Jump to content

Decision Time Mooney M20 C versus E versus Grumman Tiger


Recommended Posts

So I've been hunting for a plane for months now and I'm down to these. My debate right now is operating costs. The vintage Mooney M20 C or E with the manual johnson bar gear and constant speed prop...how much more do these factors add in maintenance costs versus a fixed gear Grumman Tiger (or 172 etc) without the cs prop?

Also, any insights into the M20C and E differences. Both planes I found have mid time engines, both have the manual gear, both seem well cared for. The E the local avionics guy told me it is an excellently maintained plane. It looked meticulously beautiful. Great paint. The only downside is the guy wants a fair bit for it and the panel has a 430 WAAS (nothing newer) and is a shotgun panel - not standard 6 pack...the owner doesn't fly IFR hardly at all and I plan to do it quite a bit - owner suggested I add a G5 if it's an issue.  It does have an autopilot, I believe an STEC 20? or 30?, and a JP? engine monitor.  The M20C has slightly older paint job, but a superior panel. It has the Garmin Audio 345, Garmin GPS 355 WAAS and a standard 6 pack - ADS B IN/OUT.  I am unsure if the C has an autopilot but my guess is that it probably at least has the wing leveler.  Both of these are priced exactly the same (mid 50s). The E model has fuel bladders, the C model was stripped and sealed in 2011. I am also concerned about the differences between the O 360 and the IO 360. I've heard the fuel injected you can get better GPH by about .5 GPH, but that the engine is more expensive to overhaul and can hit overhaul sooner, whereas the bulletproof O 360 can often go past TBO and cost less to overhaul. What price difference for the overhauls? The E sounds like it gets about 155 knots versus 140/145 knots on the C but I really don't care that much about that sort of difference though speed is always nice.

I did find a Grumman for mid 40s but EVERYTHING is outdated. Low engine hours (400) not flown much last 1.5 year but it has original radios, VORS with the frequencies on a dial in them (ancient) everything. I'm thinking $20k probably to upgrade to a GPS WAAS and get an indicator for glideslope that can link to the GPS and ADS B out/in transponder.
Any insights appreciated. I'm looking mostly to time build but need something that can do decent multi state hops. My wife also really doesn't like turbulence and the Tigers seem "tinny?", small? The Mooneys just look like they'd be able to handle rough weather better - they look like real planes. Don't be offended if any Tiger owners they just always look like thin metal or cheap to me. Though I do like to save money and they sound cheap to maintain.

Thanks everyone, getting close, getting excited, already have a hangar lined up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mooneys are generally poor time builders. The previois owner of my plane used to fly WV to Myrtle Beach almost an hour quicker tha  his friends in 172s. Moral:  your regular trips take less time; the same time will carry you much further from home, so yiu need more planning and a better weather strategy.

That said, I love my C! Ain't nothing wring with 145 KTAS. 

Talk to an instrument shop, costs to purchase and install new things are surprisingly high. Some things (GPS, G5, etc.) have higher install costs than purchase price. Many advise to buy the plane with the best panel that you can afford, and of course to have a Pre Purchase Inspection by someone who knows about Mooneys and what to look for.

Happy hunting! And welcome aboard! Anthony will be along soon for your Official Greeting!

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The M20C and the M20E are the cheapest 4 seat certified plane to own $ per mile wise. The tiger will cost more to own if you are flying the same places. The complex part doesnt really make a plane more expensive, especially if it has the johnson bar.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m here... Thanks for the intro Hank!   :)


If you like speed and efficiency... go Mooney!

If you like a plane that is simple as a Grumman canoe.... go Grumman...

Know that Mooney started with fixed props and added a few fixed gear planes... There are currently still three all aluminum Mooney M20D Masters sitting on fixed gear... two of them have been living on MS for years... there were hundreds, but most got converted to CS and retract... converting to retract and CS, cost a few AMUs back in the day...

The Mooney factory is still in TX....

Somebody actually reported buying a spare part through the factory today... so I know it’s still there... :)

I don’t know where Grummans are built anymore... Long Island NY?  There was a Goose factory out there back in the day... it’s all called gulfstream now... bet those used parts are affordable for the ‘in crowd’...

