Yeah, but you cant get any used parts. All the scrapped ones the gear is DAMAGED... -
Endangered Species - Retractable Piston Singles?
- Thread starter GRG55
- Start date
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
Yeah, but you cant get any used parts. All the scrapped ones are DAMAGED... -
I'm not sure I follow. Besides new parts are also available. Most gear up damage is minor, except if you have to tear down the engine / replace prop. Frankly I don't get how people gear up a plane, at least in mine the lack of drag is extremely obvious / can't slow it down...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RudyP
Cleared for Takeoff
More like 10 knots. Did you not read the post I typed for you earlier? The 242 KT figure is clearly marketing. POH has 233 KTAS as top speed at best power under the best temperature conditions running 50 degree ROP. My SR22 TN would easily do 225+ KTAS at FL250 at 50 ROP but Cirrus isn't reckless enough to recommend that engine destroying power regime.
Last edited:
RudyP
Cleared for Takeoff
I have 500 hours in my chute pulled plane. Flies just fine at 40KTS faster than your Mooney - sometimes even better than that...
How often does your Mooney hit 350+ KTs of ground speed?
Last edited:
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
RudyP
Cleared for Takeoff
Yep, you're in a retract right?
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
Show me the AFM quote. Also you know there are two Acclaim versions one faster than the other....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
Ok now you're being dumb. Apples and oranges and you know that. So as not to feed the troll, I'm out.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
RudyP
Cleared for Takeoff
It's two pages back on this thread. You are worse than arguing with my 5 year old nephew. I think others reading this know who the troll is. I was willing to give you a chance because some of your other posts seemed reasonable but I'm done with you now.
Frogs97
Pre-takeoff checklist
Man, 6 pages and we still don't know whose is longer ...
(btw, no pictures to prove it, please)
(btw, no pictures to prove it, please)
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
I've read all the posts. I don't see an AFM reference. I apologize if I missed it. Please give me the link and page in the Mooney AFM?
Also, you should note that the Acclaim S uses an engine derated to 280hp to achieve that top speed, whereas I believe the Cirrus and TTx use 310hp.
And you know better to compare your true airspeed at 25k with a turbo to a NA plane.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
zaitcev
En-Route
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2010
- Messages
- 3,259
- Display Name
Display name:
Pete Zaitcev
Principal advantages are:
- Small requirements for takeoff and landing space - this confers an advantage of safety for low-altitude operations
- Ability to tolerate high winds
- Need little hangar space
Disadvantages are
- Great power requirements and thus high fuel burn
- Even then, slow
- Noisy
- Have unrecoverable modes that pilot must avoid
In the U.S., all gyro pilots who I know fly them for recreation. They are low-and-slow pilots who are attracted to ability to land at small sites in emergency. I know one who flies on the power of Subaru 2.5L with a little 8 psi turbo and single string ignition, and he's already had engine-out landings. Mostly non-event.
Some fly gyros around a ranch for livestock observation. But I've only read about it in magazines.
In Europe and Russia, the ability to land in helipad-like areas is much in demand. In Russia, in particular, after the designation of G airpspace and growth of GA, the lack of airports is extremely acute. So, enterprising people started building heliports. Usually it's a space for 4 or 6 pads and a fuel cart.
I sometimes have to explain to prospective Russian pilots, who think that gyro is a magic safety blanket, that they will die the same no matter if they snag a power line in a Aeroprakt or Calidus.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Depends. Beegles never seems to be hurting for scrap. It's up to the insurer and the prices of parts.
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
I added the
Interesting, I learned something! cool
I had only ever heard about their disadvantages, but given the right time and place those advantages could certainly seem appealing
UngaWunga
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2014
- Messages
- 2,020
- Display Name
Display name:
UngaWunga
Question about that video... Was that really a spin test? Yes, they were spinning downwards, but because the controls were making the plane do that. Does spin testing need to do stall induced spins? They didn't stall the plane in the video. Just curious. Very cool plane, btw.
I also like how the cabin door in on the pilot's side. No need for the pilot to get in first and then watch passengers step on things they shouldn't when trying to get into the plane. Never understood why the cabin door is on the right on older single-door planes.
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
He was cross controlled, slow, he pulled back on the stick and stalled it and it spun.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's crazy man! Was it pretty smooth up there?
drotto
Cleared for Takeoff
That was their celebration for passing the European spin certification.
bnt83
Final Approach
I don't want the added weight, complexity or liability of a retract on my personal airplane.
Why would I want to buy a plane with retracts when the company who built it thinks they can charge $700 for a plastic door handle and $900 for a wire wound rheostat that you can buy on Mouser for $45? These are the same folks that would tell you to buy a new actuator if you asked for a grease specification to inspect and re-grease it.
Just look at the parts pricing for older single engine retracts and you'll figure out why there are few new ones.
Failures are well documented on older ones. Just Beech for example.
http://csobeech.com/gear-rod.html
If I wanted to hangout in the flight levels all the time, well maybe.
Why would I want to buy a plane with retracts when the company who built it thinks they can charge $700 for a plastic door handle and $900 for a wire wound rheostat that you can buy on Mouser for $45? These are the same folks that would tell you to buy a new actuator if you asked for a grease specification to inspect and re-grease it.
Just look at the parts pricing for older single engine retracts and you'll figure out why there are few new ones.
Failures are well documented on older ones. Just Beech for example.
http://csobeech.com/gear-rod.html
If I wanted to hangout in the flight levels all the time, well maybe.
Last edited:
MooneyDriver78
En-Route
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 4,692
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom
Didn't read entire thread, but the parasitic drag coefficient for the Mooney is 0.017 vs Cirrus 0.024, Bonanza is 0.019, since drag goes up exponentially, it takes a lot of HP and drag reduction to overcome increase drag at higher velocities. The few extra knots don't come cheap. I think Cirrus did all they can with a fixed gear design.
