Nukemzzz Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 I have a 1966 M20e When I purchased the plane In December I downloaded the commonly available scanned 66’-67’ POH and learned about the plane using it. I created a robust wire bound version of it so I could leave the original in the plane since it’s so old. A couple of days ago I noticed that the V speeds in this Internet manual didn’t match a Surecheck reference guide that was in the plane. (note, I’m still working on the plane, I’ve not been using the internet manual...not yet, but I’m getting close to flying it and so needed to cross check.) Well, tonight I compared with the ancient, original, 66’ POH that is in the plane and it doesn’t match the 66’-67’ version in some significant ways. For example Vx: 94mph in the 66-67 POH. 80mph in the 66. The differences aren’t insignificant and there are many. What I’m wondering is which is more accurate? You would think the newer one would be since maybe they did more testing after the original POH came out. But I don’t know that I trust a manual downloaded from the internet for something so important. Any experience with this? Any idea why they are different? Both say they cover my SN. Internet download: Original POH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MB65E Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 I wouldn’t trust Surecheck. What’s your SN? Use that then back up with current AFM/POH. Mooney used to keep their stuff current on the website. Current POH, and Maintenance manuals. Not sure if the current state. -Matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLCarter Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 Make sure the newer version isn't in kts, dirty math 80kts is pretty close to 94mph? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 From the Mooney website page covering PoH revision status. Clarence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N201MKTurbo Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 I would check the TCDS. It should have the real numbers. But to be sure, go test fly it and find out for your self. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yetti Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 Does your PoH serial number match the serial number of the plane. Use that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 I had a similar challenge when I bought my M20C... The older the POH, the less data it has... So I called the Mooney Factory... I spoke with some guy named Bill Wheat... Bill suggested I need two things... One, the owners manual for the year the plane was built... (arrow documents) Two, the most recent POH printed for the model... I later found out... Bill Wheat was the engineer that signed my 65C’s AW page in its first log book... 35 years earlier! More recent POHs are really serial number specific... About Mooney POHs through history... The first was an owners manual... about 30 pages of welcome aboard you smart wonderful male pilot... The 1976 version was about 100 pages that included more performance charts and basic procedures... A 90s POH is about 300 pages long with some deep detail... So if you like to read about Mooneys get an even more modern POH to see what else you might be missing... Some MSers have done their own flight tests to generate some of the missing data for their own plane... Vx won’t be 94mias... because that is even above best glide... (where did that come from?) I don’t think that is Vx for a long body either... PP thoughts only, not a CFI... Best regards, -a- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nukemzzz Posted February 22, 2020 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 SN is 1126 The old POH in the plane says SN range: 832-? (So it seems to have been made when the 66’ model was in actual production) The internet version for 66-67 models says. 832-1308 for 66’. So my plane is in Range for both books. it seems the newer internet version should obsolete the old original. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nukemzzz Posted February 22, 2020 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 Original POH: newer one: If the newer manual is valid, the above implies that at some point Mooney learned that the best climb angle speed was 94mph and not 80mph which is a pretty big goof right? Unless the 80mph is dirty? Still confused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nukemzzz Posted February 22, 2020 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 11 hours ago, Yetti said: Does your PoH serial number match the serial number of the plane. Use that. Yes. It matches both POH versions being discussed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsxrpilot Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 As @N201MKTurbo suggested, get in the plane and go fly. Try out both speeds, 80 and 94. See how they differ and which one you like better. Neither one will hurt you. Go fly, get to know your airplane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yetti Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 Just now, gsxrpilot said: As @N201MKTurbo suggested, get in the plane and go fly. Try out both speeds, 80 and 94. See how they differ and which one you like better. Neither one will hurt you. Go fly, get to know your airplane. I find that 100 works for most everything Climbout, when the propeller stops. Manuvering 