Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: tricky to land?

  1. #1
    Guest
    Guest

    tricky to land?

    Our airplanes do have a higher landing accident rate than others like Cessnas. In my opinion, this isn't the fault of the airplanes, but of the pilots, due to two problems:

    1. Landing at excessive speeds. My Sundowner's POH specifies approaching (flaps down) at 68 KNOTS, and touchdown at 61 knots. These speeds are appropriate for being at maximum weight (2450 for my Sundowner). I'm aware that some pilots routinely approach and land at significantly higher speeds, and I suspect that this is the primary landing accident cause.
    You also should be aware that, to maintain the same percentage above stall speed (that's what landing speeds are based on), these speeds will be lower at lighter weights. (For example, at 20% under max weight, these speeds are 10% lower). Though the max weight speeds are OK to use when operating at lighter weights (and the POH doesn't address this issue), remember two things:
    a) Excessive speed (as compared to the "book" speeds, based on maximum weight) will cause more trouble when lightly loaded.
    b) If you really have a tight short field situation, do reduce your landing speeds, by half of the percentage under maximum weight for the airplane (and do allow a substantial runway length margin above what the POH specifies, in all cases).

    2. Having the CG outside of the front CG limit. For most of our airplanes, if we don't have a significant amount of rear seat passenger weight, baggage, and/or baggage area ballast, we will be significantly out of the front CG limit. (Worst case scenario is a couple of heavy people in the front seats, and full fuel). In the past, you may have flown airplanes which, when lightly loaded (back seats and luggage area empty), were well within the weight and balance limits, consistently, so it wasn't necessary to compute the balance condition. That's not the case for our airplanes.
    When flying without rear seat passengers and/or baggage, I carry two full 6 gallon water containers (sorta cube shaped, from Walmart for about $7 each), tied down in the luggage area.

    Steve King
    CFI, ASMEL
    N6007Y
    79 Sundowner


    -----Original Message-----
    From: musketeermail@yahoogroups.com on behalf of tnflyer35
    Sent: Sun 8/20/2006 3:29 PM
    To: musketeermail@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: [musketeermail] Musketeer m-312


    Any advice for a new Musketeer owner. I have freinds that buy and sell
    alot of diferent planes and i have flown with them Mooney, Commanche
    180, Cessna 152,172,182 but have never flown any beechcraft. I have read
    that the musketeer is tricky to land.

    The one i just bought has had the nose gear collapsed. Guy landed at a
    marked strip and collapsed the nose gear. It is not hurt bad but i still
    have to go through all the Prop stike stuff and all. Engine mount and
    lower cowl is all that was damaged. I think it was a grass strip.

    I think once we get it airworthy again it will be a real nice plane.
    While i am working on it i am going ahead and having the interior done.
    Paint is in decent shape.

    Let me know if anyone has any interest in discussion on the musketeer.

    Thanks: Dave









    Join BAC today and be a part of the ONLY Type Club for the Musketeer series!

    www.beechaeroclub.org


    Yahoo! Groups Links

    <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/musketeermail/

    <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    musketeermail-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

  2. #2
    Guest
    Guest

    tricky to land?

    I have been flying my Mouse for about 10 years now.
    They are very easy to land if you follow the numbers.
    Even if you follow them 99% of the time there is
    always that 1% caused by complacency or inattention
    that will get you.
    In the time I have been flying it I have bounced 3
    landings that I remember. One was after a night flight
    to Laughlin Nevada years ago. One was after a little
    wind shear dropped me onto the runway a wee bit
    before I was expecting to make contact and one was
    just last week after a 4 hour cross country from
    Victorville Ca. to Oroville Ca.
    Came in a little fast at an airport considerably
    closer to sea level than I am used to. Bounced it
    pretty good. The one thing that saved my bacon on each
    of these episodes is just giving it a little power
    after the initial bounce. All three turned into non
    issues and were rectified immediately. If you do not
    give that little power there is a good chance that you
    will become a salt water inhabitant called a porpoise.
    That is where the damage will most likely take place.

