Shortest runway landing

[carusoam]

 

John,

 

I take great pride in bringing something new to you....

 

As you know, It seems no two planes stall alike.  The FAA believes we should avoid stalls and spins.

 

For an example of a Mooney stall accompanied by what looks like a spin, search this site for a video featuring the unwitting cameraboy in the back seat. (would you stall a skylane with backseat ?)

 

 

It's either a spin or the world was rotating faster than usual.

 

Now you can say you know of a mooney that has stalled, spun and lived to tell about it.  Amateur flown....

 

Best regards,

 

-a-

 

[johnggreen]

JimR,  

Nice to hear from somebody that's "been there".  About the only way to spin a 172 is to power it in, which you may have done.  With enough power, you can execute what is essentially a snap roll into the spin and sometimes that doesn't work well either.  I understand that the earlier 172s entered a spin a little easier, but even if you get it in, it will usually come out after one turn by itself.

In the near future, I want to brush up on my technique with spins and intend to go over to Alabama to do a few hours with Greg Koonce.  Until three months ago, I owned a Decathlon so it was easy to stay current with the devil.  Don't really know why I sold it, but I figure something will be going back in its place that I can spin and fly upside down in.

Shadrach,

1.1 over VSo is risky. In your airplane that is a 5 knots margin.  An abrupt wind shear or vertical gust and you won't be able to overcome Mother Nature.  Just be careful my friend.

Carusoam,

I will watch the video, but am very doubtful of the legitimacy.  I will pay $2,500 to anyone who will spin a Mooney three turns with me on the ground to watch it.  I will fly to any point within 500 miles of my home base to watch the show and pay the money to the pilot or his survivors depending on the outcome.  THIS IS NOT A JOKE.  ANYONE WANT TO TRY ME?  I do reserve the right to make them put up some earnest money for my trip so I won't be the brunt of some dumb joke.

Jetdriven,

I was going to mention the Joel Smith accident as my next point.  The NTSB report is very detailed, very clear about cause, and will make any sensible pilot's blood run cold.  It was a classic stall/spin accident and a very unnecessary one.

Fly safe guys,

JG

 

 

[johnggreen]

Carusoam,

Sorry, can't find the vido.  Please check the number because I can't wait to see if it is a spin or just what I imagine is a spiral.

JG

[carusoam]

 

John,

 

I updated the link above.  The stall activity starts about 3 minutes into the 5 minute clip.

 

It goes something like, intentional power-off stall, nose down steeply, engine revving, tight spiral, loss of videographer composure...then full recovery.

 

Three full rotations in this particular sequence would lead to recovery from a lawn dart maneuver at thousands of vertical fpm after a loss of several thousand feet.

 

Darwininian....

 

Best regards,

 

-a-

 

 

 

[Shadrach]

Looks more like a stall, insipient spin that's converted into a spiral...it's badly rigged or he's demonstrating poor technique.

[N601RX]

Here is what Don Kaye wrote about spinning a Mooney while practicing stalls with a student.

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

Here is another mooney who got into an accidental inverted spin while practicing stalls.  This guy did it twice in the same day!

http://www.mooneyevents.com/spins2.html

 Here is a 60 turn spin in a cessna

Here is a link to the pilots web site.  She runs a aerobatic and spin training school.

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

This is another video she made.  Very entertaining watch it.

 

[aviatoreb]

Quote: maropers

 pretty much anywhere you want.... 

[Urs_Wildermuth]

Shortest ones for me were Wangen-Lachen (LSPV) with 1335 ft available and  as well as Langenthal (LSPL), 1575 ft. Those are the available distances, the runways are longer but have displaced thresholds.

Grass runway, shortest is my maintenance base LSZK, 1759 ft available distance.

With my "C" Model, no problem.

[Shadrach]

JG,

I'm pretty selective about when and where I do short field work. I acknowledge that your points are valid; I think we differ on the unpredictability of the wing, but then, we fly different models. My F model gives a very recognizable buffet prior to stalling, You're correct in mentioning the MGW differences, but in a prior post you also said your Bravo has never seen 2600lbs. I have flown my F into a number <2500  strips at or near MGW (2740lbs). So there is a range (albeit small) where our aircraft intersect in terms of weight. I would never chastise someone for being too conservative in their flying, but I think that it can sometimes foster an attitude in which bad habit's develop. We can agree to disagree on whats practical and safe. I have no death-wish nor do I have your experience, but I know my airplane well and it's just not the proverbial snake waiting to strike that I feel your comments suggest these aircraft are.   

I have a neighbor who works MX for corp flight dept. that has 2 Conquests, 2 Seneca IVs, and a Bravo. He flies all 3 types. He has (lucky SOB) personal use of the Bravo. He is flight safety Mooney trained. He was uncomfortable (but is getting better) going into to anything shorter than 4000ft with the Bravo.  I think the quality of his ($6000 IIRC) training was lacking to say the least. I took him up on a short hop to 3000ft strip and upon making the first turn off, he said a few interesting things:

1) "This thing lands like a 172."  

