Friday Afternoon Smackdown: Bravo vs. Rocket

[AndyFromCB]

Rockets can burn a lot of fuel too.

I often carry two people and full size 29'er MTn bikes and fishing poles w my son who loves "fly fishing" - he picks a northeast destination w fishing nearish to an airport - we fly there and ride bikes maybe 10 mi to a fishing spot.

I have also carries skis - even my Xc skis which are 207cms. Although they go into the hat rack. All the way to almost to between front seats. All the big stuff and I need rear seats down. It's pretty big that way - not as big as an m20 m maybe but still big.

Maybe I can take from what fluffy said about turbo and ice... The approved thing to do w ice is to get out of ice ASAP. With of without tks - and a powerful turbo engine facilitates that. My take on what was said.

As far as dual alternators on the m20m - that's great - but remember the rocket mod includes something unusual And special which is two 35amp batteries - that is a huge electrical reserve - but I do not know how long it will run tks pumps - anyone here know ? I suspect close to the amount of time you have fluid to run

TKS pump draws one amp, so you'd be long out of fluid before you'd be out of a battery ;-)

[jackn]

To bring this thread back; I may be biased but for your mission, which is similar to mine, I recommend a 252 with extended tanks and TKS. You get an easy 7 hour endurance. 6 hrs get you 800 to 1300 nm depending on winds. You also get great dispatchability. It's a wonderful plane!

[xftrplt]

You guys always make it sound like ice is an instance (sic.) death sentence. Other than frontal conditions, you can sit there in a good old 172 or an Arrow, take on an inch during an approach, fly your final 20knots faster, look out of a side window and land just fine. Been there, done that, didn't use any flaps.

-----------

Cavalier in the extreme. Caveat subscriptor!

[AndyFromCB]

You guys always make it sound like ice is an instance (sic.) death sentence. Other than frontal conditions, you can sit there in a good old 172 or an Arrow, take on an inch during an approach, fly your final 20knots faster, look out of a side window and land just fine. Been there, done that, didn't use any flaps.

-----------

Cavalier in the extreme. Caveat subscriptor!

Cavalier to you, realistic how we learn to fly in the midwest. Every pilot here will tell you about the time they've landed a 172, a cherokee or an Arrow with a half inch of ice. Read the pilot reports from mooney pilots about their induction testing during the early 1980s. A mooney airframe handles an inch of ice just fine. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Cavalier is not taking your IFR students into ice, cavalier is getting all of your certificates in AZ. Shooting an approach in december into stratus with a 1000 foot ceiling and picking up some ice along the way, I can think of a lot different situations much worse and unsafe.

[jetdriven]

Cavalier to you, realistic how we learn to fly in the midwest. Every pilot here will tell you about the time they've landed a 172, a cherokee or an Arrow with a half inch of ice. Read the pilot reports from mooney pilots about their induction testing during the early 1980s. A mooney airframe handles an inch of ice just fine. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Cavalier is not taking your IFR students into ice, cavalier is getting all of your certificates in AZ. Shooting an approach in december into stratus with a 1000 foot ceiling and picking up some ice along the way, I can think of a lot different situations much worse and unsafe.

In 9000 hours I cant tell you a story about landing a 172 with an inch of ice, but I can tell you a story where in Kingman, AZ we were picking up mixed ice in a Beech 1900 at the rate of about 3 inches per minute. IDK about you guys, but Id prefer to be more than a couple minutes away from the end of my life.

[xftrplt]

Andy,

Just so you understand I'm no shrinking violet:

Based in DCA and LGA and flew the NE for 20 years. Don't recall ever having an FO more aggressive than I. If it could be done safely and within the rules, we went.

Seen ice accumulate rapidly, dispite a heated windshield and powerful bleed-air systems.

Had both engines surge and the A/T kick off from ice at FL350 with 30 miles viz.

Flew fighters in front-line units throughout the world; always felt the reins, not the crop.

(Still ride a Honda VFR, hard, with but small "chicken strips.")

GA is great because one can fly virtually when and how one wants, with minimal oversight.

But GA's virtue is also its Achilles' heel.

It seems a disturbing number of perfectly good Mooney's, Beechcraft, and TBM's have fallen out of the sky recently.

(All the pilots, no doubt, thought they were above average.)

Having been a horse soldier, I know cavalier when I see it.

Finally, though inured and coldly apathetic to pilots killing themselves, I do regret the toll on innocent passengers.

