Leadville (KLXV) in an NA Mooney?

[Pinecone]

23 hours ago, kortopates said:

Excellent points and especially #4 but nothing wrong with pitching down till the you feel light in the seat. This is after all what the upset recovery schools teach these days and the ACS no longer makes any statements about minimizing altitude loss. Instead the emphasis is on "immediately recovering from the stall by reducing the angle of attack". 

No matter how bad a wing might be dropping off in the stall, an immediate push down that makes you light in the seat will very promptly recover back to flying speed with wings leveled and the pilot can transition back to climb attitude to return to the starting altitude. 

So personally I think its a big confidence booster for those fearful of power on stalls - which is required to the full break these day for private students and whichever the DPE calls for on the Commercial. 

The other reason for pushing till light in the seat is that folks where focusing on preserving altitude to only get into a secondary stall; usually more violent than the first.

 

More importantly, it is taught in unusual attitude recovery as the stall is stopped when you push.  Remember a stall is based on angle of attack.  When you push to light in the seat, you are near 0 AoA and THERE IS NO LONGER A STALL.

And yes, the airplane accelerates better at near 0 G.

AND, you ailerons are more effective (higher roll rate) and lower G loadings.

[Pinecone]

On 7/13/2024 at 7:18 AM, skykrawler said:

Hmmm.....My thoughts are we should all have been trained for soft field takeoff which is similar to what Mr Kaye is describing.

Doing it with the gear retracted might not be the most clever thing.   Drag of gear at low airspeed is not so great.

It isn't really a soft field take off.  A soft field take off starts with the yoke back to get the nose up to get a higher than normal angle of attack to lift off as soon as you can to reduce the drag of the wheels on the soft surface.

After that, yes, a high DA take off is like a soft field in that you level off to accelerate.

A short field take off uses neutral controls to reduce drag for the fastest acceleration.

So high DA is really a mixture of the two.  Maximize acceleration to lift off, then level off for best acceleration .  But you don't want to lift off early as that can lead to mushing off the end of the runway.

[PT20J]

I reread a bunch of this thread. It seems to me that Don is advocating advanced techniques that need to be practiced in order to have them in your bag of tricks should you ever need them. They are not going to work well if you try them out for the first time when it counts.

In my experience, pilots are very comfortable anywhere within the envelope of the airplane they have been flying when they take their private or commercial practical test. But over time, they start flying cross countries and don't practice steep turns, slow flight, stalls, maximum performance and cross wind takeoffs and landings. Instead, they fly comfortably near the center of the envelope. And, they become increasingly uncomfortable flying anywhere near the edges. They become apprehensive about flying slowly or stalling and that's why their approach speeds gradually creep up until they don't want to land on any runway shorter than 3000 feet. If that sounds like you, go fly with Don -- or another experienced instructor -- and explore the edges of the envelop until you are comfortable getting all the performance your Mooney is capable of providing. 

[PT20J]

In case anyone might be under the illusion that I am immune I will recall my experience at this year’s Santa Maria PPP. I had the great pleasure of having Paul Kortopates as my instructor. I haven’t been doing much instruction in recent years, but Paul is very current. When he asked for a soft field takeoff I thought, “#&$@, I haven’t done one of those in years.” We had to do it twice before we were both reasonably happy and even then it did not look anything like Bob Hoover taking off in the Shrike and building airspeed to do a roll on takeoff. But, I’m working on it. 

[donkaye]

1 hour ago, PT20J said:

In case anyone might be under the illusion that I am immune I will recall my experience at this year’s Santa Maria PPP. I had the great pleasure of having Paul Kortopates as my instructor. I haven’t been doing much instruction in recent years, but Paul is very current. When he asked for a soft field takeoff I thought, “#&$@, I haven’t done one of those in years.” We had to do it twice before we were both reasonably happy and even then it did not look anything like Bob Hoover taking off in the Shrike and building airspeed to do a roll on takeoff. But, I’m working on it. 