In 20 years of Mooney ownership, I had a prop governor OH’d once....

Cost wise this stuff falls out like loose change over time... I wouldn’t trade speed and efficiency for the cost of one governor OH...

What do the guys at GrummanSpace say?

I might of misspelled the site name... I couldn’t find it... :)

Step vans, canoes, and planes without rivets... even without doors...

If you fly often enough... loading a family of four into a plane on a rainy day...

Sliding the canopy back and letting the rain in... will be slightly annoying...
 

Can you convert a Grumman to retract and CS prop? Was that ever an option...?

If you are buying a plane to travel in... Go Mooney!
Bringing family... Go Mooney!

Going to see your wife’s mother-in-law... speed is everything... Go Mooney!

The M20C is great as an entry level plane... Many go on to become forever-planes... There are a few around here that have gone all color wide screens.... on the panel...

The M20E is famous for being a retirement plane... the fuel injection allows for some awesome fuel efficiency, without needing an engineering degree to get the benefits....

The accountants all choose Mooney...

The speed hounds all choose Mooney...

The efficiency misers all choose Mooney...

The Mooney is more comfortable/stable in turbulence if you actually fly in real conditions....

So...

What was the reason for looking at the Grumman?

With the Mooney, you get the whole package... you are not selecting this over that...

Imagine getting a 50amu entry level Mooney that cruises at 150mph.... and gets 18mpg... and covers well over 500miles... One stop from NJ to FL...
 

Compare that to a new Mooney... for 700amu... sure it cruises over 200mph... and doesn’t get the same mileage when going twice as far... for 14X You get some niceties... fancy leather, WAAS GPS, and color screens with your AP.... Nonstops required from NJ to FL...   :)

Start at the entry level, then work your way up... either way... go Mooney!

PP thoughts only, not a plane sales guy... 

Best regards,

-a-

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, first of all, if you're gonna fly a lot of IFR and build time, you need an autopilot. And so when you're looking at these planes, the first question you ask is about the autopilot. An STEC 30 is a great answer to that question. A wing leveler is not. So ask that question first and know what the answers mean. An STEC 30, good answer, lets continue talking. A wing leveler, thanks, and see ya later. At the moment, adding or upgrading to an autopilot is either not possible, or costs more than 50% of the value of the airplane. So get this answer up front, understand it, and get it correct.

Second, a WAAS GPS is gonna be very desirable for serious IFR flying or even IFR training. It opens up a lot of approaches to you that otherwise are not available. Again this is a very expensive upgrade. Not as expensive as an autopilot, and there are options. But expensive none the less, so finding a plane with the WAAS GPS is a big step in the right direction.

So now to the two Mooneys you mention. If you've found an E that is in good airworthy condition, with bladders in the tanks, an STEC 30 autopilot and GNS430WAAS gps, all for under $60K? Buy it. If the C has a wing leveler rather than a proper autopilot? Move along.

You could get the Grumman... and you'll be excited to own your own airplane for 6 months... and then you'll wish you'd bought the Mooney.

I just got back from a BBQ at my neighbor's house. He owns a 172. He and I both have about the same number of hours in our own airplanes. 90% of the hours in my log book are cross country trips to nearly all 48 continental states. 90% of his hours are in the pattern, in the local practice area, or $100 lunch runs. Same number of years, same number of hours. Different airplanes.

I bought my first Mooney because as @Niko182 said, the Mooney C and E are the cheapest certificated 4 seat airplane going from A to B. I like going A to B. So that was important. My neighbor uses his 172 to go from A to A. 172's and Grummans are good for that, going nowhere. Mooneys are good for going places.

  • Like 8
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I listened to@gsxrpilot when buying my C model last year (after not listening and almost dropping the money on a horrible money pit) and it was a great decision. Ensuring you’re getting a proper autopilot (2 axis) and IFR GPS that is Waas is the best advice that can be given for a vintage mooney I think. If you’re planning on doing any instrument flight or training you’ll be very happy you waited for an airplane that met these criteria. As far as differences between the E model and C model goes, if you have 2 that are similarly equipped/ maintained and similar in engine time and they’re close to the same price then something isn’t right with the E or they’re asking too much for the C. I chose the C model because of its acquisition cost coupled with the equipment mine has in it.

