A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Opinions on a M20J



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #9  
Old September 6th 04, 07:53 AM
Julian Scarfe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...

I'll take issue with you on items 3 and 4.


With the principle (comparative to similar types) or the numbers?

3) Its landing distance is greater than many compatible tourers: because

the
airframe is clean, it floats. So for short fields it tends to be the
landing distance that is limiting. I wouldn't want to operate a M20J
regularly out of much less than 2700 ft as you don't have much safety

margin
at less than that. If you have that and don't visit short strips very
often, no problem.


Usually, the only reason it floats is because folk come in at well over
1.3Vso.


Yeah but that's the same with every aircraft type.

I would have no hesitation about being based at a 2,000' strip (at
sea level).


Maybe something got lost in translation. All our runways are measured in
metres. I
agree 2700 ft (about 820 m) is quite conservative. 2000 ft feels short.
The book gross performance is 1550 ft, which is about 2200 ft with the
recommended safety factor.

Going into KBGR regularly, I rarely have a problem turning off
at the first taxiway (1100') and I'm usually off the ground from my home
base in about 1000', without using short-field technique.


Touching down at the end, that seems about right. If you're landing it in
1100 ft from 50 ft then I'd like to see it... ;-)

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.


Again, I think this is a technique issue, both on takeoff and landing.


Never had a serious issue on landing. But there are physical limits for
take-off for any aircraft. I never like the idea of spending much time on
one wheel for a take-off, so I start to get nervous when I can't keep both
tyres on the runway below rotation speed.

I don't know what else you fly, Ron, but aircraft like the TB20, the PA28s
and most light twins seem to handle crosswind take-offs with rather more
comfort.

Julian


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Any opinions on the Garmin GNS 480 ! ! ! RonLee Instrument Flight Rules 18 January 18th 05 12:33 PM
Opinions on Cessna 340, 414 and 421 john szpara Owning 55 April 2nd 04 09:08 PM
Opinions wanted ArtKramr Military Aviation 65 January 21st 04 04:15 AM
OPINIONS: THE SOLUTION ArtKramr Military Aviation 4 January 7th 04 10:43 PM
Rallye/Koliber AD's and opinions R. Wubben Owning 2 October 16th 03 05:39 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.