I told him that it really did not, but that excess energy on landing destroys/damages more Mooneys in the landing phase of flight then flying slow ever has.

2) "I fly final at 80-85kts."  

My feeling is that no certified light single needs to fly final at 85kts unless it is over gross or iced up. Many airplanes will tolerate it just fine but that is too fast for a Bravo even at MGW.

3) "I think this thing will handily out-climb the Bravo to 3000ft."

This may be true, I don't know. The chief MX and I disagree on engine operations as well as full power fuel flow, so he may be giving up climb for cooling. 

I think we can agree on the fact that we both fly different versions of the same airframe and that yours is certainly less forgiving. If you have a chance to fly an earlier version some time, I'd love to here you thoughts on the differences.

I'm still lobbying for some rt seat Bravo time with my hangar neighbor, but as it's a corporate plane I doubt it will happen. 

[Lood]

Mmmm... very interesting topic - the part on stalls, that is. My first airplane was a 1958 C172. Lovely airplane and I also did my PPL on her. I can attest to the fact that it was very hard to get it to spin. In fact, I couldn't get it to spin. The CFI at the flight school I attended spun it during my check ride and the only way he could get it to spin was to keep some power on and go into the stall with slightly crossed controls. Recovery was straight forward - as mentioned above.

Fast forward to today. Untill recently, the closest training facility where I am able to do my PPL renewals, did not have any instructors rated on a Mooney. So I just do my renewals on one of their C172's. This was again due in August this year and off we went in the C172. When we came to the stall part, this C172 surprised both myself as well as the instructor with something very akward. During the stall, the right wing would flick down together with stall - quite violently, like an incipient spin. At first, we owed this behaviour to be a direct result of me not having the ball centered, so I did it again, paying 120% attention this time. It did exactly the same. Wings were level and ball was in the middle. So the instructor took a turn as he had also never encountered this in a C172. The same thing happened for a 3rd time. The moment the nose breaks, the right wing flicks down very quickly. The normal full opposite rudder and stick neutral quickly got it out of the dive everytime. Can anyone explain this? We discussed it and decided that maybe the rigging on that specific C172 was not right.

Regarding my Mooney, I found that coming in at 75mph instead of the normal 80mph just about eliminates any float. Even at 75mph though, gusting conditions have had the Mooney fall out from under me in the flare - luckily very close to the runway and others have caused the Mooney still float a little. I once got my Money behind the power curve after flying slowly with a photographer doing a photo shoot on RC models. I let the gear and flaps down and before I realised, trouble loomed, I took full power and apart from a change in the sound of the engine, nothing else in terms of performance that is worth metioning happened. Even with an almost elevl attitude, the speed decreased and the airplane kept sinking. Nose down and gear away saved the day. Stalls in my Mooney are really very mild though. After the break, the right wing gently falls away but is quickly picked up by the rudder. ROD, however, is quite spectacular.

[johnggreen]

Shadrach,

I'm at the office now and actually have real business to take care of, but, at least if I get caught "playing" on the computer by the boss, she can't be too difficult as she will have to sleep with me tonight.

Actually Ole Bud, we don't disagree on anything that I can see.  I have expanded this discussion far beyond the boundaries of the "shortest landing" thread.  In doing so, I may have confused the issue and failed to make the most important points.  Points, that I believe result in many unnecessary accidents in Mooney aircraft.  Let me try to be brief, which my wife/boss says is beyond my capabilities.

There are two predominant things different about a stall in a Mooney vs. a Cessna.

First:  The recovery must be complete which entails a significant pitch down of the nose.  This usually means that the pilot is literally looking at terra firma through the wind screen; this is almost never the case in a Cessna.  Seeing the ground causes a pilot (especially a pilot who didn't intend to stall as in an appoach stall) to panic and pull back on the yoke before a full recovery.  Which leads us to number two.

Secondly:  A secondary stall, no pun intended, can be one of the most freightening experiences the average airplane driver will ever have.  Again, the natural inclination is to pull back on the yoke and that will almost certainly mean a spin.

It is akin to a non-aerobatic pilot getting upside down.  The ingrained habit is to always pull back on the yoke/stick to avoid the ground.  When you do that either inverted or during a incomplete stall recovery, the result is always opposite of the one desired.

If these facts about a Mooney were fully understood by the Mooney Pilot Community, our accident rate and death rate would fall precipitously.

I'm through and I appreciate the opportunity afforded by all the guys that contributed to this debate.  Now, I've got to get some work done.

JG

[piperpainter]

1000 Ft Bull Run Oregon Very fun!

http://www.shortfield.com/index.php?option=com_jumi&fileid=5&Itemid=125&snum=sf_bullrun&initlat=NaN&initlong=NaN

[Urs_Wildermuth]

Bryan,

 

are you the guy who flew the M20C into there? I saw these videos a long time ago and could not believe it I get worried about prop clearance even on normal grass runways and this one looks like it's got a few rocks and other prop wrecking materials in there.

Tried to find it on Google maps, but no joy. Any chance you could post a kmz or coordinates for it? 

Now with the Antonov 2 I used to fly, any time, but with a Mooney ?

 

 

[jetdriven]

If you watch that video, the Mooney spin was actually from a secondary stall.  Id love to see his airspeed indicator when he recovered, he was going straight down and with full power for a while.    He should also use his shoulder harness for takeoff and landing, unless he was saving it for when he needs it.

[John Pleisse]

Eagle's Nest...Rehoboth DE. It is really a 3200 ft strip, but the portion void of damaging ruts and bumps is under 2000ft....PVT. Real handy, close to the beaches and worth wedging it in.

[johnggreen]

Gentlemen,

I finally watched the "Mooney spin" video on Youtube and as I suspected there was no spin.  Not even close.  The pilot approached a stall, lowered the nose, put in aileron and spiraled.  In fact, I don't think we even heard a stall warning.  He apparently wouldn't know a spin from a loop.  It is scary that any pilot watched that video and thought that was a spin.  

Entry to a spin is, even in an airplane that spins as easily as a Decathlon, an extremely fast maneuver, much like a snap roll.  In fact, it is, in a sense, a snap roll and in every airplane I have ever spun will place the airplane nearly inverted during entry.  In a Mooney, with a laminar flow wing, the roll would almost certainly be at a rate approaching 360 degress per second and almost as certainly place the airplane inverted in the process.  The first turn would indeed be nose down but at a rate probaby four or five times the gentle spiral seen in the video.  You may rest assured that the violence of the roll and pitch down would have precluded any steady hand held video as see here.

Without being rude, if you think that is what a spin is like, PLEASE, find an instructor with an aerobatic airplane and at least ride through some spins.  It will give you a much better understanding and respect for the maneuver.

I'm getting a better perception of the Mooney accident rate.  This is embarrassing.

JG

[jetdriven]

I dunno, John, it looks like an incipient spin to me.  That looks like too much roll rate for ailerons ony.  You can see he is holding about 1/2 to 1/3rd left aileron as they go vertical. Still, this is not a place you want to be in a Mooney.

[N5MD]

Toledo, Oregon (5S4), elevation 7', earlier this month. I still had a few feet to spare even. The take-off used every single foot of runway though. That's in my 1966 C model.

[johnggreen]

Carusoam & Jetdriven,

I apologize for seeming dogmatic, but the "maneuver" shown in the video offered up by Carusoam is so far from a spin as to be laughable.  

I feel like I'm trying to prove that the world is not flat, but for your edification please look at these parts of the video.

1.  You can easiy hear the idiot pilot describing the maneuver as a spin, but at no time do you hear a stall warning.

2.  That would be because there is no evidence of a stall from the video.  The pilot pulls the nose to a rather gentle angle, slows the airplane and then pushes it forward.

3.  Blue sky.  At no point, until the nose is down do you lose sight of blue sky as the airplane pitches down.  Entry to a spin is an almost violent maneuver and  results in a roll during entry of greater than ninety degrees into the direction of spin.  In this case, that is to the left.  There is, in fact, no roll at all.  That is because there was no stall and cetainly no spin.

4.  A spin is actually, a stable condition, maintained by full back elevator and full rudder.  As Jetdriven points out, the pilot has full aileron deflection into the rate of turn.  He is simply doing a nose low spiral.

5.  The rate of roll in a spin would be multiples of the slow roll the pilot is able to induce with the ailerons.

Seriously, anyone who thinks this is a spin needs some advanced flight instruction before they kill themselves.

[John Pleisse]

No stall horn, he obviously has airspeed and he was jocking the ailerons. Spin...........not so much.

[jetdriven]

watch again. secondary stall. no mooney has that roll rate at 70 kts.   no way

 

[John Pleisse]

I watched it again B. I see the aggrivated (second bump) partial stall from him holding it off. I think it's is a partial stall, the left wing dipps and he kind of freaks and noses it over into a spiral simulataneously. Where's the stall horn?

Good thing. I would never bring a Mooney close to a spin. The thought of spinning a Mooney gives me the willies. There's no point to it.

[mooneygirl]

If this is the video I believe it is. The fellow had a child/teen in the front seat, Dad in the back seat. He was not in control of his airplane and over it went.  His landing is awful too.  This is the type of pilot that gives pilots a bad name. I believe the video was taken in California, down near Lake Hemet.  "Hey watch this!"  what a boy thing....

[fantom]

Quote: mooneygirl

"Hey watch this!"  what a boy thing....

[thinwing]

Actually i can see how a "short mooney landing "thread can evolve into a stall /spin discussion since we are talking about slowing down the heavier later model year Mooneys to land comfortably in less than 3000 ft.After reading all the reports of Bravo owners not feeling comfortable in short field operations..I can add my voice in agreement..A fully loaded tks bravo is a ground lover pure and simple and there is no amount of speed control that will change that for me.Having owned and flown stinsons,supercubs,m5 maules,huskies,Barons,Pitts s1s,the Bravo is a whole other animal and agree spinning one is akin to starting a Bar fight in a room full of gang members.Besides,if i really want to land short we need to talk about a whole nother catagory!!sinc kp couch