The best thing I can say is to watch the market constantly. The good ones can easily have a deposit on them with a couple hours of being posted for sale. When I was ready with the money, I checked all the listing websites constantly and was ready to jump on the airplane that met my criteria.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The engine in the Tiger and the C model are virtually the same, less the constant speed propeller.  Both engines are reliable and simple, the C model having tighter cowls is a bit harder to work on than the Tiger.  The dog house baffles on a C model in many cases are worn out needing repairs.

Depending on propellers, the Tiger has a 200 hour AD, the C model a 100 hour AD.

Both have a wet wing fuel tank system.  Both airframes are similarly supported,  Mooney factory is still going, lots of aftermarket, the Grumman factory doesn’t exist, but Fletchair in Texas does lots of stuff to help.

If you’re building time, a C model can be flown slower.

Buying an empty panel and and filling it costs a lot more than buying one that is close to what you need/want.

Clarence
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live two hangars down from Fletchair at Silver Wings airpark in Fredericksburg TX. They are the Grumman gurus. 31 years ago when I lived in North Dakota I used to buy parts from Fletchair when they were in Houston for a 1978 Grumman Tiger I bought in 1989. I enjoyed the Tiger. It was a lot more fun to fly than my 1st airplane, a C-172. When I was considering moving to Texas I flew the Tiger (3 stops) to San Antonio. It was a long day, but do-able. It had a Century IIb autopilot, the first autopilot that I had ever used. It flew heading and nav, but no altitude hold, I kept the airplane for a couple years and have fond memories of it. I see them come and go all the time where I live and if I was going to have anyone do a pre-buy on a Tiger, it would be David Fletcher at Fletchair. When the Tiger was re-made in the early 90's they had good panels with at least a STEC-30 and at that time a Garmin 430. If you are set on a Tiger I would save up some extra cash and put it toward a newer airframe. For what it is, a fixed gear,  fixed pitch prop airplane, it's about as fast as anything in that category. I liked the sliding canopy.

In 1993 I bought my first Mooney, a 1983 231. (I had a C-172 RG for a year plus in there to build up some retract time and made almost $20,000 on it the year I owned it.) It really felt like I was moving up to a totally new level of airplane with the Mooney. My point is that you can step your way up to the airplane you want, but economically. most of the time, it's probably better to just decide what you want and work toward that goal. Every airplane you buy and fly will need things and you'll be in a constant state of discontent wishing you had the next airplane.Mooney pilots and Tiger pilots are always looking for an excuse to fly. Get a ride in both in see for yourself what you like.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, the tiger looks like a home build.  It just looks cobbled together.  Mooney looks like a real plane.  Aesthetics aside, there is no comparison in utility.  Between the c and E, I would go E, which is not only faster, but also allows smooth LOP operations, burning less fuel point A to B, faster.  Also don’t have to deal with the doghouse.

Equipment:  before I started flying IFR, I thought I didn’t need gps because there were legacy approaches at most fields I go to.  Slowly, those approaches started disappearing and VORs unreliable.  Also, think about being on a long cc and having problems enroute and all the little nearby fields only have gps approaches.   

I got very lucky with my setup.  I bought a clean F with shotgun panel and wing leveler.   Over time I added Brittain accuflite, G5’s and gtn and other stuff.  I don’t think it can be done as economically now days.  It’s been a long time since I’ve seen accuflite (mainly bi-805 valve) come up for sale.   That said, what @gsxrpilot says about autopilot is true.   If you don’t have an autopilot, that’s all you think about while you’re flying along and leaves you wishing for one.  However, gps, Pfd, edm, etc can all be factored into the purchase price so you could upgrade after purchase.   It’s just the AP that is so crazy expensive (or unobtainium)

