Opinions on a M20J

Hey Jon...keep up the posts your buying adventure. I'll be
interested to see what you finally wind up with and what the journey was
like. I'm hoping to eventually head down the ownership path. At this
point, I'm only familiar flying Cessna hardware but am definitely
interested in what you're leaning toward in the Mooney arena. Something
about 160 kts and 10 gph that just sounds like something for
nothing...er, sort of.

Nice looking plane, by the way.
--
Jack Allison
PP-ASEL, IA Student

"When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth
with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there
you will always long to return"
- Leonardo Da Vinci

(Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail)

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

Anyway, even with those caveats, I'm not saying you couldn't land a Mooney
there. A person flying by the numbers, using proper technique, should be
fine. It's just no place to be sloppy.

I think that's the key. I implied in my original post that the M20J
requires more landing distance than comparable tourers. On reflection in
the light of others' posts, and perusal of some numbers, I think that's
misleading. The issue is that it's much less forgiving of any imprecision
in technique. Given that we're all human, I still think that's a good
reason to think hard about whether you want to base a Mooney at a relatively
short field.

Julian

"Bob Miller" wrote in message
...

The previous poster seemed to imply that Mooney deliberately set the
limitation low. Can any other J owners corroborate the 11 kt
demonstrated x/w for a J??

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...13X26176&key=1

Julian

On 6 Sep 2004 19:55:58 -0700, (Bob Miller) wrote:

The previous poster seemed to imply that Mooney deliberately set the
limitation low.

I'm not aware that Julian posted anything about Mooney setting a
*limitation* on crosswind performance, deliberately or otherwise.

He did post that they chose to *demonstrate* crosswind performance at a
certain speed. But Part 23 only requires that this demonstration be done
at 0.2 Vso or greater. Vso in the 'J' is 54 KIAS. So anything over 10.8
Kts 90° crosswind component meets the requirements of Part 23.

As I said, the usual reason for that is because that's what was available
when the schedule called for performing this part of the flight test.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Right now we are looking at a '79 M20J. I flew it Saturday adn it was
very nince. The owner has taken good care of the plane. My partner is
going to fly it Wednesday to get his impression. He will probably like
it. He is the one that sent me the ad. I'll keep you posted.

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
Student airplane owner

Jack Allison wrote:
Hey Jon...keep up the posts your buying adventure. I'll be
interested to see what you finally wind up with and what the journey was
like. I'm hoping to eventually head down the ownership path. At this
point, I'm only familiar flying Cessna hardware but am definitely
interested in what you're leaning toward in the Mooney arena. Something
about 160 kts and 10 gph that just sounds like something for
nothing...er, sort of.

Nice looking plane, by the way.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...13X26176&key=1

Thank you.

Right now we are looking at a '79 M20J. I flew it Saturday adn it was
very nince. The owner has taken good care of the plane. My partner is
going to fly it Wednesday to get his impression. He will probably like
it. He is the one that sent me the ad. I'll keep you posted.


If you've some experience in complex sel aairplanes, and red blood flowing in
your veins, just go ahead and write the check. I have an M20J born about that
year, and -- but you've flown it, you already know. Wecome aboard.

"Julian Scarfe" wrote
If you're in the market for a fast, fuel-efficient single-engined tourer,
there are 4 reasons not to buy a Mooney:

Actually, there is one you missed. Cabin room.

If you're a stick (tall and thin) and you like the sportscar position
(legs stretched out in front of you, stuck into a narrow channel) you
may well enjoy a Mooney. If you are shaped more typically, like to
sit upright, and want room between you and the front seat passenger -
think again.

The late model Mooneys are not so bad (the Ovation is almost
comfortable - almost) but I have some time in a K model Mooney and it
is by far the most tight and uncomfortable aircraft I have ever flown,
not excluding the gliders.

Of course I am what might be called gravitationally enhanced, so the
best advice I can give is this - decide how long your longest trips
are going to be, and sit in one for that long. Then make your
decision.

Michael

"Kai Glaesner" wrote in message
om...
Paul,

Mine's got a big fan in the front.

Was useful to keep the canopy open and stick my head out of the
side while taxying on a warm day like today (UK).

But your's is not a 10gph, 160 KTAS, IFR travelling machine, is it? ;-)

No, but it can carry guided missiles under the wings! :-)

And I can slow it down to 80 knots on 5gph, so that makes it
just as efficient, assuming no headwind! :-P

Paul

"Julian Scarfe" wrote in message ...
"Bob Miller" wrote in message
...

The previous poster seemed to imply that Mooney deliberately set the
limitation low. Can any other J owners corroborate the 11 kt
demonstrated x/w for a J??

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...13X26176&key=1

That's a pretty common mistake in cross winds. Once you touch down in
a strong cross wind, the ailerons should be turned all the way to the
stops against the wind. When I teach cross wind landings I teach that
you never want to expose your belly to the wind (metaphor only). You
need to keep that upwind wing down.

-Robert