Opinions on a M20J

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...

IMHO, it might not be a bad idea to stall a prospective purchase anyway,
just to see what the airplane's "manners" are. But I fail to see how
stalling the airplane is a superior method to checking cruise speed than
simply checking the cruise speed directly.

Its faster. I think your making too much of this. Mooney pilots always
try to compare how fast their Mooney is. If you want a fast one (and
most Mooney pilots do, otherwise they'd buy an Arrow) you want to
determine how fast your is. Running a 4 course range with a GPS takes
a good 15 minutes. Stalling take about 2 minutes.

-Robert

There was an interesting post a few plies back about stalling a Mooney to
determine if its wings are rigged correctly. The poster cautioned that Mooneys
out of rig (that's my p[hrase, not his) roll inverted in a full stall. the ame
poster suggests one should not spin a Mooney.

I have, uh, heard that Mooney spin recovery is conventional, but have, uh,
heard, you have to be careful when you recover because you will be pointing
pretty steeply downward, and Mooneys do really accelerate quickly when going
downhill.

I've only flown a couple of Mooneys, a Ranger a million years ago, and a 201
for the past -- my God, since 1978! Both were well mannered in slow flight,
gave lots and lots of warning before the wing stalled, and each stalled
abruptly but mostly forward. Not a big deal for stall recovery (at altitude).
Sometimes one wing would give up before the other, but maintaining dirctional
control is not a problem.

I'd suggest if a prospective buyer who is not experienced in Mooneys, maybe
moving up from non complex aircraft, stalls one and it goes inverted, he won't
be buying anything except a small plot of land for his remains.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
om...
Its faster.

It is? Seems to me that, in not much more time than it takes to climb to an
appropriate altitude, do the proper clearing turns, configure for slow
flight and stall the airplane, you could just as easily have flown a
standard square course, using a GPS to monitor your progress, and calculated
the exact cruising speed.

I think your making too much of this.

If I am, then you started it.

Mooney pilots always
try to compare how fast their Mooney is.

If they are, they are being silly. After all, it's not like most Mooneys
are the fastest thing around...they just happen to go fast on less power.

But if they insist on being silly, I can't imagine that they'd use stall
characteristics as a way of comparing how fast their Mooney is to another.

I can just see the conversation now:
"How fast is your Mooney?"
"Well, I get a roll rate of 1 degree per second during the stall"
"Oh really? I only get a roll rate of half a degree per second during the
stall"
"Damn...your Mooney IS faster than mine".

If you want a fast one (and
most Mooney pilots do, otherwise they'd buy an Arrow) you want to
determine how fast your is.

Okay. That seems obviously true.

Running a 4 course range with a GPS takes
a good 15 minutes. Stalling take about 2 minutes.

15 minutes? Uh, right. And only 2 minutes for the stall? Uh, right
(again). But even if that were so, you're talking a time investment of only
13 minutes more, and at the end, you have an actual number that is the
actual speed of the airplane, rather than some vague information about stall
behavior.

Sorry Robert, I'm just not buying it. I know, you'll say "well, I don't
care if you buy it", and that's fine too. And I think it's wise to stall
the airport before buying it, just because that could turn up some other
less desirable issues with the plane. But to determine cruise speed by
stalling it? That just seems silly to me.

Pete

emove (AJW) wrote in message ...

I have, uh, heard that Mooney spin recovery is conventional, but have, uh,
heard, you have to be careful when you recover because you will be pointing
pretty steeply downward, and Mooneys do really accelerate quickly when going
downhill.

One of the Mooney Proficiency CFIs accidently spun a Mooney with a
student. It took them 2,500 feet to recover. They said the spin was
very fast, stabilized (a bad thing) pretty fast and that the plane
oscillated during the spin. He let it spin more than one turn.
Speaking with the test pilot (Bob Kromer) the factory never had the
guts to try to spin beyond one turn.

I'd suggest if a prospective buyer who is not experienced in Mooneys, maybe
moving up from non complex aircraft, stalls one and it goes inverted, he won't
be buying anything except a small plot of land for his remains.

Hence the "with an experienced Mooney CFI" part of the post.

-Robert

emove (AJW) wrote in message ...

I have, uh, heard that Mooney spin recovery is conventional, but have, uh,
heard, you have to be careful when you recover because you will be pointing
pretty steeply downward, and Mooneys do really accelerate quickly when going
downhill.