Edited by Browncbr1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not nearly as experienced as most who have responded but believe the consensus to go with what YOU are most comfortable with is correct.  I am very happy with my C.  It does not have a working autopilot (currently, on the list of things to improve, it’s number 4 for me) right now but properly trimmed I have done some long cross country’s IFR and things worked out fine.  Again, personal preference in that respect, I have other higher priorities to fix/improve like getting a EMS and G5 installed.  My only divination from the above advice is to think mechanically, all other things being relatively equal, which of the two has lower engine hours, more thorough record books (your comment about the API’s remarks caught my attention) and will allow you to spend the most time in the air opposed to waiting on repairs.  Get your mission bird!  (Or close to your mission bird).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tagging on to what @gsxrpilot said, even if the AP in the E is a STEC 20, it is upgradeable to a 30. A wing leveler - not so much. In an earlier post, you stated your mission is x-country with wife plus 1. If you don’t mind the 140-145 kts of the C, buy the E, run LOP at 145 and get better fuel economy. And the GNS 430 WAAS will do about everything the new ones will. If you decide you want a bigger screen for your GPS, swap it for the IFD 440 (supposedly a 20 minute install by the pilot) and use their IFD 100 iPad app to run it.


But with either Mooney you buy, you have the traveling machine. Not so much with the Grumman. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m a new F owner and will agree with the others for the a to b. As for the panel I thought I could live with the shotgun panel but it was a pain IMC with practice I could probably get good at it but in the end spent a lot of money changing it to what it needs to-be. Lastly for the gps if mine came with a 430w I would not have upgraded.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Hank said:

Mooneys are generally poor time builders. The previois owner of my plane used to fly WV to Myrtle Beach almost an hour quicker tha  his friends in 172s. Moral:  your regular trips take less time; the same time will carry you much further from home, so yiu need more planning and a better weather strategy.

That said, I love my C! Ain't nothing wring with 145 KTAS. 

Talk to an instrument shop, costs to purchase and install new things are surprisingly high. Some things (GPS, G5, etc.) have higher install costs than purchase price. Many advise to buy the plane with the best panel that you can afford, and of course to have a Pre Purchase Inspection by someone who knows about Mooneys and what to look for.

Happy hunting! And welcome aboard! Anthony will be along soon for your Official Greeting!

Yeah I'm aware of the "time building" aspect.  I don't know that I really need a Mooney but the wife really wants to get places fast with one small kiddo and another one on the way soon.  Also occasionally I may have to do multi state hops from Nebraska to NY...so I'm playing it safe in case I need it for that.  With the fuel burn being comparable to a Grumman Tiger, and even nearly a Cessna 172 I figure why not see more of the country...or I'll just pull the power waaaaaaaay back and go slower.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

Fixing the shotgun panel is not a difficult task. And one you can do yourself and then get signed off if you really want to save some $$$. 

Oh, I thought this would be extremely difficult.  That is good to know.  I may also just go the G5 route so I can get more info off the one gauge......i'm hoping it can work with a Garmin 430WAAS ?  any insight on this or do I have to upgrade something else to get a G5 like upgrade to a GTN650?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Neshi said:

I’m a new F owner and will agree with the others for the a to b. As for the panel I thought I could live with the shotgun panel but it was a pain IMC with practice I could probably get good at it but in the end spent a lot of money changing it to what it needs to-be. Lastly for the gps if mine came with a 430w I would not have upgraded.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah I don't think I could do the shotgun panel, I just got my IR rating and I want to get this fixed.  The owner think it's no biggie, but he flies almost totally VFR he told me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Oldguy said:

Tagging on to what @gsxrpilot said, even if the AP in the E is a STEC 20, it is upgradeable to a 30. A wing leveler - not so much. In an earlier post, you stated your mission is x-country with wife plus 1. If you don’t mind the 140-145 kts of the C, buy the E, run LOP at 145 and get better fuel economy. And the GNS 430 WAAS will do about everything the new ones will. If you decide you want a bigger screen for your GPS, swap it for the IFD 440 (supposedly a 20 minute install by the pilot) and use their IFD 100 iPad app to run it.


But with either Mooney you buy, you have the traveling machine. Not so much with the Grumman. 