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nukemzzz Posted February 22, 2020 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 11 hours ago, M20Doc said: From the Mooney website page covering PoH revision status. Clarence Interesting. The date of the one I found on the internet is March 1967. So it looks like it obsoletes both the original POH as well as the Surecheck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nukemzzz Posted February 22, 2020 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 2 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said: As @N201MKTurbo suggested, get in the plane and go fly. Try out both speeds, 80 and 94. See how they differ and which one you like better. Neither one will hurt you. Go fly, get to know your airplane. One of the reasons I’m sorting this out is we just yesterday finished all the repairs and I’m about to start training in it. I want to start off with the right POH and I’m trying to make sure that the proper POH is in the cabin for posterity. There is a lot to get square with this plane as I start this adventure and having two manuals that don’t match doesn’t sit well with me. Lol Side note: I logged over 70hrs of work personally getting it ready to fly again with A&P and IA oversight. And tomorrow seems to be go time!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_Belville Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 I have a '66E, serial 929. A previous owner, meticulous Delta Captain, provided a N943RW specific manual. Vx - clean is 94 mph CAS, Vx - take off flaps - is 80 mph CAS. Probably not a coincidence. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nukemzzz Posted February 22, 2020 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 6 minutes ago, Bob_Belville said: I have a '66E, serial 929. A previous owner, meticulous Delta Captain, provided a N943RW specific manual. Vx - clean is 94 mph CAS, Vx - take off flaps - is 80 mph CAS. Probably not a coincidence. That’s interesting. Notice the original manual doesn’t specify flaps or not. The newer one says clean. It looks like the new manual corrected the vagueness of the old and I’m pretty sure the best angle of climb to clear obstacles is clean. i just want to make sure I’m memorizing the right stuff for the check ride when it’s time or when something like clearing an obstacle becomes a real need some day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 you’re memorizing the wrong stuff... Since these documents were written... actual POHs with reliable information have been created... They put a Man on the Moon after these documents were written... You need to do something differently to be able to use what you have... Using this information without knowing why it is written can be dangerous... Much has changed in the way we train and fly since the 60s... Today, clearing close by obstacles... Vx is performed in T/O configuration. Once cleaned up, VX probably doesn’t apply.... you will be challenged by climbing over a mountain, while extremely heating your CHTs... You are about to find out the limitations of 60s documents more than anything else... They didn’t have word processors, and some of their engine data really is poorly documented... And your engine has changed since they installed it originally... there was an AD to swap out exhaust valve sizes somewhere along the way... Owners manuals were being developed at the same time the plane was being learned about... Not much has changed to the plane’s operations... since the B became the C... rudder throw, and rudder length were big changes... total fuel capacity was also a significant change... Get the most recent POH and know it is still missing 200 pages of important documentation... PP thoughts only, not a CFI... Best regards, -a- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nukemzzz Posted February 22, 2020 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, carusoam said: your memorizing the wrong stuff... Using this information without knowing why it is written can be dangerous... Much has changed in the way we train and fly since the 60s... Today, clearing close by obstacles... Vx is performed in T/O configuration. Once cleaned up, VX probably doesn’t apply.... you will be challenged by climbing over a mountain, while extremely heating your CHTs... You are about to find out the limitations of 60s documents more than anything else... They didn’t have word processors, and some of their engine data really is poorly documented... And your engine has changed since they installed it originally... there was an AD to swap out exhaust valve sizes somewhere along the way... Owners manuals were being developed at the same time the plane was being learned about... Not much has changed to the plane’s operations... since the B became the C... rudder throw, and rudder length were big changes... total fuel capacity was also a significant change... Get the most recent POH is still missing 200 pages of important documentation... I see. I’ll ask me CFI how we learn about it’s actual performance together. I’ve already learned that the cruise performance tables are for sales brochures. Lol Another reason I’m asking all these dumb questions is I was working on my own reference sheets for V speeds and such. Trying to summarize what was in the various sources I found. Then I came across some discrepancies. If the Surecheck was correct I was going to use it but I wanted to check it first. Edited February 22, 2020 by Nukemzzz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 Bring the two documents to your CFI to discuss what is next... 1) Owners manual for the year of the plane, for legal reasons... (just paperwork for the ramp check you may never see) 2) Most recent POH for the model of your plane, for most complete collection of performance data for your plane... 