Non-turbo M20J at high-elevation airports

[bnicolette]

deleted

[RJBrown]

There are wind patterns in the mountains. What seems unexpected to those without experience is common. A mountain checkout is absolutely vital to your survival. Configured for a maximum climb but going down is not where you should be learning about wind in the mountain. Mountain waves are predictable. Learning to use them to advantage is important. Corona pass just west of Denver is a good place to experience these winds. Where V-8 crosses the pass it is 11671'. If there is wind you cannot climb into it, the mountain wave will knock you down. You must climb near KBJC until at least 12,500. Higher if the wind is stronger. You will know when you are high enough because you will climb into the wind. If you are too low the wind will push you down. There are times that I have climbed into the winds at over 2500FPM at over 12500. You will ride up the face of the winds if high enough like riding over the face of a wave in the ocean. If you picture in your mind how water might flow across the terrain it can help you understand airflow patterns.

 Playing in the winds coming over Corona pass can be quite a good learning experience. The pass is the low spot in the ridge line just west of Denver. Worst case you can always turn back over lower terrain. Great place to feel both getting knocked down by the wind and feel "surfing" over the top of the wave. 

 Standing lenticular clouds often announce the presence of this phenomenon.

Many of you would consider APA a high altitude airport at 5880' with a summer density altitude sometimes over 8500' while I consider it normal flying.

  My mountain flying checkout was required by Aspen flying club where I learned to fly back in 92. The route we flew took us over Corona Pass and into Kremmling, Eagle (Vail), Aspen, Glenwood Springs and Leadville. I did it in a 182 on Thanksgiving morning. This would be more of a challenge in the summer. Glenwood was the trickiest airport of the day but at 5916' the lowest in elevation. While Leadville at 9964 was relatively easy.

[midlifeflyer]

Glenwood was the trickiest airport of the day but at 5916' the lowest in elevation. While Leadville at 9964 was relatively easy.

No doubt.

 

That 5916' (when the temperature is only 3°C; check density altitude!) is in a canyon with only a 3300' runway with no good go-around options. You're getting pretty close to requiring superior technique for your takeoff in some Mooney models on a more typical spring or summer morning..

 

Leadville, on the other hand is in a wide valley. More straightforward so long as you have the power to handle the density altitude (about 13,000 msl when it's 70°F outside)

 

Good description of Corona.

[RJBrown]

Dont forget the downdraft created by the cold water in the river than passes the approach/departure end of the runway. Without warning it will startle you.  Glenwood is a one way in one way out airport.

Leadville is a big aircraft carrier. You can dive into the valley to get airspeed. Gives you an extra 500' of altitude right away.

[bd32322]

Take a glider training course near lake Tahoe! I flew with an instructor in a glider at Minden, NV. Very awesome with lake tahoe and the gorgeous mountains. And pretty windy when I was there. Unfortunately I wasnt there long enough to take a lot of flights and go beyond the basics.

I went and flew there mostly because microsoft flight simulator has a glider training session at Minden

[midlifeflyer]

Dont forget the downdraft created by the cold water in the river than passes the approach/departure end of the runway. Without warning it will startle you.  Glenwood is a one way in one way out airport.

Leadville is a big aircraft carrier. You can dive into the valley to get airspeed. Gives you an extra 500' of altitude right away.

Agreed. It's pretty common for mountain airports to have features leading to downdrafts. The river at GWS is one of those. It's a reason that a steeper approach than normal (4.5° rather than 3°) is usually recommended, even if the runway isn't short and there are no obstacles.

[smccray]

Many of you would consider APA a high altitude airport at 5880' with a summer density altitude sometimes over 8500' while I consider it normal flying.

 

So... would those of you in the know say that APA is a no-go in a J for someone without any mountain flying experience?  Knowing that landing ground speed will be higher, and that take-off roll will be longer, I know that APA would be a different and new challenge, but should I call Denver off limits?  Landing I would be light, but I would anticipate taking off at or near gross weight in the morning.  Would you say depart with partial tanks and make a stop on the way home?

[KSMooniac]

I wouldn't fear KAPA as a flatlander...just do your homework (like you've already done, I suspect) and be wary of the winds coming off the peaks to the west.  If the reports are showing high winds coming off the Rockies, then you might think twice, but if it is a nice day then by all means go for it.  Just fly your IAS as normal, and resist the urge to slow down prematurely when you see how fast the ground is moving on landing...just keep flying normal IAS.  

 

A gross weight takeoff in the morning is doable as well, so long as the winds are light because you don't want downdrafts in the area to cut into your diminished climb rate.  Staying lighter is better IMO, even if you need a stop on the way back.  

[N201MKTurbo]

You can get to APA any time you want baring IFR. It is out on the plains, quite a ways from the mountains. Even in severe wind conditions the effects diminish for the most part by about downtown Denver.

 

I flew over the rocks almost daily out of 01V (RIP) for six years.

 

I remember one day I just got back from Aspen and this old guy at the airport asked how the weather was. I replied " oh, it was OK" he then asked "then why do you look so green?"

 

26 years old with a Mooney and a job that had me flying almost daily, I was bullet proof!

[KSMooniac]

I've had a couple of very bad bumps of the head going into APA or EIK, but basically I agree that it is closer to the plains than the mountains.  Density altitude is the biggest concern, but at least it is flat and the runways are long!

[smccray]

Thanks for the recommendations guys.  I've told my wife that Denver was doable since it's not in the mountaints, but the post above made me think twice.  You're right Scott- I've started going homework on this trip, but I'm still working through the details.

[KSMooniac]

I was nervous my first time going in there, but it really isn't anything to sweat over so long as the weather is nice.  Lighter is better on departure, but with a long runway and patience you'll be fine.  If you've flown at gross weight already, so just remember your climb rate on takeoff will be similar when you're trying to climb through 7000 or 8000 feet in Texas.