Yeah I am a bit less sure how much x country I will do or not, but it could be substantial if my traveling job gets going again soon.  Either way the wife really wants something faster, she's all about time savings for trips with the baby.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, S.C. said:

I’m not nearly as experienced as most who have responded but believe the consensus to go with what YOU are most comfortable with is correct.  I am very happy with my C.  It does not have a working autopilot (currently, on the list of things to improve, it’s number 4 for me) right now but properly trimmed I have done some long cross country’s IFR and things worked out fine.  Again, personal preference in that respect, I have other higher priorities to fix/improve like getting a EMS and G5 installed.  My only divination from the above advice is to think mechanically, all other things being relatively equal, which of the two has lower engine hours, more thorough record books (your comment about the API’s remarks caught my attention) and will allow you to spend the most time in the air opposed to waiting on repairs.  Get your mission bird!  (Or close to your mission bird).

The E has the worse panel, but it's not bad but the avoinics guy at my local shop recommended it cuz the guy took meticulous care of it and this is what caught my attention as well.  When the mechanics start telling you it's good....you should listen.  The Mooney looked very nice  up close that's for sure.  I had trouble seeing hardly any flaws, but of course I'm a new buyer and excited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pilot boy said:

Yeah I'm aware of the "time building" aspect.  I don't know that I really need a Mooney but the wife really wants to get places fast with one small kiddo and another one on the way soon.  Also occasionally I may have to do multi state hops from Nebraska to NY...so I'm playing it safe in case I need it for that.  With the fuel burn being comparable to a Grumman Tiger, and even nearly a Cessna 172 I figure why not see more of the country...or I'll just pull the power waaaaaaaay back and go slower.

My wife really enjoys the time savings too! Even with a C, derided as being "slow" (145-148 KTAS), my flight times average 1/3 of the driving time or a little less. Nine hours by car to my inlaws, or 2:40 by Mooney; six hours driving to my parents, 90 minutes by Mooney from WV, now 2 hours from AL because I have to detour around ATL Bravo. We have no complaints!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Browncbr1 said:

To me, the tiger looks like a home build.  It just looks cobbled together.  Mooney looks like a real plane.  Aesthetics aside, there is no comparison in utility.  Between the c and E, I would go E, which is not only faster, but also allows smooth LOP operations, burning less fuel point A to B, faster.  Also don’t have to deal with the doghouse.

Equipment:  before I started flying IFR, I thought I didn’t need gps because there were legacy approaches at most fields I go to.  Slowly, those approaches started disappearing and VORs unreliable.  Also, think about being on a long cc and having problems enroute and all the little nearby fields only have gps approaches.   

I got very lucky with my setup.  I bought a clean F with shotgun panel and wing leveler.   Over time I added Brittain accuflite, G5’s and gtn and other stuff.  I don’t think it can be done as economically now days.  It’s been a long time since I’ve seen accuflite (mainly bi-805 valve) come up for sale.   That said, what @gsxrpilot says about autopilot is true.   If you don’t have an autopilot, that’s all you think about while you’re flying along and leaves you wishing for one.  However, gps, Pfd, edm, etc can all be factored into the purchase price so you could upgrade after purchase.   It’s just the AP that is so crazy expensive (or unobtainium)

This line is exactly what I think every time I see a Grumman "To me, the tiger looks like a home build.  It just looks cobbled together."  I don't know what it is about them.  I really like the cool canopy and they're comfortable...but something about them just screams cheap to me even though they go for huge $$$.  I don't really get it.  The Mooney M20 E I saw looked significantly nicer than the Grumman Traveler I looked at.  It was almost like the paint was mismatched or something (I think it's due to different materials for the wings and frame) and this guy took really good care of his Grumman too, it still looked crappy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

Fixing the shotgun panel is not a difficult task. And one you can do yourself and then get signed off if you really want to save some $$$. 

 

21 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

Ok, first of all, if you're gonna fly a lot of IFR and build time, you need an autopilot. And so when you're looking at these planes, the first question you ask is about the autopilot. An STEC 30 is a great answer to that question. A wing leveler is not. So ask that question first and know what the answers mean. An STEC 30, good answer, lets continue talking. A wing leveler, thanks, and see ya later. At the moment, adding or upgrading to an autopilot is either not possible, or costs more than 50% of the value of the airplane. So get this answer up front, understand it, and get it correct.