[stevesm20b]

I have a simple rule. I don't fly when icing condishions are present.

[bd32322]

You guys always make it sound like ice is an instance death sentence. Other than frontal conditions, you can sit there in a good old 172 or an Arrow, take on an inch during an approach, fly your final 20knots faster, look out of a side window and land just fine. Been there, done that, didn't use any flaps.

Other than frontal conditions, areas of icing are almost always at most 3000 feet thick.

Frontal conditions are different but then we're talking SLD and freezing drizzle/rain. Neither exists much above 12K unless in the mountains. This is where I adjust and just wait things out on the ground.

I want a space shuttle before i launch into icing conditions <sarcasm>

still caution is warranted.... Its not just the wings that ice over... Whip antennas will ice over and bang against the airframe like some freak monster .. Fuel vents can ice over and stop you from flying with perfectly clean wings ... You could just collect a lot of ice on the unprotected surfaces enough to make you go slow and heavy and disturb airflow over clean control surfaces

High climb angles will expose the underside and vents to icing etc etc... But with a protected plane you will have more options for sure, FIKI or not

Key is to be sure of areas that do not have icing ... So you have a backup plan

[FoxMike]

350KT,

I just thought of something unrelated to ice that you might want to consider in your aircraft choice. A rudder trim is worthwhile item for long climbs. TLSs have them, I don't know if they were added to Rockets (231s).

[AndyFromCB]

Don't I remember that you have only been instrument rated for a few years, Andy, and that your experience is limited to GA? If so, maybe you should pause to do a little introspection and listen to what these high time type-rated ATPs are telling you.

Jim

I agree on all points, I was only brining up my dumb experiences from the past. Survived to talk about them. In both cases, I was with pilots much more experienced that I, both cases involved landing into a front. In both cases, I felt uneasy. The Cessna 172 incident was flying a stranded 172 from KTOP back home to KCBF with a CFI. The Arrow incident was actually after helping a friend drop of a TBM 700 at KBMI for maintenance and then heading back to KDSM to drop him off, 6000 hour pilot, he didn't think much about dropping into the soup at 5000, getting vectored all around and shooting an approach down to 500. Dumb but at the time didn't seem that terrible other than truly fast approach speeds. Who knows how close we were to biting the dust? 172 seemed to be on the verge as we landed more or less with full power, the arrow not so much. The fat wing on that airplane just didn't seem to mind at all. Dumb, dumb, dumb, I know.

However, I won't repeat them. I stay out of that crap now, won't launch unless the tops are known, will not launch into a front or land into one either. I will only deal with stratus icing of known thickness. The experiences with TKS in stratus icing have been extremely favorable where other than my landing lights and wing tips, the entire airframe seems to be ice free upon landing because of the propeller spray. I feel fairly confident with TKS in these situations and it seems to increase my dispatch rates considerably. All I am trying to say is that TKS is a fairly capable system and shines in the above described situation and I don't find using it as such to be cavalier. Seems to me the attitude is even with TKS, icing in a no go and I disagree. It depends on the type of icing we're dealing with. Hot prop goes a long way when dealing with layers.

I would say the launching into a cold front overhead, with ceiling of 500 and tops reported to be at FL200 would be cavalier and I have no desire to ever do that. That's exactly how that TBM in NJ bit the dust.

I would say the launching into the same system 2 hours later after it has passed, with a ceiling at 1000, tops reported to be at 5000, -2C on the ground, TKS primed and on, is a low risk activity. Level off at 900, accelerate, pull back on the yoke, be over the ice 3 minutes later. This is exactly the type of conditions TKS was made for and shines. This is the kind of conditions all over midwest in the fall, winter and spring that stops most NA, non-deiced airplanes in their tracks and hence my reason for owning a Bravo.

And I think some here disagree, basically thinking that a single, piston, even with TKS has no reason to tackle ice at all. I beg to differ. All I am saying there is ice and there is ICE and people have dealt with stratus icing with nothing but hot props long before there was TKS or boots for singles.

Anyways, not a cloud in sight, heading to the airport to drop her off in Lincoln for her second annual. Should be a fun flight.

[davidsguerra]

350KT,

I just thought of something unrelated to ice that you might want to consider in your aircraft choice. A rudder trim is worthwhile item for long climbs. TLSs have them, I don't know if they were added to Rockets (231s).

dont need it in a rocket. the engine is tilted in a way that takes out most of the p factor. also it climbs like a beast so the climbs arent that long. 15 minutes and you are at ceiling.