[midlifeflyer]

The bigger problem for a lot of untrained pilots flying into high D-Alt locations is the difference in TAS and runway usage. Even with no wind, that 80-71 IAS on final will be more like a TAS of 93 when  it's 70°F at KAPA.

 

The temptation to go slower or force the airplane onto the runway is both great and potentially dangerous, as is the temptation to pull the aircraft off the ground too early on takeoff and climb too steeply (there were a number of stall/spin accidents in the Denver area attributable to that one).

[N201MKTurbo]

When I was flying all over Colorado, I considered APA to be a low elevation airport

[PMcClure]

You got some good advice here. Not sure what time of year you are talking but consider arriving/departing early or late as cooler temps keep DA down and also usually the winds are lighter, too. Fly the numbers, don't let the usual visual cues of fool you. Ground speed will be faster at the same indicated airspeed.  

[Smiles201]

If it were summer time I would never depart APA at gross, even early AM, and would never advise someone to do so who has never departed a relatively high altitude airport. I would gladly make a fuel stop for the piece of mind of better performance. Leave 150 - 200 lbs under gross, until you gain experience. Fly around the pattern before deciding to add more fuel. Your mooney will feel like a 100 horsepower 172 at APA compared to flat land performance. conservative advice

[bd32322]

If it were summer time I would never depart APA at gross, even early AM, and would never advise someone to do so who has never departed a relatively high altitude airport. I would gladly make a fuel stop for the piece of mind of better performance. Leave 150 - 200 lbs under gross, until you gain experience. Fly around the pattern before deciding to add more fuel. Your mooney will feel like a 100 horsepower 172 at APA compared to flat land performance. conservative advice

You can always just load up your plane to gross at sea level airport, climb to KAPA altitude and note your performance figures and plan accordingly.

I have been a flatlander but i have flown around KFNL a bit, which is closer to the hills than KAPA and about same altitude. The 100 or so horsepower rotaxes had no problems, so I anticipate your Mooney to have no problems as long as you fly by IAS. Also not many obstacles to hit around there, its high but all flat mostly.

[PMcClure]

I don't offer advice - just pointing out the facts. DA is lower and winds usually lighter in the morning and evening vs the afternoon. if I was thinking about doing this, I would be as light as possible and go as early as possible. 

[N201MKTurbo]

I have to look at things a little differently. I bought my first Mooney in Denver and flew the first 2000 hours around the rockies. I didn't know any better, the performance I saw at Denver was normal performance, and of coures the performance would be degraded at high elevation airports like Telluride and Leadville, but that was to be expected. The real performance surprise was when I would fly to sea level airports and see the awsome amount of power the plane would make on takeoff.

 

I never considered APA to be a high elevation airport after all it is on the flat lands.

[midlifeflyer]

When I was flying all over Colorado, I considered APA to be a low elevation airport

When I was flying out of there for 20 years, I just considered it a normal airport.   All a matter of perspective.

[Riq]

IMO, Denver is being built up to be more than it is getting into. I flew my pa-28-150 all over CO, because I obeyed the math.

 

Id much prefer the numerous airports in the DEN area opposed to the high winds of the east CO plains, or the deceptively high and windy Cheyenne.

 

Tons of flight instruction is happening on the front range at all times, take a course while youre there. 

 

This is of course coming from the East, and my perspective.

[M016576]

I have to look at things a little differently. I bought my first Mooney in Denver and flew the first 2000 hours around the rockies. I didn't know any better, the performance I saw at Denver was normal performance, and of coures the performance would be degraded at high elevation airports like Telluride and Leadville, but that was to be expected. The real performance surprise was when I would fly to sea level airports and see the awsome amount of power the plane would make on takeoff.

I never considered APA to be a high elevation airport after all it is on the flat lands.

I'm in the same boat- learned to fly in a 172 in the Rockies based out of a field at 6000'. I now fly a M20J at a field in the Pacific Northwest at 4100' and fly often back into the Rockies.

As the Red Baron wrote- it's not the crate, but the man in it that makes the difference.

Risk mitigation is a large part of aviation. Some wont fly in the mountains without a turbo, but I see plenty of NA aircraft out there and fly my own there regularly. Others are perfectly happy flying low IFR in a single engine aircraft for extended periods- I don't count myself as one of them. As with everything- it's a matter of training, means, skill, luck and judgement.

But to say that it's "suicide" (as some seem to thimk) to fly in the mountains in a NA aircraft is just as silly as saying its "suicide" to fly hard IFR in a single engine aircraft.... It is an addition risk, though, in both cases- one that can be mitigated with training, etc. (IMHO).

[RJBrown]

I am based at APA I take off at gross any time the family travels. I learned here. 5880' is normal for me. It is just a matter of perspective. My first flight to sealevel (CRQ) was the eye opener for me. Had to push the mixture knob in all the way to keep it running and boy did it land slow.

[231LV]

You guys have just highlighted the reasons I sold my J, and bought a K when I moved from the southeast (elevation 252, no hills) to the Salt Lake City area (elevation 4227, high mountains east, south and west). Climb performance and speed brakes to get down in a hurry once I reach the valley are a huge advantage over the J. It could have been flown it here, but not with the peace of mind of the K. The 150-200 fpm climb at altitude was a bit too disquieting to me.

Agree! The K is an amazing airplane! At DA's of 8000-9000 ft, climbs of 500 to 650 ft/min are routine...no worries. At cruise 17k and running LOP, 9.5 gph with 175KTAS...wow! I use my speed brakes whenever I get the "stuka" approach from controllers...surprising how often this can be...