Landing Height System for Mooney

[carusoam]

Nidal,

You have a great system...

You have have covered many evils that can occur... to a wide array of pilots...

 

There is one thing that Mooney pilots will be looking for in addition to all that you have done...

It may take years to get there... and that is OK.

 

What Mooney pilots are running into lately...

Is a combination of retractable gear and age... at no fault of their own... 

Insurance companies are raising rates for these people to alarming levels...

alarming = more than the cost of a Mikrokit system...

We aren’t seeing any alarming raise in GU landings with age around here... 

But we are sure seeing the raise in insurance costs...

The human brain is known to have minor overloads in times of high work levels... named ‘distraction’. 

So... if there is a way to measure Landing height and compare gear status... and alarm upon a mismatch...

I’d like my alarm to use Parker’s voice reminding me that... “now would be a good time to lower the gear, don’t you think?”

Parker is our local MS insurance guy...   

The moment I hear his voice, I would know what needs to be done... now! Not later...

If it only alarms when necessary, it would go a long way towards cutting back on the phenomena of distraction...  And really reduce the opportunities for GU landings...

The current system of pulling power with gear up... only sounds a buzzer...  buzzers are good, but are easy to ignore when work load is high... (I’ll get back to that in  minute... oops)

Some people have added voice to replace the buzzer... but, power gets pulled quite often in attempts to slow down... causing a bunch of early alarms that occur often...

 

Another voice system many MSers have is José’s wife’s calming voice... You may recognize her... “traffic ahead...”

José probably hasn’t had a good night’s rest in years.... constant teasing by his wife...  

Mooney PP thoughts only...

Best regards,

-a-

[donkaye, MCFI]

I updated the audio file today and it works perfectly on the ground.  I'll test it in the air tomorrow or the first nice day we have here.

[Microkit]

2 hours ago, carusoam said:

 

But we are sure seeing the raise in insurance costs...

 

Personally, I think it won't matter to the insurance rate.  Give Mr. Parker a call and ask him if you invest in a system that tells you the gear is still up when at a low air speed or low AGL, how much they will lower your rate to recoup your investment.  Maybe not much or maybe just enough where you get that investment back over many, many years.  And I think they are also counting on pilots installing or adding more safety systems not to just lower their insurance rate, but mainly for the extra aid or chance to save their lives and loved ones.

There are probably only a handful (if not less) of underwriters for GA airplanes.  You are telling them how great the system is, in their mind, they are thinking but can he guarantee the intercom will not fail, or he won't lose full electrical power, so he can still hear audio, or can he even notice the warning under high workload situations.

The only way I managed to lower my full comprehensive rate by 35% on my Lancair was to get my instrument ticket, and to make sure I fly plenty of hours the last 12 months.  They did not care how many added safety systems I have installed on the Lancair; Gear Safety Controller which yells and yells and then gives up on me and automatically extends the gear once speed reaches a set-speed and a full Audio warning system that converts every light or buzzer to a voice just by hooking up to the trigger of these older systems that only do light or buzzer.

 

[Warren]

@Microkit Is it possible to have access to the installation manual early?  I ordered mine late December and understand it will not be here until February.  I am installing an autopilot upgrade and will be running wires to the wing.  It would be great to have enough information to do all the prep for the system while the plane is apart and only have to do the unit installation when I receive it.

[Microkit]

11 minutes ago, Warren said:

@Microkit Is it possible to have access to the installation manual early?  I ordered mine late December and understand it will not be here until February.  I am installing an autopilot upgrade and will be running wires to the wing.  It would be great to have enough information to do all the prep for the system while the plane is apart and only have to do the unit installation when I receive it.

Yes.  The manual is not sent with the product.  It’s only available online.  If you look at the lower end of the product page itself, right above the dimensions diagram, you can find the full install manual there.    Here is a direct link to it as well

https://landingheight.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Installation-Users-Guide-LS-100-X_A3.pdf

 

[Warren]

@MicrokitThanks for the quick response.  Apparently I didn’t do a thorough enough search on your website.  I can’t wait to play with the new toy!

