Mooney 201 vs 201 MSE

[aaronk25]

"I am stating for the record that you lack judgement and you are on a path to disaster. I only hope I do not have to read how your quibbling as we used to say in the military has gotten you into serious difficulty or killed innocents."  "Here's an idea. You are truly an accident waiting to happen."

Chris----Glad you went on the record.......I think we were all waiting for someone, god help us "to go on the record".  I think thats why I made the post was for you to go on the record and help us by forecasting who is gonna crash.

 

Allsmiles,

 

The load of weight I carry when heavy is boxes and heavy parts, combined with full fuel is typically what contributes to the payload.  I also do W&B on the goods.  I also would in a second, convert my mooney to a experimental category if the FAA would grant me the privileges that the home built experimental aircraft use.  But as a certified converted to experimental, the restrictions are very limiting, basically flight testing.  

 

I'd throw out the century 3 autopilot, steam gauges and every other antiquated over priced piece of 60' technology in the plane and install 2  dual flat screen dynons, tru trak auto pilot, separate dynon AI with back up battery, ect.....no prob.....  I'm just still upset about the election, thats all.....Aaron

[Parker_Woodruff]

I fly my 77 j at 2900 gross weight, but technically not legal. However I try to use common sense in my decision making and with 25 degrees of timing on the early J compared to the 20 degres on the newer ones, the older ones have at least same but most likley more power.

1.120 usable at the 2900lbs.

 

Not only are you looking operating the aircraft illegally, you also have differences on your 1977 model that should be of concern.  Have you seen how your propeller is different than every other M20J from 1978 and on?  I doubt the square-tip prop is better than the round blades used on other M20J airframes.  That is, unless your plane has a prop upgrade.

 

Have you also considered that the CG envelope changes with extra weight?  And you don't have a published chart for your airframe at that weight?

[Cris]

I agree with you it is a violation of the FARs but how or why am I going to be "a accident waiting to happen"? Sure its breaking a FAR if I operated it this way but it dosent increase my chances of crashing anymore than anyone else's flying a newer MSE at 2900lbs. Sure all the published numbers change in the POH, but they don't change significantly and I'm not cutting it that close anyway. I also have the newer MSE performance data as a reference.

Ok This is really silly " Sure all the published numbers change in the POH, but they don't change significantly and I'm not cutting it that close anyway. I also have the newer MSE performance data as a reference."

If you actually do check the performance chart for a 2740 lb Mooney at 20 C, 2000' pressure alt and a 6 kt headwind you will find it needs 1850' +- to get over a 50' obj. while the 2900 lb Mooney with similar conditions requires 2850' +- which means you need 1000' or 54% more runway than the lighter version. And yet you think the numbers "don't change significantly"? Really?

[aaronk25]

If you actually do check the performance chart for a 2740 lb Mooney at 20 C, 2000' pressure alt and a 6 kt headwind you will find it needs 1850' +- to get over a 50' obj. while the 2900 lb Mooney with similar conditions requires 2850 +- that means you need 1000' more runway of 54% more runway than the lighter. And yet you think the numbers do not change significantly"? Really?

 

   

 

Maybe I should have defined "significantly" for my missions. 4000+ runways most of the time 8000 to 10000ft.  I also wouldn't ever put myself in a situation where I'm cutting it that close to the book number, under gross!  If a engine quits and your 20' above the trees, the options of wear to land are very limited.  What if there is a down draft?  I say this to get you to maybe, just maybe understand the thought process I had.  

 

I think its more reckless (but legal) to take off with 5' of extra pavement than required in your 2740lbs gross example from the POH than taking off at the MSE higher gross weight and having 8000 feet of runway avail.  Another example of how legal isn't always safest.....but god forbid take off a J model at a higher gross weight than allowed, but allowed with newer "Js".

 

I also am aware that when heavy roll out and climb performance goes down exponentially.  

 

I think I'm done posting on this forum as we've already covered this topic on another.....have a good one.

[carusoam]

Aaron,

You're not going about it the right way.

Sorry to see you go before understanding what has been brought to you by some very knowledgable people.

Best regards,

-a-

[aaronk25]

Wooops correction.....I ment fine with this thread not mooney space forum. Mistyped....in regards to the thread I said what my thoughts were and others said there's and I took the advise, just don't have to much more to say about the topic. I did post some news about "over gross" on the correct thread.

[FAST FLIGHT OPTIONS LLC]

^deleted

[scottfromiowa]

I fly my 77 j at 2900 gross weight, but technically not legal. However I try to use common sense in my decision making and with 25 degrees of timing on the early J compared to the 20 degres on the newer ones, the older ones have at least same but most likley more power.

1.120 usable at the 2900lbs.

Aaron...I love you like a brother, but I would NOT fly your plane like this...and I would delete these posts...I understand where you are coming from, but "don't be that guy".

To everyone that thinks "I am a hater"...reading this thread is like barb throwing 101...At least I keep it to politics.

[RussG]

I recently purchased a 1993 Mooney M20J MSE and I'm looking for a current parts catalog and maintenance catalog.  Any help would be greatly appreciated!

[scottfromiowa]

Good choice of threads to post that request on noob...

Good luck with that manual.

Maybe do a 30 second check on how to start a new thread and request there?

Just a thought.

Happy New Year!

[WardHolbrook]

Man, am I ever late to this party. I just read Aaron's post on operating his J model over weight. In addition to the concerns that others have raised, I'd add that In the event of an accident  - even something "minor" like a gear up landing or a runway excursion - one of the first things the Feds will do is take a hard look at is the aircraft weight and balance for the flight.The fact that later model Js are legal at 2900 lbs isn't going to carry a lot of weight in how they handle this pilot deviation. Aaron, I'm a little surprised at this. I thought you had better judgement than that. 

 

Note: I saw the date on Aaron's original post and for giggles went back and read some of his subsequent posts. I take back my comments about his judgement - apparently he has seen the light. 

 

There's no such thing as an "oopsie" when it comes to W&B. If the FAA ever checks into it they will expect you be in compliance. The ramifications of being found intentionally noncompliant with the regs are something that all of us would want to avoid.  

Edited January 2, 2015 by WardHolbrook

[Awqward]

My '87 205 has increased flap 15 speed (132 KIAS) and I can lower the gear at 140 KIAS and fly at 165 KIAS once they are down.....I believe this is the same for the MSE....these are very handy attributes and means I can keep a good speed right to the FAF....no speed brakes required

[ryoder]

I flew backward one time and even though it's not in the poh I did it anyway...

But seriously I am a less is more guy and would want the bare bones 201 with lower gross weight especially if it cost less.

[fantom]

But seriously I am a less is more guy and would want the bare bones 201 with lower gross weight especially if it cost less.

Spoken like a serious CB

[Marauder]

Spoken like a serious CB

A serious effort indeed to win the Cheap Bast$&d of January award.