I don't do "Flight Reviews" any more only the Wings Program that qualifies for the Flight Review.  I find it to be much better than a basic review in that 3 knowledges courses are required and then 3 different flight activities, each activity relating to accident prevention.  It also has the benefit of giving one free pass in 5 years on a violation that was not deliberate.  Over the past couple of years the FAA changed Activity A070405-07 to include soft field takeoffs and landings among many other types of landings.  So, I'm doing them all the time.  It's a little different in the Mooney than in a Cessna in that the nose comes up pretty quickly and there is a balancing act that needs to be performed on the mains just before the plane is ready to fly.  Then as the wheels come off the runway the nose needs to be lowered to stay in ground effect until 5 knots below Vx at which time the climb out begins with momentum taking the airspeed to Vx.  One big benefit of the soft field takeoff is that it trains a pilot to know his airplane in a regime where you are at the edge of the envelope having maximum torque and p-factor and at a speed where the airplane wouldn't fly were it not in ground effect.  Not being able to do this has caused a number of accidents by pilots, for example, attempting go-arounds.  One happened at San Carlos a number of years ago by a pilot returning from a transition training after a long day of flying.  He lost control and destroyed his newly acquired Mooney.  Luckily, he survived.  Before I'll sign anyone off on a transition training they need to be able to perform soft field takeoffs successfully every time.

[PeteMc]

On 7/12/2024 at 8:56 PM, donkaye said:

it would be beneficial for an average pilot to really understand both the benefits and potential problems associated with ground effect

Yes, but in primary training it is beat into a lot of students that Ground Effect is a bad thing.  So they are primed to make sure they can climb OUT of Ground Effect before they run out of runway. 

FAA Airplane Flying Handbook: ...Under conditions of high density altitude, high temperature, and/or maximum gross weight, the airplane may be able to lift off but will be unable to climb out of ground effect...

[N201MKTurbo]

5 hours ago, PeteMc said:

Yes, but in primary training it is beat into a lot of students that Ground Effect is a bad thing.  So they are primed to make sure they can climb OUT of Ground Effect before they run out of runway. 

FAA Airplane Flying Handbook: ...Under conditions of high density altitude, high temperature, and/or maximum gross weight, the airplane may be able to lift off but will be unable to climb out of ground effect...

Why would anybody try to climb out of ground effects before you had enough airspeed? That makes no sense. And what does the end of the runway have to do with it unless there is an obstacle?

I only had this issue once that I can recall. It was when I was a new pilot in 1980. I had my large roommate with me in a Tomahawk. We flew to Flagstaff in the middle of summer. On the takeoff roll I rotated and the nose came off the ground but it wouldn’t take off. It just rolled down the runway with the nose in the air. So I pulled in another notch of flaps and up she went into ground effects. The airplane wouldn’t climb and just flew along at about 10 feet off the ground. Luckily the terrain fell off going south, so we cleared the trees easily. We were never able to climb any higher than the initial altitude, but after a mile or two we were 1000 feet AGL, so I retracted the flaps. 

[Pinecone]

11 hours ago, PT20J said:

I reread a bunch of this thread. It seems to me that Don is advocating advanced techniques that need to be practiced in order to have them in your bag of tricks should you ever need them. They are not going to work well if you try them out for the first time when it counts.

In my experience, pilots are very comfortable anywhere within the envelope of the airplane they have been flying when they take their private or commercial practical test. But over time, they start flying cross countries and don't practice steep turns, slow flight, stalls, maximum performance and cross wind takeoffs and landings. Instead, they fly comfortably near the center of the envelope. And, they become increasingly uncomfortable flying anywhere near the edges. They become apprehensive about flying slowly or stalling and that's why their approach speeds gradually creep up until they don't want to land on any runway shorter than 3000 feet. If that sounds like you, go fly with Don -- or another experienced instructor -- and explore the edges of the envelop until you are comfortable getting all the performance your Mooney is capable of providing. 

Perfect marketing for the Mooney Safety Foundation Pilot Proficiency Program. 

[Hank]

2 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

Why would anybody try to climb out of ground effects before you had enough airspeed? That makes no sense. And what does the end of the runway have to do with it unless there is an obstacle?