Thanks for being so present in supporting the kit and information on MooneySpace.

[donkaye, MCFI]

Nidal,

Although I followed the instructions and my unit works perfectly, please explain what the 2 and 24 mean on the below page and when numbers should appear in those positions.  It's not clear to me from the manual even though I think I know what they mean.

Thank you.

 

[Microkit]

10 minutes ago, donkaye said:

Nidal,

Although I followed the instructions and my unit works perfectly, please explain what the 2 and 24 mean

2’ & 24 inches.   As below it it shows installed height: 0. So this is first time before initial setup which is needed.  As you figured it out, when you put 0, it reset the setup value allowing you to fine tune it.  
now measure vertically between the glass and ground and input that number. Anything within a 1” reading, system will take the internal reading, higher difference means the unit is installed at an angle which is ok, and system triangulate and gets its own installed angle to be used subsequently.  Regardless of the number you put, system will show 0 afterwards indicating that this is your 0 point reference as it is installed.  
 

EDIT:  if you on ground, and you are looking at this page a s system shows 0.00. This means your installer mechanic already set it up for you and you are good to go. 

Edited January 24, 2021 by Microkit

[Lance Link]

Hey Don thanks for posting about this.  You are our test pilot!

[Airways]

@Microkit are you applying for EASA-approval as well ?

[donkaye, MCFI]

50 minutes ago, Lance Link said:

Hey Don thanks for posting about this.  You are our test pilot!

As such,  I flew today with the updated audio file, and the volume call outs between altitude and gear check are the same now.  Thanks, Nidal!

[Microkit]

1 hour ago, Airways said:

@Microkit are you applying for EASA-approval as well ?

We are planning to look into this.  However, several customers in EU said they are able to do it “Per registration”.    When we started to receive orders from overseas for the certified LHS unit, we sent out an email reminding these customers that “so far” countries outside the US are not treating NORSEE certification similar to STC and to talk with their mechanic or EASA safety inspector about this before we ship out.    

They came back to us saying the shop can submit a request for the installation individually per registration (similar to a major alteration request with the FAA) and they think it will be approved  for three reasons:

- System is an FAA approved unit, even though not STC.

- It is a simple alteration, only connecting to Audio panel and power supply with very low power consumption and with also low audio power (< 1W)

- It uses a replaceable Access Panel or inspection plate for installation, so no holes or fixtures are permanently drilled into the fuselage or wings. 

We are happy to assist anyone overseas with any extra information requested, we encourage our overseas customers to send us an email if they need anything for the approval of their unit.

 

[Microkit]

1 hour ago, donkaye said:

As such,  I flew today with the updated audio file, and the volume call outs between altitude and gear check are the same now.  Thanks, Nidal!

Great.  Thank you.  It will be the default audio file now.

 

[Blue on Top]

On 1/9/2021 at 3:51 PM, carusoam said:

 

Electrical Engineering...

AE... Aeronautical (this has to be a cool job)

MS has a few engineers in various places... Best regards,  -a-

As we used to say in college, "You can't spell gEEk without a double E.  

... and, yes, being a AAE (Aero/Astro Enginerd) is a VERY cool job!

[jlunseth]

On 1/23/2021 at 11:06 PM, Microkit said:

Personally, I think it won't matter to the insurance rate.  Give Mr. Parker a call and ask him if you invest in a system that tells you the gear is still up when at a low air speed or low AGL, how much they will lower your rate to recoup your investment.  Maybe not much or maybe just enough where you get that investment back over many, many years.  And I think they are also counting on pilots installing or adding more safety systems not to just lower their insurance rate, but mainly for the extra aid or chance to save their lives and loved ones.

I am not as concerned about the annual rate as I am about not ever gearing up. Do that, and in this market you may have become uninsurable. That is why something that would not yell at me unless I am on short final and have actually made the mistake, would be most useful. Something that just yells at me routinely is not very useful.