    Jamie Waggoner
    N6110N
    69 B-23
    VCV

    --- Steve King <sking@lbcc.edu> wrote:

    > Our airplanes do have a higher landing accident rate
    > than others like Cessnas. In my opinion, this isn't
    > the fault of the airplanes, but of the pilots, due
    > to two problems:
    >
    > 1. Landing at excessive speeds. My Sundowner's POH
    > specifies approaching (flaps down) at 68 KNOTS, and
    > touchdown at 61 knots. These speeds are appropriate
    > for being at maximum weight (2450 for my Sundowner).
    > I'm aware that some pilots routinely approach and
    > land at significantly higher speeds, and I suspect
    > that this is the primary landing accident cause.
    > You also should be aware that, to maintain the same
    > percentage above stall speed (that's what landing
    > speeds are based on), these speeds will be lower at
    > lighter weights. (For example, at 20% under max
    > weight, these speeds are 10% lower). Though the max
    > weight speeds are OK to use when operating at
    > lighter weights (and the POH doesn't address this
    > issue), remember two things:
    > a) Excessive speed (as compared to the "book"
    > speeds, based on maximum weight) will cause more
    > trouble when lightly loaded.
    > b) If you really have a tight short field
    > situation, do reduce your landing speeds, by half of
    > the percentage under maximum weight for the airplane
    > (and do allow a substantial runway length margin
    > above what the POH specifies, in all cases).
    >
    > 2. Having the CG outside of the front CG limit.
    > For most of our airplanes, if we don't have a
    > significant amount of rear seat passenger weight,
    > baggage, and/or baggage area ballast, we will be
    > significantly out of the front CG limit. (Worst
    > case scenario is a couple of heavy people in the
    > front seats, and full fuel). In the past, you may
    > have flown airplanes which, when lightly loaded
    > (back seats and luggage area empty), were well
    > within the weight and balance limits, consistently,
    > so it wasn't necessary to compute the balance
    > condition. That's not the case for our airplanes.
    > When flying without rear seat passengers and/or
    > baggage, I carry two full 6 gallon water containers
    > (sorta cube shaped, from Walmart for about $7 each),
    > tied down in the luggage area.
    >
    > Steve King
    > CFI, ASMEL
    > N6007Y
    > 79 Sundowner
    >
    >
    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: musketeermail@yahoogroups.com on behalf of
    > tnflyer35
    > Sent: Sun 8/20/2006 3:29 PM
    > To: musketeermail@yahoogroups.com
    > Subject: [musketeermail] Musketeer m-312
    >
    >
    > Any advice for a new Musketeer owner. I have freinds
    > that buy and sell
    > alot of diferent planes and i have flown with them
    > Mooney, Commanche
    > 180, Cessna 152,172,182 but have never flown any
    > beechcraft. I have read
    > that the musketeer is tricky to land.
    >
    > The one i just bought has had the nose gear
    > collapsed. Guy landed at a
    > marked strip and collapsed the nose gear. It is not
    > hurt bad but i still
    > have to go through all the Prop stike stuff and all.
    > Engine mount and
    > lower cowl is all that was damaged. I think it was a
    > grass strip.
    >
    > I think once we get it airworthy again it will be a
    > real nice plane.
    > While i am working on it i am going ahead and having
    > the interior done.
    > Paint is in decent shape.
    >
    > Let me know if anyone has any interest in discussion
    > on the musketeer.
    >
    > Thanks: Dave
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >


    __________________________________________________
    Do You Yahoo!?
    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
    http://mail.yahoo.com


    Join BAC today and be a part of the ONLY Type Club for the Musketeer series!

    www.beechaeroclub.org


    Yahoo! Groups Links

    <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/musketeermail/

    <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    musketeermail-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

    <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Similar Threads

  1. LAND ON THE ICE RUNWAY in New Hampshire
    By corcoran in forum Fly-Ins
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-21-2017, 01:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO