Pattern and landing speeds.

[carusoam]

@PT20J Skip,

Any idea how much yoke force is used...

Situation 1...

• trim all the way up (as if landing)
• flaps all the way down (as if landing)
• Throttle Fire walled during a go-around

This situation has become a handful for lighter build Mooney pilots...

I am wondering if this is a designed amount of force?

 

Situation 2...

• the trim has run full forward...
• pilot forgets the flaps down may be helpful...
• Running out of strength can be a real challenge when the trim can’t be recovered...

Two questions regarding max push / pull that can be (or needs to be) used on the yoke.

question three... how many hours in the gym do I need?   

Best regards,

-a-

 

[PT20J]

1 hour ago, carusoam said:

@PT20J Skip,

Any idea how much yoke force is used...

Situation 1...

• trim all the way up (as if landing)
• flaps all the way down (as if landing)
• Throttle Fire walled during a go-around

This situation has become a handful for lighter build Mooney pilots...

I am wondering if this is a designed amount of force?

 

Situation 2...

• the trim has run full forward...
• pilot forgets the flaps down may be helpful...
• Running out of strength can be a real challenge when the trim can’t be recovered...

Two questions regarding max push / pull that can be (or needs to be) used on the yoke.

question three... how many hours in the gym do I need?   

Best regards,

-a-

 

Anthony, I have no idea of the actual control forces involved, but the CAR 3 requirements were to raise and lower flaps and apply takeoff power with the following requirement:

During each of the controllability
demonstrations outlined below it shall not require
a change in the trim control or the exertion of
more control force than can be readily applied
with one hand for a short period.

Raising flaps causes a nose up pitching moment. Adding power causes a nose up pitching moment. In the landing configuration, a lot of nose up trim is set. So, with 300 or so hp it doesn't make a lot of sense to jam on full power and raise the flaps simultaneously. A go around should be a simple matter of smoothly adding power and trimming and then raising gear and flaps and trimming. Where people get in trouble is rushing the whole process and trying to do everything too quickly. 

In the second example, I'm not sure if you are talking about a runaway electric trim or the more serious stuck trim. In a runaway trim, pull the breaker and trim manually. If something mechanical jams full down then you have to find a configuration and speed that minimizes the control forces. It should be flyable, but it won't be fun and having gone to the gym regularly would be helpful.

Skip

[carusoam]

The second was an example of a runaway trim that jammed at the end... on an M20K...

The pilot and SIC were both holding the nose up, but ran out of strength during the landing...

Fortunately the crew is OK, but Marvin K. Mooney is no longer with us... 

Best regards,

-a-

[brndiar]

4 hours ago, PT20J said:

I think it's important to define terms so we all know that we are talking about the same thing. The FAA has refined it's definition of stabilized approach (when referring to piston GA planes -- not jets) several times over the years. I think they've finally got it right: "A pilot is flying a stabilized approach when he or she establishes and maintains a constant angle glidepath towards a predetermined point on the landing runway." https://www.faa.gov/news/safety_briefing/2018/media/SE_Topic_18-09.pdf

A stabilized approach does not require a constant airspeed -- in fact there are lots of cases where a decelerating approach makes a lot of sense so long as you are controlling the airspeed to make the airplane do what you want. A stabilized approach doesn't have to be three degrees. Lot's of airports have obstructions that require a steeper than 3 degree glidepath. You can change configuration on final and still have a stabilized approach. But, it is very difficult to arrive on speed at the spot of your intended landing consistently if you let the glide angle wander during the approach.

Skip

Basic Math for

 

15 hours ago, brndiar said:

Hi,

The pictures are from training in October 2019.

The goal was to determine "attitude" according to attitude indicator for "stabilized" (500 fpm) decent with:

 1 full flapps,

2,T/O flaps,

3, without flaps (great always down)

In no case was "power off", it was always trottle sufficient enough to sustain 500 fpm down. 

In that case RPM was always in red. 

Lg,m.

 

 

16 hours ago, brndiar said:

Hi,

How do you do an approach without flaps?

With my 1977 M20C  bei approach without flaps nose of mooney always cower the end of the runway. According to attitude indicator such an "stabilised" approach is cca 5 degrees "nose up".

With T/O slightly "up".

 Only with full flaps gives me "nose down" ( see in picture ) so that I can see "aiming point" 

Apropos,  how many degrees is first "down linie" in the attitude indicator?

 

 

 Hi.

It is very interesting thread. Do not want to bring here confusion.  

Suppose 70 KIAS final approach speed (GPS Speed, cca the same as KIAS) with M20C, 180 Hp carb. Engine.

for 3 degree glidepath I need   : 70 *( tan (3 grad)) = 70*0,0524= cca 370 fpm descent,

for 6 degree glidepath: 70* (tan (6 grad)) = 740 fpm descent.

Each power setting result (at current W&B- Solo, full Tank, 1G straight flight) in a correspondent reference to Horizont (Pitch), here  

as reference attitude indicator.

What I fount, that  for ANY APPROACH WITHOUT FULL FLAPS (500 fpm descent)  "nose up" pitch was required  (with T/O only "slightly up", ev. at horizont).

Full flaps give me cca 5 grad "nose down",  referenced to the attitude indicator, suppose the first white linie in attitude indicator is 5 grad down.

And here begins my problem- without full  flaps I do not see aiming point- is covered up with nose of my Mooney.

Also I found The FAA preferred method for achieving stabilized situation (Point the nose at the aiming spot with the control wheel and adjust the airspeed with the throttle)

extremely uncomfortable.

My preferred method is to control descent with Power and airspeed with yoke +trim (above).

With method is learned by transitionto Mooney by CFI?

lg,

milos

 

 

 

[Ibra]

9 hours ago, Shadrach said:

1) Flaps are not spoilers as you said but the certainly produce drag. Drag significant enough to be felt at low speed.

True, you do get more drag on slow speeds on full flaps but hard bit is to understand how much is explained near VS (dirty config has low drag) or near VY (clean config has low drag)
On M20J, I see min sink rate at 1000fpm on clean config at VY1=90kts and 1200fpm on dirty config at VY0=85kts, +20% on the min drag value is not a big deal IMO
Yes, drag values are higher on dirty config when you campare at a similar slow speed say 80kts speeds, +50% on dirty config?
But wing is more draggy in clean config than dirty config at VS1 = 60kts (it stalls in clean config)
So should be break-even speed of about 70kts?

9 hours ago, Shadrach said:

2) More than anything, the upwards pitch when raising flaps is due to the nose up trim required for approach when the flaps are deployed. Raising flaps puts the airplane in an out of trim situation. This is should not be a killer nor cause a stall as it is easily overcome. 

I believe the real killer is stick force (or gradient), these are non-intuitive when one reconfigure flaps at wrong speed/power
As we all agree that stick force/feel or trim should not be used for flying and one has to rely on his airspeed and attitude
For clarity, trim = ability to fly hand-off on "trim speed" and gradient = forces felt on yoke around "trim speed"
Stick forces should have positive gradient on zero power stall configs (this is a certification requirement)

Trim,
- Neutral trim on landing config and zero power at VS*1.3 is on FWD position (fully forward)
- Neutral trim on takeoff config and zero power at VS is on AFT position (fully back)
- Neutral trim on takeoff config and max power at VS is about half way (near TO position)
- Neutral trim on landing config and max power at VS simply does not exist

Gradient,
- At zero power stick gradient is positive near VS for any config and any trim position, you feel more resistance when you pull the yoke
- At max power stick gradient is positive near VS1 for takeoff config FWD trim position, you feel more resistance when you pull the yoke
- At max power stick gradient is reversed near VS0 for landing config FWD trim position, you feel more resistance when you push the yoke
- When you are above VS*1.3 stick forces are back to normal and feel just as they do in cruise with flaps or without   

The discussion about stick gradients and trim positions are irrelevant for those who flies target airspeed/attitude and regularly go to the gym
Flying at slow speeds intentionally is never an issue for someone who is spot on speeds with enough flap/pitch/speed/power coordination

IMO go-around can be made far easier this way (I am sure there are more ways to do it)
1) Enough power to gently to fly at 50ft and accelerate above VS1 (stick gradient and off trim are not excessive)
2) Drag flaps up, trim near TO position and more power to accelerate (stick gradient and off trim is normal)
3) Climb on positive rate at VY and go clean configuration

I also do it in one go accelerate to VY on dirty config full power and clean aircraft in one go for it to climb

9 hours ago, Shadrach said:

The notion that raising flaps would cause the plane to go from level flight to hanging on the prop exaggeration in the extreme. This is the slaying of a beast that does not exist. It’s a noticeable but easily controllable nose up tendency (caused by a number of factors in addition to trim), it is not a runaway pitch control. It just isn’t that big of a deal.

 

I am sure doing it intentionally near VS is also safe, in calm hot days, I do everything around there (landing, takeoff, go-around, climb) on TO trim and power only with barely any stick rotate/flare movements apart from keeping VS*1.1 all time, the only bit I am not sure about is engine failure scenario, there is no way to arrest 1500fpm-1800fpm bellow 300ft with no power and also my landing spot but usually the ground roll is small....

 

 

Edited March 3, 2020 by Ibra

[Ibra]

6 hours ago, carusoam said:

how many hours in the gym do I need?

Depending on how much power you use and speed you initiate/target 

You can have gym spinning class Go-Around or gym heavy lifting Go-Around 

Edited March 3, 2020 by Ibra

[Davidv]

The gym is my CB way to fix my forward CG problem until I can afford new avionics up front.

[Hank]

1 hour ago, brndiar said:

Hi.

It is very interesting thread. Do not want to bring here confusion.  

Suppose 70 KIAS final approach speed (GPS Speed, cca the same as KIAS) with M20C, 180 Hp carb. Engine.

for 3 degree glidepath I need   : 70 *( tan (3 grad)) = 70*0,0524= cca 370 fpm descent,

for 6 degree glidepath: 70* (tan (6 grad)) = 740 fpm descent.

Each power setting result (at current W&B- Solo, full Tank, 1G straight flight) in a correspondent reference to Horizont (Pitch), here  

as reference attitude indicator.

What I fount, that  for ANY APPROACH WITHOUT FULL FLAPS (500 fpm descent)  "nose up" pitch was required  (with T/O only "slightly up", ev. at horizont).

Full flaps give me cca 5 grad "nose down",  referenced to the attitude indicator, suppose the first white linie in attitude indicator is 5 grad down.

And here begins my problem- without full  flaps I do not see aiming point- is covered up with nose of my Mooney.

Also I found The FAA preferred method for achieving stabilized situation (Point the nose at the aiming spot with the control wheel and adjust the airspeed with the throttle)

extremely uncomfortable.

My preferred method is to control descent with Power and airspeed with yoke +trim (above).

With method is learned by transitionto Mooney by CFI?

lg,

milos

Milos, in my humble opinion and experience, 70 knots is much too fast for a C model. My target speed on final approqchnis 85 MPH, slowing near the ground to 75 MPH when I am heavy and 70 MPH when light.

One caution: you said "GPS speed." The GPS tells you how fast you are moving over thr ground, and it is not safe tomuse for flight because it does not include the wind. 70 knots Ground Speed can end in a stall when turning base if there is a 20-25 knot tailwind.

In the pattern, always use your airspeed indicator and ignore GOS ground speed.

Fly safe!

[Shadrach]

8 hours ago, carusoam said:

This situation has become a handful for lighter build Mooney pilots...

What? Why I never! My mom says I’m big boned...

[brndiar]

1 hour ago, Hank said:

Milos, in my humble opinion and experience, 70 knots is much too fast for a C model. My target speed on final approqchnis 85 MPH, slowing near the ground to 75 MPH when I am heavy and 70 MPH when light.

One caution: you said "GPS speed." The GPS tells you how fast you are moving over thr ground, and it is not safe tomuse for flight because it does not include the wind. 70 knots Ground Speed can end in a stall when turning base if there is a 20-25 knot tailwind.

In the pattern, always use your airspeed indicator and ignore GOS ground speed.

Fly safe!

Hi,

Thanks for replay. 

Of course,  I fly according to IAS.

70 knots are in my POH. citat: "On final trim the aircraft to fly hands-of at an approach speed of about 80 MPH (70 Knots)". Of course that is relevant bei MTOW. Flying solo I reduce approach speed by cca 5 Knots.

With "GPS speed" above I wanted to tell, that there is no big difference between "True" and "Indicated" airspeed bei 70 Kias. For example with cessnas there is relevant  "Instrument instrument error" bei low speeds. 

I am big fun of "Flying with AOA concept in my mind". Hate Instructors,  who teach,  that airspeed is everything. It Is not, wenn it does not correlate to Aoa I expect to it, but that is already off topic. 

Lg,m

 

[Shadrach]

6 hours ago, Ibra said:

True, you do get more drag on slow speeds on full flaps but hard bit is to understand how much is explained near VS (dirty config has low drag) or near VY (clean config has low drag)
On M20J, I see min sink rate at 1000fpm on clean config at VY1=90kts and 1200fpm on dirty config at VY0=85kts, +20% on the min drag value is not a big deal IMO
Yes, drag values are higher on dirty config when you campare at a similar slow speed say 80kts speeds, +50% on dirty config?
But wing is more draggy in clean config than dirty config at VS1 = 60kts (it stalls in clean config)
So should be break-even speed of about 70kts?

I believe the real killer is stick force (or gradient), these are non-intuitive when one reconfigure flaps at wrong speed/power
As we all agree that stick force/feel or trim should not be used for flying and one has to rely on his airspeed and attitude
For clarity, trim = ability to fly hand-off on "trim speed" and gradient = forces felt on yoke around "trim speed"
Stick forces should have positive gradient on zero power stall configs (this is a certification requirement)

Trim,
- Neutral trim on landing config and zero power at VS*1.3 is on FWD position (fully forward)
- Neutral trim on takeoff config and zero power at VS is on AFT position (fully back)
- Neutral trim on takeoff config and max power at VS is about half way (near TO position)
- Neutral trim on landing config and max power at VS simply does not exist

Gradient,
- At zero power stick gradient is positive near VS for any config and any trim position, you feel more resistance when you pull the yoke
- At max power stick gradient is positive near VS1 for takeoff config FWD trim position, you feel more resistance when you pull the yoke
- At max power stick gradient is reversed near VS0 for landing config FWD trim position, you feel more resistance when you push the yoke
- When you are above VS*1.3 stick forces are back to normal and feel just as they do in cruise with flaps or without   

The discussion about stick gradients and trim positions are irrelevant for those who flies target airspeed/attitude and regularly go to the gym
Flying at slow speeds intentionally is never an issue for someone who is spot on speeds with enough flap/pitch/speed/power coordination

IMO go-around can be made far easier this way (I am sure there are more ways to do it)
1) Enough power to gently to fly at 50ft and accelerate above VS1 (stick gradient and off trim are not excessive)
2) Drag flaps up, trim near TO position and more power to accelerate (stick gradient and off trim is normal)
3) Climb on positive rate at VY and go clean configuration

I also do it in one go accelerate to VY on dirty config full power and clean aircraft in one go for it to climb

I am sure doing it intentionally near VS is also safe, in calm hot days, I do everything around there (landing, takeoff, go-around, climb) on TO trim and power only with barely any stick rotate/flare movements apart from keeping VS*1.1 all time, the only bit I am not sure about is engine failure scenario, there is no way to arrest 1500fpm-1800fpm bellow 300ft with no power and also my landing spot but usually the ground roll is small....

 

 

I think this whole scenario could be summed up by simply admonishing pilots against reconfiguring if they find themselves on the backside of the power curve. In almost any other situation,  the aircraft will have already accelerated to significantly north of Vs in the time the gear has retracted and the pilot has reached for the flap handle.

Edited March 3, 2020 by Shadrach

[PT20J]

9 hours ago, carusoam said:

The second was an example of a runaway trim that jammed at the end... on an M20K...

The pilot and SIC were both holding the nose up, but ran out of strength during the landing...

Fortunately the crew is OK, but Marvin K. Mooney is no longer with us... 

Best regards,

-a-

Mooneys are very sensitive to ground effect. Everyone, I'm sure, is aware of the reduction in induced drag in ground effect -- that, and the slight increase in lift, cause the famous Mooney float. But, ground effect also causes a pitch down moment. We need to raise the nose to flare for landing, and at the same time the airplane wants to pitch down increasing the stick force. Some people deal with this by adding nose up trim during the flare, but that really sets you up for an out of trim condition if you need to go around. So, with the trim stuck full down, it would take a lot of stick force to flare. 

Mooneys had a problem with stuck trim due to the configuration of the stops on the trim mechanism and there is a fix for that which every airplane with electric trim should have installed. (The problem is usually caused by running the electric trim -- which has lot of torque -- hard to the stop which then jams).

Skip

[Ibra]

5 hours ago, brndiar said:

"On final trim the aircraft to fly hands-of at an approach speed of about 80 MPH (70 Knots)"

The "hands-off" statement is 100% true for "low power" decent/cruise in any config and "high power" fast decent/cruise in clean config, all these are done with trim close to it's max forward position

However, I can bet in Mooney is impossible to fly "hand-off" on full 100% power decent/cruise with full flaps irrespective of trim (climbs don't count as cruise/decent as well as 140kts cruise/descent on flaps extended )

[PT20J]

31 minutes ago, Ibra said:

However, I can bet in Mooney is impossible to fly "hand-off" on full 100% power decent/cruise with full flaps irrespective of trim (climbs don't count as cruise/decent as well as 140kts cruise/descent on flaps extended )

This doesn't make sense to me. First, how does the airplane know that it is climbing or descending? Aerodynamically, it only knows pressures and shear forces (drag) as it moves through the air. And why would climb or descent or level flight affect the ability to set trim ("hands off"  at a constant airspeed is just slang for zero stick force which is the definition of being in trim). But we cannot test this because 100% power in level flight or a descent (unless you are at very high altitude) will exceed the flap speed. I'm clearly not understanding your point.