3) Bring along a recent copy of an M20J POH to see what is in there that was never written for the model plane you have... Let me know if you see any density altitude information in any of the ancient documents... if you are going to use the data to clear a tree at the end of the runway on a hot day... shouldn’t the data collection match what you are trying to do? 50 year old planes are nice, and low cost... but they are missing some basic things...like proper seat belts. Write yourself a to do list of all the things you want to have... get all the updates that you expect To need... We lost an MSer (Patrick) quite a few years ago.... a simple real calculation of actual runway length requirement using DA would have made a difference.... The data available in the original owners manual is enough to say don’t fly... unless it’s a standard day and you are using a 5k’ long runway... Real life, 50years later has changed... An MSer / fighter pilot has written about his experience hitting trees on departure... in his M20E(?)... he landed in a home’s garage... This post isn’t meant to be scary, it is meant to outline the data that is missing in early documentation, with actual real life, MS examples... Still just a PP, not a CFI... Best regards, -a- 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 Add to the pile of “where did that come from?” There is no way that Sure Check has verified any of the information they have... They probably have a giant disclaimer at the bottom of it... Know that Some days a simple Safety factor of 2X won’t be enough... Find references for ... hard vs. soft runways.... wind strength including tail winds... runway incline, vs. decline vs. level... Have an answer for when the engine goes silent on climb out.... MSer Canopyman would probably recommend... landing straight ahead... always have a plan even if it includes nothing but trees... We have an MSer or two that have survived trees... Get good seat belts... have a CO monitor... update your performance documents... practice the known procedures... Collect your own data, using something like CloudAhoy and a WAAS source.... If your life depends on the data you have... make sure it is good data... PP thoughts only, not a CFI... Best regards, -a- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yetti Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 Practice this. Up high, go to take off configuration. have instructor pull the throttle. Do it as many times as it takes so that it is instinctive to push down. Find 100 mph if you like. but your push should get you to 100 mph without looking. Be proficient in pushing down. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MooneyMitch Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 "We have an MSer or two that have survived trees... " I know of a specific event where the Mooney that hit trees was most lucky with that outcome. Fortunately after tree impact, the Mooney fell to the ground backwards, whereas the tail/empennage appeared to absorb most of the impact. There were no shoulder belts in the airplane. Had the plane fallen nose first, the outcome probably would have been much different. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 The other one was out on Long Island... Engine out, landing just before the trees... The Pilot is best conscious to be able to exit the plane... a fire consumed the plane after the pilot got out... Fortunately, both MSers have described their experiences around here... Best regards, -a- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nukemzzz Posted February 22, 2020 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 2 hours ago, carusoam said: Add to the pile of “where did that come from?” There is no way that Sure Check has verified any of the information they have... Surecheck: tiny, easy to use flip board is nice to have handy. But I didn’t trust it. Checking it before using it is how I ended up down this path in the first place. It was in the back seat of the plane when I bought it. And as PIC I needed to verify it or toss it IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carusoam Posted February 22, 2020 Report Share Posted February 22, 2020 There are a few threads around here where people have posted the important parts of their updated checklists... and V-speeds... and favorite formats... And where they keep them... electronic or paper... There are even some updated procedures for landing traffic patterns. U-turn vs. Square box... Since the turn to final can become a killer... the U-turn has some unique reasons to be preferred... I sat through a presentation at Mooney Summit to get a good look at George’s U-turn presentation... light years ahead of blindly using 60’s documents... And another presentation regarding when to use Vx vs. Vy vs Vz... And proper response to engine stumbles for each... (don’t wait to figure it out... there isn’t enough energy to keep the nose pointing up...) Best regards, -a- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.