Second, a WAAS GPS is gonna be very desirable for serious IFR flying or even IFR training. It opens up a lot of approaches to you that otherwise are not available. Again this is a very expensive upgrade. Not as expensive as an autopilot, and there are options. But expensive none the less, so finding a plane with the WAAS GPS is a big step in the right direction.

So now to the two Mooneys you mention. If you've found an E that is in good airworthy condition, with bladders in the tanks, an STEC 30 autopilot and GNS430WAAS gps, all for under $60K? Buy it. If the C has a wing leveler rather than a proper autopilot? Move along.

You could get the Grumman... and you'll be excited to own your own airplane for 6 months... and then you'll wish you'd bought the Mooney.

I just got back from a BBQ at my neighbor's house. He owns a 172. He and I both have about the same number of hours in our own airplanes. 90% of the hours in my log book are cross country trips to nearly all 48 continental states. 90% of his hours are in the pattern, in the local practice area, or $100 lunch runs. Same number of years, same number of hours. Different airplanes.

I bought my first Mooney because as @Niko182 said, the Mooney C and E are the cheapest certificated 4 seat airplane going from A to B. I like going A to B. So that was important. My neighbor uses his 172 to go from A to A. 172's and Grummans are good for that, going nowhere. Mooneys are good for going places.

I think I'm on the same page as gsxrpilot.  The E appears to have been incredibly maintained and does have the STEC.  I can get it for $60k or slightly less.  I am concerned about slow speed down the road and it's why I've hesitated on the Grumman.  I used to run a boat rental fleet with many models of engines and the one thing you don't do when buying a boat is buying too little speed/horsepower cuz you'll always regret it.  (For those wondering, buy at least a 4.3 Mercruiser or greater.)  With my possibility of cross country trips for work and the fact that we would like to visit more locations as a family I think the Mooney does seem the better option over the Grumman.  Plus the wife wants that speed, which I'm honestly kinda surprised how much she wants to get places fast, I guess that's what a crying baby does to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tigers all get the funny decal on their tail... it must have faded in the first few years from UV attack...

The coolest engine available is the IO360 with an updated prop... either an MT or TopProp...

Don’t forget the engine monitor...

 

The stubby wings of the Grumman family makes the plane a bit less stable... check the Vso stall speed... short wings typically increase the stall speed with that....

By design, the stall speed of certificated GA planes are pretty close together... Short body Mooneys are around the 58mias range...

Long body Mooneys are around the 58kias range...  MGTW and flaps down for fair comparison...

I briefly did homework comparing a C172, P150, GA1A....  The Piper was in the lead...

Fly in an M20C, that homework assignment never gets finished... :)

I did that three Mooney owners ago... three shutdowns ago...

Go Mooney!

Best regards,

-a-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Hank said:

My wife really enjoys the time savings too! Even with a C, derided as being "slow" (145-148 KTAS), my flight times average 1/3 of the driving time or a little less. Nine hours by car to my inlaws, or 2:40 by Mooney; six hours driving to my parents, 90 minutes by Mooney from WV, now 2 hours from AL because I have to detour around ATL Bravo. We have no complaints!

Oh my gosh those numbers sound awesome.  I just finished my instrument in a 172 and one of the last long x country flights with the instructor it took us like 30 minutes less than driving from Omaha to Kansas City (a 2.5 to 3 hr car ride).  I think the flight was 2 hrs not sure really why it took so long, a combo of winds and KC approach did have to vector us around a bit...but still it was lame.  I told my wife it took me 2 hrs to FLY to KC. She was like that's terrible, ever since it's like I can't buy a 172 or she will be upset, and to be honest I don't want to.  It's flat out here there's not much to see anyway!  Oh and then I picked up my grandmother for xmas - 107 nm away.  Winds out of west at 30 knots plus.  The trip there (3 hr drive) took 55 minutes with the tailwind, the trip back took nearly 2 hours.   The cars on the ground were going barely slower and maybe even faster!....IAS 110 knots, ground speed like 65 knots. 

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.