Oscar Avalle

Mooney factory closed again

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

Wait a minute....I agree that Mooney's notoriously have fuel tank leaks, the steel cage on older models suffer corrosion especially if tied down outside in humid areas like the Gulf Coast, the shock discs are a pain and ridiculously expensive for a chunk of rubber but I thought that the wing spars were the strongest of any and rock solid....you must be referring to the old wooden wings in the late 50's M20A. 

The spars are 7075 extruded aluminum and they are fairly reactive.  Plenty of Mooney’s are either totaled or cost tens of thousands to have spars replaced. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Members that donate $10 or more do not see advertisements*

As regular readers here know, several in the modern model line have had spar issues discovered during tank reseal.  It’s not just older models.

Clarence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Andy95W said:

I’m not going to debate having a BRS, I wish my M20C had one. But I think your reasoning, above, is flawed.

Most stall/spin accidents are turning base to final, typically at 500’ AGL or less. Cirrus gives a minimum altitude for BRS deployment as 580’. Even if a pilot’s reaction was instantaneous, you’re still below the envelope recommended by Cirrus. And most pilots will probably still hit the ground in a Cirrus spin on final before they even have the opportunity to think about closing the throttle and pulling the handle. 

Even if you are below the minimum recommend by Cirrus there is still benefit. Not complete but some. Obviously airports vary but 500 ft on base is too low for many because of neighborhood encroachment like where I am. 700 ft is more likely. But if you spin a Mooney at 500-700 ft I would not be very hopeful of surviving. With BRS/CAPS the chances are better. It just depends upon what value you place on loss of life or paralysis. There is still some Benefit vs Cost. It’s a buying decision. I get it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this Cirrus talk reminds me of my grandfather who used to drive Packards which were pretty pricey back in the day. When someone would tell him all the reasons they would not own a Packard, his reply was always, "Then if I were you, I wouldn't buy one." 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, PT20J said:

All this Cirrus talk reminds me of my grandfather who used to drive Packards which were pretty pricey back in the day. When someone would tell him all the reasons they would not own a Packard, his reply was always, "Then if I were you, I wouldn't buy one." 

That’s a great analogy. It’s just like cars. Some people fought every innovation to improve safety or drivability as too expensive, too easy, kills the romance of driving, not as efficient/effect as a properly trained “skilled” driver. I can remember the pushback on fuel injection, disc brakes, front wheel drive, Super charging, turbo charging, ABS, airbags, active traction control and of course automatic transmissions versus manual. Today the pushback is on EV and auto pilot. I bet I see the day before I die that they take the “driver“ out of driving. (Ferrari  doesn’t sell a car anymore with a manual transmission because no human can shift as fast as an automatic)

Innovation in general aviation is slow and initial cost high but most have embraced the benefits of (no carb icing) fuel injection, first Loran and now WAAS GPS, data base terrain avoidance, ADSB traffic and weather. There is pushback by some on CAPS/BRS but I would not be surprised in my lifetime to see it along with single lever control, auto land, 4 point seat belts, air bags as standard on all new generations of high performance singles.

The trend in commercial aviation, as the 737 Max saga has illustrated, seems to be making planes easier to fly for pilots with a lower skill base.  The same seems to be happening in GA.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s pretty hard to argue the safety of a parachute.That is indisputable.  

Not that anyone asked, but here is my two cents....

My dad is an attorney and dove a mercury marquis for 30 years. 

Most of his clients were farmers and he drove in the fields for years, and never got his car stuck. 
One day he told me he was going to buy a pickup truck, and I suggested four wheel drive. 
He told me he didn’t need four wheel drive, because he had been driving a two wheel drive for all those years without a problem. 
I said, but in a truck, you will make different decisions.
He didn’t agree and bought a two wheel drive. 
He has been stuck six times in three years. 

A parachute cannot possibly be a bad thing to have as an option...

Unless, it causes you to make decisions you would otherwise not make. 



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See if I got this right...

New stuff is better than the old stuff... Car, boat, plane... all wheel drive vs. 2wd...

But, stuff I have right now is the bomb!

65M20C, or 94M20R... or any M20A,B,C,D,E,F,G,J,K,L,M,R,S,TN,U,V....

Don’t forget anything enhanced by Rocket engineering...

What else have you got?
:)

Best regards,

-a-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

Seriously, does anyone here put any faith in the spin certification of an M20? Does anyone really make a buying decision based upon some ancient certification in which there is no date, or data or history?  Does anyone here have spin training in a Mooney?...and training in a docile Cessna 172 doesn't count...actually in a Mooney?  NO - not legally because if you look at the POH intentional spins are not allowed.  

And why are they not allowed?  Because it does not easily recover.  OK so once upon a time a skilled test pilot was able to recover a Mooney in one turn but anything done by Mooney is anecdotal today and done by test pilots no longer alive.   Bill Wheat passed in 2016.   There is some evidence that Mooney's have a tendency to flip on their back if they are loaded aft CG in a spin.  It appears that 2,000 ft. may be lost in one turn.

http://www.mooneyevents.com/spins.html

https://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=90612

Truth be known Mooney's may be only marginally better than a Cirrus in a spin depending on loading and if flaps or gear are down.

Does anyone here feel confident that they could recover a Mooney in a spin under 2,000 ft.?  If spin recovery was a key buying decision then you would buy a Cessna 172 which can apparently recover in 500-800 ft. in one turn. 

So we take a risk every time we fly a Mooney.  Basically our only realistic defense to a spin is to avoid one by having good stall training.

This makes the whole discussion about the value of CAPS/BRS ridiculous.  Most stall/spin accidents are at low altitude.  If you enter a spin in a Mooney there is a good chance that you will not survive.  If you enter a spin an a plane with CAPS/BRS there is a good chance you will survive.  It is as simple as that.  It is a proven safety device.

https://www.faa.gov/mobile/index.cfm?event=news.read&update=87827 

Some here say that they don't need it.  Well it is like shoulder harnesses - you don't need it until you need it.  There are some pilot/owners that have failed to install rear shoulder harnesses in older Mooney's that lacked them from the factory because their passengers "don't need them".  There are some here that probably don't use the shoulder harness anyway because "they don't need it".  It is all well and good until you suffer a hard landing....then you need it.

Everything has a cost vs. benefit.  Perhaps "I don't need it" really means "I can't afford a plane with it".  I get that.  Mine doesn't have one either.  Would I (and my passengers) feel better if I did have one?...Yes.

 

 

 

 

Yes I am confident, because I don't let an airplane spin. Recognizing incipient spin is the key, but beyond that is preventing loss of control in the first place. One of the changes that created AQP is to stop practicing maneuver in regimes that will kill us to preventing flight into such regimes in the first place. For instance on a single runway operation if you overshoot the center line do you skid the airplane onto final, keeping extra speed to prevent LOC or do you remain in co-ordinated flight accept the overshoot and fly back onto centerline? If they are to parallel runways do you start the turn early, if late skid with speed, or bank over hard but co-ordinated. If you bank over what is the minimum speed you maneuver at in the pattern?

Share this post


Link to post
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.