I saw a video several years ago, where a loaded Bonanza tried to take off on a hot afternoon. It was unable to climb out of ground effect, on the esge of stall (the wing wobbles were obvious) and went through the fence at the end of the airport and rolled . . . . I don't remember details (I think someone survived), but the backseaters did not.

[PT20J]

A really good exercise is to do a soft field touch and go without letting the nose wheel touch. The pitch forces are constantly changing and keeping the pitch attitude where you want it takes a fine touch.

[midlifeflyer]

1 hour ago, PT20J said:

A really good exercise is to do a soft field touch and go without letting the nose wheel touch. The pitch forces are constantly changing and keeping the pitch attitude where you want it takes a fine touch.

Love that exercise! It was another one of the things I did with students in primary training. I would describe  the soft field landing as a "finesse landing." I would demo the soft field touch and go without letting the nose wheel touch, explaining it was only a demo of what can be done, not something for them to do. Without exception the student always wanted to do it. 

[cliffy]

There is one other aspect of stalls/spins in Mooneys that is not remembered or talked about by anyone at Mooney anymore.

If you look a the TCDS for the C model - in 1969 you'll see a big change to the elevator down throw from 10 degrees prior to 22 degrees after 69.

No one would address this at the factory even 15 years ago when I was there several times trying to confirm an old memory of the FAA requiring more stall and spin testing as they said the early throws were not enough to recover at the ends of the envelope. I have a fuzzy memory of the situation but it was a long time ago. 

[N201MKTurbo]

3 hours ago, Hank said:

I saw a video several years ago, where a loaded Bonanza tried to take off on a hot afternoon. It was unable to climb out of ground effect, on the esge of stall (the wing wobbles were obvious) and went through the fence at the end of the airport and rolled . . . . I don't remember details (I think someone survived), but the backseaters did not.

I haven’t seen that video, but I wondering if he was pitching up to get out of ground effects instead of leveling off in ground effects to accelerate?

[BlueSky247]

Funny timing. I just happened to catch an interesting YT last night where a Baron driver was making an excellent case for delaying rotation by five knots. His argument was that the extra speed not only dramatically improves the climb rate and subsequently, the engine out safety margin but also yields rudder authority should an engine die on rotation. 
 

I’m not suggesting we rotate at 90 knots at Leadville, but that certainly would be one way of staying in ground effect longer. 

[Shadrach]

22 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I haven’t seen that video, but I wondering if he was pitching up to get out of ground effects instead of leveling off in ground effects to accelerate?

I think this is the crash being discussed. He did not attempt to accelerate in ground effect. He lifted off in ground effect and continued to attempt to climb with insufficient energy. As he attempted to climb out of ground effect he found himself short on energy and long on induced drag. He likely slowed down from the attempted pitch up mushing back into ground effect. By the end of the runway, he was in the position no one ever wants to be in. Short on airspeed, altitude, runway and ideas.

[Shadrach]

8 minutes ago, BlueSky247 said:

Funny timing. I just happened to catch an interesting YT last night where a Baron driver was making an excellent case for delaying rotation by five knots. His argument was that the extra speed not only dramatically improves the climb rate and subsequently, the engine out safety margin but also yields rudder authority should an engine die on rotation. 
 

I’m not suggesting we rotate at 90 knots at Leadville, but that certainly would be one way of staying in ground effect longer. 
 

 

 

In my opinion anything above ~ 1.4Vso on take off offers diminishing returns.

 

[dzeleski]

15 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

I think this is the crash being discussed. He did not attempt to accelerate in ground effect. He lifted off in ground effect and continued to attempt to climb with insufficient energy. As he attempted to climb out of ground effect he found himself short on energy and long on induced drag. He likely slowed down from the attempted pitch up mushing back into ground effect. By the end of the runway, he was in the position no one ever wants to be in. Short on airspeed, altitude, runway and ideas.

Not sure if its just the lack of pixels... it seems the flaps were not down either.