Skip

[jlunseth]

My takeoff or go around procedure is pretty simple.  Full power, gear up on a positive rate (the VSI needle moves), then flaps up.  I don't fly a long body though.  On a go around or missed approach I often apply power relatively slowly and in increments.  I am looking first for stable flight (no altitude loss), then gear, then flaps, then get the power in all the rest of the way.  The reason is that I have a 231 and I can't just firewall the throttle, it takes a little paying attention to it to get in just 36" and not 38 or 40. There will always be some overshoot when the turbo spools up and I don't want it to slide up too high on its own. If I have trees at the end of the runway I generally pay attention to getting full power in first and get over the trees,  then clean up.

[PT20J]

Mooney flaps aren't very draggy, as flaps go. This causes some to say that they aren't very effective which is incorrect. Flaps are characterized as "high lift" devices. Their function is not to slow you down, but to allow you to land slower by decreasing the stall speed. Check flap/no flap stall speeds of a bunch of airplanes and you will find that Mooney flaps lower the stall speed much more than most single engine airplanes. For a lot of GA singles, the main function of the flaps is to improve visibility over the nose on landing approach.

When I plan a go around in any airplane, I think in terms of getting it into the climb configuration as quickly and efficiently as possible. For the Mooney, my sequence is power, gear flaps.

Skip

[jlunseth]

I use half flaps as drag in my aircraft.  On downwind I am usually around 100 or somewhat more.  I am not that picky about downwind speed, what I do is put in a power setting on downwind that works for me, which is 24.5 inches, and it makes around 100 or somewhat over. Abeam the numbers I drop the MP to around 15 and put in half flaps (under flap speed), easy to do in my aircraft because there is a line on the flaps indicator.  It is also a four count if I am in IMC.  Then pitch for 90.  The half flaps help keep speed under control during the rest of the approach and give me a little stall speed margin during the turns.

At the FAF on an instrument approach I do something similar. Approach speed is 120 at my 24.5 power setting, aircraft clean.  At the FAF its gear down, power to about 15, and half flaps.  The half flaps help control the airspeed to that magic 90 kt number that fits in Cat. B for approach timing, OTW I would be doing 100+ on the downslope.  

The flaps are not much drag, just enough.

[Ibra]

1 hour ago, PT20J said:

This doesn't make sense to me. First, how does the airplane know that it is climbing or descending? Aerodynamically, it only knows pressures and shear forces (drag) as it moves through the air. And why would climb or descent or level flight affect the ability to set trim ("hands off"  at a constant airspeed is just slang for zero stick force which is the definition of being in trim). 

Yes agree aircraft does not knows if it is on decent/climb/cruise if available power is infinite (aircraft knows about climbs if power is limited), my question is on yoke forces when flying high power at slow speeds (not how does the aircraft flies, aka aerodynamic Drag/Lift forces, on high power at slow speeds)   

The question is does Mooney trim range allow us to fly hand-off under 100% power with flaps in slow speeds? apparently answer is no for decent/cruise but yes for climbs

1 hour ago, PT20J said:

But we cannot test this because 100% power in level flight or a descent (unless you are at very high altitude) will exceed the flap speed. I'm clearly not understanding your point.

You are missing the lower speeds? at any power setting aircraft will usually achieve the same VSI performance one two ASI speeds  

Say at 40% power, you will find that you can fly 0fpm at 70kts and at 110kts, but Mooney trim range will only allow you hand-free flying at 110kts  

For 100% power full flaps, I am sure you can fly level/decent at VS0+4kts/VS0+2kts and it is well within flap speed (say approach to near stall and "wrong recovery" by going full power), the problem is Mooney trim range does not allow you to trim the yoke forces hand-free there !