[hammdo]

@Microkit, I ordered mine the same day as Don Kaye. Just wanted to make sure I’ll have mine for my February 15th install date...

Thanks!

-Don

[Microkit]

10 hours ago, hammdo said:

@Microkit, I ordered mine the same day as Don Kaye. Just wanted to make sure I’ll have mine for my February 15th install date...

Thanks!

-Don

Don,  

pls check your spam folder, a couple of emails were sent to you today 2:50 pm central. 

[hammdo]

Got both! Than you!

-Don

[hammdo]

Mine arrived! Thanks for keeping me posted. 
 

-Don

[Microkit]

I want to answer a question that keeps coming up regarding what is the best technique to use.  

Everyone will end up developing their own technique depending on how they are used to performing landings and their energy management during the approach. It may work that someone follows someone else's technique for the last few feet, but this means they also need to follow their technique for the approach as well, regarding indicated speed, descent rate and such.

If you look at the “low approach” portion of the night video (first post of this thread), you can hear the system keep repeating certain numbers.  The system is designed NOT to repeat a number if the airplane is kept at that height.  At a higher range, let's say a 70’ there is a buffer of 2 feet, meaning, if you hear 70, the only way the system will repeat the 70 again if the airplane passes two feet away from 70 (72’ or 68’) and then back to 70.

However, at a lower height, the buffer is only 1”.  It just takes 1”-2” of height difference for the system to repeat the number.  It's very common and perfectly ok for someone to hear a low number repeated twice or so before touchdown.  Hearing more than that can indicate the airplane is coming in with a little of extra energy.

Back to the “low approach” example, the fact the pilot kept hearing “one” several times, which is expected, because he is trying to hold “one” and it's natural to deviate just an inch.

And to get the legal stuff out of the way, we don't recommend approaching below 1.3 vso (+ extra speed needed depending on wind conditions) to lower the energy, and we don't recommend that low approach maneuver, if the airplane reached within 5” of the runway, the system will not callout go-arounds as the airplane goes higher, this indicates the airplane reached 5” or lower.  

It goes without saying, there is a huge chance that the wheels will touch the runway, probably all three wheels, at a high engine setting while trying to keep it leveled for those who are attempting to do such a low approach maneuver.

Indeed, everyone ends up with their own technique in regard to perfect landing every single time. Feedback received from many customers (flying several airplane types) shows NONE of them agreed on one common technique.  

Some are saying they put power to idle way before (>300’ AGL) and just flare when they hear a specific number.  Others said they come in with actual power till they hear a specific number, cut power, hear another number, then prepare to flare.  Some put idle at 5’, others put a 2 degrees nose up at a certain number.

Users need to understand that every single landing is different, depending on runway length, approach angle, descent rate, wind conditions, obstacles before the runway, and various other factors, hence why we can't or know how to suggest a specific technique at all.  

I think once you have a chance to fly the system a couple of times, the above will make sense

[Hank]

39 minutes ago, Microkit said:

I want to answer a question that keeps coming up regarding what is the best technique to use.  

Everyone will end up developing their own technique depending on how they are used to performing landings and their energy management during the approach. It may work that someone follows someone else's technique for the last few feet, but this means they also need to follow their technique for the approach as well, regarding indicated speed, descent rate and such.

If you look at the “low approach” portion of the night video (first post of this thread), you can hear the system keep repeating certain numbers.  The system is designed NOT to repeat a number if the airplane is kept at that height.  At a higher range, let's say a 70’ there is a buffer of 2 feet, meaning, if you hear 70, the only way the system will repeat the 70 again if the airplane passes two feet away from 70 (72’ or 68’) and then back to 70.

However, at a lower height, the buffer is only 1”.  It just takes 1”-2” of height difference for the system to repeat the number.  It's very common and perfectly ok for someone to hear a low number repeated twice or so before touchdown.  Hearing more than that can indicate the airplane is coming in with a little of extra energy.