Before I left for the West coast last year I worked with my instructor to get the gear up and hold it down in ground effect for what felt like an eternity. The speeds you can build at sea level are quite impressive, but I didnt really realize why we were being so "dramatic" about it. It wasn't until I took off in CO at 9,000 DA did I realize that the eternity in ground effect is completely required to actually take off in those conditions. (It was my first time taking off with a DA above 4-5k)

[Shadrach]

21 minutes ago, dzeleski said:

Not sure if its just the lack of pixels... it seems the flaps were not down either.

Before I left for the West coast last year I worked with my instructor to get the gear up and hold it down in ground effect for what felt like an eternity. The speeds you can build at sea level are quite impressive, but I didnt really realize why we were being so "dramatic" about it. It wasn't until I took off in CO at 9,000 DA did I realize that the eternity in ground effect is completely required to actually take off in those conditions. (It was my first time taking off with a DA above 4-5k)

It’s hard to tell, but it appear the flaps are in the take off position. Once airborne, he woild have probably been better off without them

[BlueSky247]

40 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

In my opinion anything above ~ 1.4Vso on take off offers diminishing returns.

Right, and I for one sure wouldn't want to be barreling down some runways well over speed on mooney's donuts.

[midlifeflyer]

37 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

I think this is the crash being discussed. He did not attempt to accelerate in ground effect. He lifted off in ground effect and continued to attempt to climb with insufficient energy. As he attempted to climb out of ground effect he found himself short on energy and long on induced drag. He likely slowed down from the attempted pitch up mushing back into ground effect. By the end of the runway, he was in the position no one ever wants to be in. Short on airspeed, altitude, runway and ideas.

Yeah, it looks like that, but there might be a few other things going on.  The video talks about Cameron Airpark - that's a 4,000' runway at about 1300 MSL.  At 95 F, that would put the D-Alt around 4,000'. That should be well within the capability of an A36 Bonanza using normal takeoff procedures.  

[N201MKTurbo]

1 hour ago, Shadrach said:

I think this is the crash being discussed. He did not attempt to accelerate in ground effect. He lifted off in ground effect and continued to attempt to climb with insufficient energy. As he attempted to climb out of ground effect he found himself short on energy and long on induced drag. He likely slowed down from the attempted pitch up mushing back into ground effect. By the end of the runway, he was in the position no one ever wants to be in. Short on airspeed, altitude, runway and ideas.

That's sad. Even after he is stalling, he never lowers his nose to gain some airspeed.

Any idea what airport that is?

[Andy95W]

1 hour ago, BlueSky247 said:

a Baron driver was making an excellent case for delaying rotation by five knots. 

It’s a much different animal in a light twin, where every takeoff consideration revolves around an engine failing at the worst possible moment- rotation at a low airspeed.

The extra 5 kts gives a significant increase in rudder authority to counteract the yaw from the failed engine and puts you closer to Vyse, which is best rate of climb with an engine failed. As an added note, it gives a few more seconds on the ground where if the engine fails you can reject the takeoff, as long as the pilot has taken the additional speed into account for accelerate/stop distance. 

[midlifeflyer]

16 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

That's sad. Even after he is stalling, he never lowers his nose to gain some airspeed.

Any idea what airport that is?

O61. Cameron Park in California.

[EricJ]

There was a Bonanza crash in Flagstaff several years ago that ended in a double fatality and fire.   It was a hot summer day, so very high DA, and it was a transient couple that just stopped for fuel, so they weren't necessarily familiar with Flagstaff or potentially with high DA issues.   There wasn't enough of the airplane left to make any conclusive determinations, but some of the locals thought it may have just been the difference of not leaning for takeoff.

[Shadrach]

30 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

Yeah, it looks like that, but there might be a few other things going on.  The video talks about Cameron Airpark - that's a 4,000' runway at about 1300 MSL.  At 95 F, that would put the D-Alt around 4,000'. That should be well within the capability of an A36 Bonanza using normal takeoff procedures.  

according to the NTSB the DA was 4100'.  The aircraft was TN'd and was making >90% horsepower throughout the sequence. He was 100lbs over gross. NTSB blamed it on a "wind shift" and the extra 100lbs.  Maybe...but to me it looked like his pitch attitude put him behind the power curve about a wingspan above the ground.