Edited March 3, 2020 by Ibra

[Ibra]

1 hour ago, PT20J said:

Mooney flaps aren't very draggy, as flaps go. This causes some to say that they aren't very effective which is incorrect. Flaps are characterized as "high lift" devices. Their function is not to slow you down, but to allow you to land slower by decreasing the stall speed. Check flap/no flap stall speeds of a bunch of airplanes and you will find that Mooney flaps lower the stall speed much more than most single engine airplanes. For a lot of GA singles, the main function of the flaps is to improve visibility over the nose on landing approach.

I agree, Mooney flaps shifts the stall speed by an impressive 8kts-10kts without much change in minimum drag sink rate value, most shifting polar curve to 10kts to the left on slow speeds and yes, they are not draggy, landing with a high flare speeds in Mooney is a runway marathon compared to doing same on most GA singles

- Distance flare to touchdown is explained by excess threshold speed, on high flare speed it is about same with/without flaps   

- We can takeoff on Mooney with full flaps for fun with decent rate of climbs (not sure if this is related to power or type specific)

[Shadrach]

On 3/3/2020 at 6:47 PM, Ibra said:

I agree, Mooney flaps shifts the stall speed by an impressive 8kts-10kts without much change in minimum drag sink rate value

I suppose it depends on the meaning of “much”.

Try practicing power off approaches from abeam the numbers with and without full flaps. The difference seems like a lot more than “much“ to me. Greater sink and greater drag with flaps.

Edited March 5, 2020 by Shadrach

[Ibra]

1 hour ago, Shadrach said:

I suppose it depends on the meaning of “much”.

Try practicing power off approaches from abeam the numbers with and without full flaps. The difference seem like a lot more than “much“ to me. Greater sink and greater drag with flaps.

Yes that is hard to quantify, the perception of flap drag/sink hugely differ depending on threshold speed, I am sure landing distance for same speed is always shorter with flaps (no question here )

- Those who fly at VS*1.5 threshold speed will tell you Mooney flaps are "not draggy" (vs C182 on 40deg flap burning VFE flare in one go)

- Those who fly at VS*1.1 threshold speed will tell you Mooney flaps are "very draggy" (flaps have triple effect of flapped PA18s)

Mooney flaps don't help "much" with +15kts excess of speed, burn 500ft agl overhead numbers, get you -2000ft unplanned decent at higher speeds (but can do all these at slow speeds), so my perception they are "not draggy: "2kts speed control is more important than flaps, latter just allow me to touch down slowly"

Edited March 4, 2020 by Ibra

[gsxrpilot]

An easy solution to this whole discussion... no flaps. If you land without flaps, the go around is that much easier. 

 

[bonal]

19 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

An easy solution to this whole discussion... no flaps. If you land without flaps, the go around is that much easier. 

 

Well put, but this whole discussion about reconfiguring for the go around and all I can think of is why not do what I do and set flaps to take off position  (in my case two pumps) on approach.  you have one less thing  to worry about if the go around becomes necessary. Making it even easier still. Unless I'm coming into a real short landing requirement I like a little more speed over the numbers and just fly it onto the runway definitely an advantage with the screwy winds we have at home. I'm sorry to say and I know almost everyone out there will tell me I'm doing it wrong but I never hear the stall horn just before it touches down. Just saying.

most important stay ahead of your airplane fly it don't let it fly you. 

[gsxrpilot]

52 minutes ago, bonal said:

Well put, but this whole discussion about reconfiguring for the go around and all I can think of is why not do what I do and set flaps to take off position  (in my case two pumps) on approach.  you have one less thing  to worry about if the go around becomes necessary. Making it even easier still. Unless I'm coming into a real short landing requirement I like a little more speed over the numbers and just fly it onto the runway definitely an advantage with the screwy winds we have at home. I'm sorry to say and I know almost everyone out there will tell me I'm doing it wrong but I never hear the stall horn just before it touches down. Just saying.

most important stay ahead of your airplane fly it don't let it fly you. 

It sounds like you and I fly our Mooneys the same way. 

[Yetti]

10 hours ago, Ibra said:

I agree, Mooney flaps shifts the stall speed by an impressive 8kts-10kts without much change in minimum drag sink rate value, most shifting polar curve to 10kts to the left on slow speeds and yes, they are not draggy, landing with a high flare speeds in Mooney is a runway marathon compared to doing same on most GA singles

- Distance flare to touchdown is explained by excess threshold speed, on high flare speed it is about same with/without flaps   

- We can takeoff on Mooney with full flaps for fun with decent rate of climbs (not sure if this is related to power or type specific)

Um no.   I think you are thinking of a different plane.