Back to the “low approach” example, the fact the pilot kept hearing “one” several times, which is expected, because he is trying to hold “one” and it's natural to deviate just an inch.

And to get the legal stuff out of the way, we don't recommend approaching below 1.3 vso (+ extra speed needed depending on wind conditions) to lower the energy, and we don't recommend that low approach maneuver, if the airplane reached within 5” of the runway, the system will not callout go-arounds as the airplane goes higher, this indicates the airplane reached 5” or lower.  

It goes without saying, there is a huge chance that the wheels will touch the runway, probably all three wheels, at a high engine setting while trying to keep it leveled for those who are attempting to do such a low approach maneuver.

Indeed, everyone ends up with their own technique in regard to perfect landing every single time. Feedback received from many customers (flying several airplane types) shows NONE of them agreed on one common technique.  

Some are saying they put power to idle way before (>300’ AGL) and just flare when they hear a specific number.  Others said they come in with actual power till they hear a specific number, cut power, hear another number, then prepare to flare.  Some put idle at 5’, others put a 2 degrees nose up at a certain number.

Users need to understand that every single landing is different, depending on runway length, approach angle, descent rate, wind conditions, obstacles before the runway, and various other factors, hence why we can't or know how to suggest a specific technique at all.  

I think once you have a chance to fly the system a couple of times, the above will make sense

I think it makes sense to fly a normal approach and see how the unit reacts and what its callout are. After several landings, you will know what to expect--then if you hear something different, correct it!

Or am I misunderstanding something?

[Microkit]

7 minutes ago, Hank said:

I think it makes sense to fly a normal approach and see how the unit reacts and what its callout are. After several landings, you will know what to expect--then if you hear something different, correct it!

Or am I misunderstanding something?

Yes, fly normal approach as usual.    

There is a relationship between the approach itself and how long the airplane stays in ground effect to lose energy for a smooth landing.  Pilots who are always performing hard landings (or harder than what they prefer) could mean flaring too early, or they are forcing the airplane down out of ground effect before it wants to come down.  Some may hear a higher number then touchdown, this is harder than it should be.  The system skipped callout on a number because the time it took for them to touchdown was shorter than the callout duration of the previous number.    

Others may hear two numbers fast then touchdown very fast, in this case, there is still room for improvements.  The best situation would be to hear a number, little pause, hearing another number, little pause, then touchdown.  Pilots will be able to gauge and train themselves to keep the pauses between the lower-end numbers consistent.    Some may take a fast glance at the airspeed at various callouts just to see if they can manage their airspeed next time. 

[larrynimmo]

Report....fully installed landing system....tested fine, and very easy to program....

however....1st flight, first announcement was 20’ and worked to the ground with no call out “check gear”...

 

2nd landing....1st call out was 50’....then “check gear” then 20 and the rest...I turned the volume on full, and the sound was clear and concise.

as for time to install it took me about 10 hours with the supervision of my AI...it included a dash mounted fuse holder and a shut down switch....I was able to hook up the audio to an abandoned ADF input wire.  Much time was spend removing the interior and tediously securing the wire through the frame...no holes had to be cut, but I did shield the 4 conductor cable in a plastic sleeve as the wire went down between the frame into the copilot side wing void...and it was easy installed in the inspection cover to the rear inboard side of the landing gear.

im glad I installed it and for the initial offering price it’s well worth the investment....”inexpensive” and airplane don’t happen together

 

[carusoam]

Great pirep for the mikrokit Larry!

Thanks for sharing it...

Best regards,

-a-

[larrynimmo]

Additional update...

today I did two landings and the call out worked perfectly 70’ and down including the “check gear” callout.

I highly recommend this system to reduce the possibility of a “gear up” landing, and to improve landing technique.

the hardest part of the install was running the wire, which most AIs or avionics shop will allow a plane owner to do...

Edited February 7, 2021 by larrynimmo
Spelling