that configuration.

 

I may have not been clear in making my point. Let’s just consider longitudinal stability for the moment. It’s simpler because only one axis is involved whereas there is generally coupling between roll and yaw axes. 

For an airplane with reversible (mechanical, unboosted) controls, as you deflect the elevator with the stick what you feel is the aerodynamic force at the elevator pushing back. Let’s say you are trimmed in level flight. A stable airplane will return to its trimmed airspeed when disturbed. The degree a stability (unstable to neutral to positively stable) is sensed by the pilot through the control pressures. Now let’s say that the pilot wants to reduce airspeed.  If it takes a push to slow down, the airplane is unstable. If there is no force required to change speed, it is neutrally stable. If it requires a pull it is positively stable. The amount of force is proportional to the stability. Airplanes are less stable, and the control forces get lighter, as the CG moves aft.

Adding gadgets to the control system such as downsprings and bobweights is a standard way of increasing the stability as sensed by the pilot. The Seneca has downsprings which improve stability with aft CG (to increase CG range) but the penalty is very heavy pitch forces with forward CG which always made my landings interesting until I learned to only flare enough to stop the descent. 
 

Edit: Of course, lots of factors determine control forces, and I’m not intending to imply that stability is the only one. For instance, Mooney’s have a relatively small control wheel angle of rotation (equivalent to a short stick) fairly large chord ailerons that lack aerodynamic balance which contribute to somewhat heavy roll forces. At some point the trailing edges of the ailerons were bevelled and this would have reduced control forces without an appreciable change in stability. My point is simply that the airplane’s stability communicates itself to the pilot through the control forces the pilot feels.

There’s a much more eloquent discussion of stability in Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators.

Skip
 

Edited January 12, 2020 by PT20J
Added clarification that stability isn’t the only factor determining control force

[eskalada]

Then if heavy controls do not equate stability, why would Mooney make their controls on the heavy side, when they could have had light controls with the same stability?

[donkaye]

Assuming you're not flying aerobatics, in my opinion, control feel is irrelevant.  The proficient pilot who wants passengers to fly with him/her again will fly in such a manner that the passenger should feel like they are riding in a car; no jerky movements, but smooth motion.  This means moving the controls with control pressure, not control movement.  Fly for the passenger, even if the passenger is you.  That's the way the ATP pilot thinks and the way the private pilot should think.  Having owned my Mooney for 27 years and flying them for 29 years and having about 9,700 hours in nearly every model Mooney, any purchase consideration given them should not involve control "feel".  As stated above, it is irrelevant to the proficient pilot.

[PT20J]

23 minutes ago, eskalada said:

Then if heavy controls do not equate stability, why would Mooney make their controls on the heavy side, when they could have had light controls with the same stability?

An excellent question. Control and stability go hand in hand. The pilot needs to be able to control the airplane. Stability is adverse to maneuverability. And, stability communicates itself to the pilot through control forces. In a sense, when you try to maneuver, the stability fights you snd you feel this in the controls. An aerobatic airplane will have low stability, high maneuverability and low stick forces. A good IFR plane will have higher stability, lower maneuverability and higher stick forces. 

On the other hand, sometimes you don’t want to maneuver. You just want to cruise along at a steady airspeed and altitude. In this case, the stability helps you. Consider flying along trimmed in cruise in turbulence. A measure of stability in this condition is called airspeed stability. It will generally be easier to control the airplane around the trim point if it is more stable in which case the force gradient (lbs per knot) will be higher than that of a less stable airplane. 

Another measure of stability in maneuvering flight is stick force per g. You want the controls to get heavy when you pull g’s because if the controls are too light, it is easy to over stress the airplane. 

Control forces really get into an area of aircraft design and evaluation known as handling qualities which is to an extent subjective. 

Skip