[xftrplt]

I would say the launching into the same system 2 hours later after it has passed, with a ceiling at 1000, tops reported to be at 5000, -2C on the ground, TKS primed and on, is a low risk activity. Level off at 900, accelerate, pull back on the yoke, be over the ice 3 minutes later. This is exactly the type of conditions TKS was made for and shines. This is the kind of conditions all over midwest in the fall, winter and spring that stops most NA, non-deiced airplanes in their tracks and hence my reason for owning a Bravo.

No argument from me.

[320KPH]

Reb

3min 45 sec

[RJBrown]

The best protection from ice is avoidance. To take off into known ice is unwise in ANY Mooney. From an operational point of view both systems are identical. Climb rate is the other protection for ice both getting out of it and avoiding it. I have seen 1500 FPM @ 26000 in a Rocket. No Bravo at any altitude can get that. Rockets regularly exceed TBO without any engine work. 200 knots @ 12,000 and faster higher. I would flight plan 200knots for every flight. If I got there sooner it was a bonus. A Rocket can carry more, higher, faster and further than a Bravo. For "factory" support Rocket has it Mooney does not. The ONLY advantage Bravos have is interior space, not load carrying, just space. Every other apples to apples comparison the Bravo looses. It is no wonder Mooney followed Rocket with the decision to use Continentals. They just had to catch up.

[carusoam]

RJ,

it seems normal to wear out cylinders in turbo engines. Are you not seeing wear, or you are able to combat wear by maintaining cylinder temps?

Even the continental owned by orangemtl seems to have cylinders replaced near to half TBO.?? (sorry if I got this wrong)

The thing that kept me from buying a turbo is too much rumor and not enough demonstrated facts. A TOH is 12 grand in parts. East coast flying, not as critical.

Engine monitors and communication of experience have become a wonderful tool...

Thanks,

-a-

[KSMooniac]

The problem with Continental cylinders is the valve fit issues that have apparently continued to plague them, with or without a turbo. There are plenty of IO-550 engines with premature cylinder replacement in addition to any TSIO-520s you might hear about. A turbo *can* lead to cylinder abuse, certainly, if the pilot doesn't do his/her part in engine management, but even the best engine management won't save cylinders with poor valve fit.

[AcclaimML]

RJ,

it seems normal to wear out cylinders in turbo engines. Are you not seeing wear, or you are able to combat wear by maintaining cylinder temps?

Even the continental owned by orangemtl seems to have cylinders replaced near to half TBO.?? (sorry if I got this wrong)

-a-

Not even! 250 hours since new for the TOH. But in all fairness to the engine, it was run hot and allowed to sit for long enough for the tappet pins to become bone dry-(see my thread on overhaul). Yes you hear a lot of Conti's that eat cylinders, but then there are folks that insist on running LOP at high engine power (over 80%). For the record my POH says not to operate past 60% power (but then it shows power charts for LOP well past that!)

Mike

[Parker_Woodruff]

Yes you hear a lot of Conti's that eat cylinders, but then there are folks that insist on running LOP at high engine power (over 80%).

...much better to be LOP over 80% power than ROP...

[AndyFromCB]

...much better to be LOP over 80% power than ROP...

Ever heard of detonation? It's quick and it ain't pretty.

[AcclaimML]

Ever heard of detonation? It's quick and it ain't pretty.

+1

[DonMuncy]

What causes detonation?

[JoeSpeed]

The speed difference for your missions would only amount to a 10-20 minute trip Tim. I would go for the newest most comfortable model in your price range

[danb35]

Ever heard of detonation? It's quick and it ain't pretty.

Yes indeed--and detonation margins are greater when LOP (especially when enough LOP) than ROP.

[AndyFromCB]

Yes indeed--and detonation margins are greater when LOP (especially when enough LOP) than ROP.

Correct, but when attempting to lean from ROP to LOP at a high power setting, one will be moving thru the dreaded danger zone, hence my comment. No LOP for me over 65% power, actually no LOP for me at all, I fly a Bravo and didn't buy the damn airplane to go slow ;-) Actually, I don't fly, I just stop by the shop everyone now and then, drop another check. 88AMUs so far this year.

[Parker_Woodruff]

Ever heard of detonation? It's quick and it ain't pretty.

If you're far enough LOP over 80% power, detonation likely won't be a problem. Would you rather be 50dF LOP or 50dF ROP at 80% power?