One of the Mooney Proficiency CFIs accidently spun a Mooney with a
student. It took them 2,500 feet to recover. They said the spin was
very fast, stabilized (a bad thing) pretty fast and that the plane
oscillated during the spin. He let it spin more than one turn.
Speaking with the test pilot (Bob Kromer) the factory never had the
guts to try to spin beyond one turn.

I'd suggest if a prospective buyer who is not experienced in Mooneys, maybe
moving up from non complex aircraft, stalls one and it goes inverted, he won't
be buying anything except a small plot of land for his remains.

Hence the "with an experienced Mooney CFI" part of the post.

-Robert

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
And I think it's wise to stall
the airport before buying it, just because that could turn up some other
less desirable issues with the plane. But to determine cruise speed by
stalling it? That just seems silly to me.

It seems to me that what you're trying to do is to determine if
the plane is rigged correctly. The question is "is it on the good
side or the bad side of the equation?". The consequences of it
being on the bad side are poor stall characteristics and lower
speed/less efficiency. So rather than just looking for one that
goes faster, you're looking for "a good one".

Paul

"Paul Sengupta" wrote in message
...
[...] So rather than just looking for one that
goes faster, you're looking for "a good one".

Which is fine. But since there are things that could hurt cruise speed
without affecting the stall, it just makes no sense to rely on stalling
behavior to "know" the cruise speed (even if you could actually determine
the actual cruise speed by stalling the airplane, which you can't).

If you care about cruise speed, you need to actually measure cruise speed.
As Julian already said, doing so is the reliable way to determine cruise
speed.

Pete

If you care about cruise speed, you need to actually measure cruise speed.
As Julian already said, doing so is the reliable way to determine cruise
speed.

I have a stupid n00b question to add to this thread. Mooney #1
was tested on a cool, dry day in Colorado at a density altitude of
8500' using the GPS square course method. Mooney #2 was tested
on a hot, humid day in Texas at a density altitude of 8500' using
the same method and power settings. Can the results of these two
tests be used to accurately compare speed down to a single knot?

I'm guessing the answer is "yes". Whatever the answer, though, it
seems that measuring cruise speed would still be the best way to
measure cruise speed.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...
"Paul Sengupta" wrote in message
...
[...] So rather than just looking for one that
goes faster, you're looking for "a good one".

Which is fine. But since there are things that could hurt cruise speed
without affecting the stall, it just makes no sense to rely on stalling
behavior to "know" the cruise speed (even if you could actually determine
the actual cruise speed by stalling the airplane, which you can't).

If you care about cruise speed, you need to actually measure cruise speed.
As Julian already said, doing so is the reliable way to determine cruise
speed.

I think you are envisioning a situation where you are presented with 6
Mooneys on the ramp with your choice to buy. Of course in that
situation you can fly each and compare the price. But if you are
traveling 100 miles out to test fly a Mooney before buying it, I just
don't see how you are going to determine if it is well rigged and fast
just on its own. Unless you have several Mooneys ready to fly to
compare you just can't use a 4 course speed test. Stalling it will
give you a good idea of its rigged right (90% of the speed differences
between Mooneys).

From my experiences buying airplanes for personal use I can say that
you spend a lot of tired hours flying around the country looking at
planes that you are told are great only to find them a piece of crap.
Once you do find one that is good, you want to start spending money on
it (inspection, offers, etc). If you want to travel around teh country
test flying a dozen or so planes you'll end up putting in a lot of
time off work as well as a lot of money moving around.
I've considered buying a little Aeronca to knock around in as a second
airplane. I've already spent almost as much as the Vref of an Aeronca
traveling around for an Aeronca and have not yet found one that is
both airworthy and priced less than 150% of Vref. You can burn through
cash very, very, very fast just searching and inspecting planes.

-Robert

Jon

----clip----

4) Its crosswind performance is ugly, particularly for take-offs. The
undercarriage uses rubber disks for its springs, and the wing is very low to
the ground. Hence any bumps and you lose any side force from the wheels,
and you have a lot of lift relatively early in the take-off roll. If you
operate an M20J from a single runway airport in a windy part of the world,
this may be an issue. If you only rarely have to deal with 20 knot
crosswinds, no problem.
..
..
Just hold on ground until you have flying speed and then rotate in
strong Xwind. No tire scuff, etc.

I've taken off and had to put in a 20 degree cross wind factor to
track down the runway.

Used to own a Mark 20C (manual gear 180HP) prior to wing leveler. Had
to fly all the time. Great airplane for old Fighter Pilot G

Would own one again.

----clip

Big John