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
And the fastest of the group does it on the least hp (280)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
denverpilot
Tied Down
This. Parts costs are too high for what they are worth in operational savings over the expected ownership period of the aircraft.
Plus, like @jesse said in the Malibu thread... a turbo to drag your butt up to the Flight Levels is great, but most folks don't because doing it unpressurized is a PITA for the most part. Especially if you have passengers.
RudyP
Cleared for Takeoff
Very smooth
edo2000
Pre-takeoff checklist
Yeah, me either. I like retracts. Owned Cessna 310s, 210s, Vikings, and then, a Cessna 185. The annuals on the C185, even with lots of off-airport operations (beaches, gravel roads, sand bars, etc.) were generally around 50%-60% of the single engine retract annuals (of course, the 310s were a lot more,
). The retract tests, microswitch adjustments, hydraulic leaks, etc., there always seemed to be something...
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 7,000
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
No doubt the upkeep of the retract is more expensive, but the devil's in the details. In the case of my retract, the costs are neck and neck with the extra gas expended to go the same speed for the circa 65 hrs/yr I've flown (average through 4 years of ownership), versus a Dakota. Anything above 90 hours and I'm running away from the fixed gear, anything less than 50 hours and I'm starting to pay a premium on the retract....Thing is, the Dakota isn't selling for what I got my Arrow for. And that's where the fixed gear advantage goes to hell fast. It doesn't do you any good if the chuckle-heads in the market overstate the advantage and agree to pay well in excess of the mx savings LOL. Like buying a new car for the supposed gas savings while carrying a car payment. Ooops.
The capital difference between my aircraft and an identically equipped Dakota is about 100% of the Arrow's price tag. Check mate. I just put an OH powerpack at around 2AMUs installed. Looking through the logbooks from the last one, this one held on for only 6 years, a bit early as far as these things are concerned (7-10 years according to my AP). Thing is, I could slap powerpacks at even half that interval and I would still be so far ahead of the premium I'd have to pay to not deal with the gear, it's not even worth discussing further.
But that's one specific sample. An Arrow is way cheaper than a Dakota. But 182RG is more expensive than a welded 182, and one cracked pivot assembly exceeds my entire yearly ownership ledger in the Arrow. IOW no way an R182 pencils out compared to a welded 182, at a capital premium to add insult to injury. A third example in the middle would be a Cherokee Six 300, which carries little to no discount over a Lance, but the Lance gear is the same as the Arrow, so the mx delta is nill.
As we can see, different retracts have different cost dynamics to their respective fixed gear near-equivalents. For my mission, carrying the hassle of retract mx in an Arrow is the cheapest option.
I think Cessna single retracts are just in a category of their own. The PA-28/32/34/44 , along with the Mooney 20s (<--provided the trusses aren't damaged by ground handling) can't be lumped with a C-310, PA24, C-210/R182 when it comes to long term mx costs and parts sourcing.
The capital difference between my aircraft and an identically equipped Dakota is about 100% of the Arrow's price tag. Check mate. I just put an OH powerpack at around 2AMUs installed. Looking through the logbooks from the last one, this one held on for only 6 years, a bit early as far as these things are concerned (7-10 years according to my AP). Thing is, I could slap powerpacks at even half that interval and I would still be so far ahead of the premium I'd have to pay to not deal with the gear, it's not even worth discussing further.
But that's one specific sample. An Arrow is way cheaper than a Dakota. But 182RG is more expensive than a welded 182, and one cracked pivot assembly exceeds my entire yearly ownership ledger in the Arrow. IOW no way an R182 pencils out compared to a welded 182, at a capital premium to add insult to injury. A third example in the middle would be a Cherokee Six 300, which carries little to no discount over a Lance, but the Lance gear is the same as the Arrow, so the mx delta is nill.
As we can see, different retracts have different cost dynamics to their respective fixed gear near-equivalents. For my mission, carrying the hassle of retract mx in an Arrow is the cheapest option.
I think Cessna single retracts are just in a category of their own. The PA-28/32/34/44 , along with the Mooney 20s (<--provided the trusses aren't damaged by ground handling) can't be lumped with a C-310, PA24, C-210/R182 when it comes to long term mx costs and parts sourcing.
zaitcev
En-Route
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2010
- Messages
- 3,259
- Display Name
Display name:
Pete Zaitcev
Meanwhile.... Diamond has announced no less than 5 different versions of the old DA-50 concept. All are powered by diesels of varying power. The least powerful has a fixed gear and the rest are retractable gear versions.
http://www.avweb.com/blogs/insider/Diamond-Goes-Big-228804-1.html
http://www.avweb.com/blogs/insider/Diamond-Goes-Big-228804-1.html
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
Well there you go. And hindsight2020, re retract maintenance, I don't know where you get that from. My retractable gear have cost me zero over a Cirrus the last 8 years. No issues, and my annual is the same fixed rate at my shop as a SR22. They aren't that big a deal to maintain on most types....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
citizen5000
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2016
- Messages
- 855
- Display Name
Display name:
citizen5000
If retractable gear were advantageous Cirrus would have them on the SR22.
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
Nope. That's not the way the world works. It doesn't have retract because of design decisions and trade offs 20+ years ago.
There are plenty of things that are advantageous that don't happen....
I could just as equally make the false argument that Diamond wouldn't be doing this if it wasn't advantageous.
Not everything is good/bad. It's tradeoffs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There are plenty of things that are advantageous that don't happen....
I could just as equally make the false argument that Diamond wouldn't be doing this if it wasn't advantageous.
Not everything is good/bad. It's tradeoffs.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Challenged
Pattern Altitude
She won't admit it, but my wife married me for my retract Sierra.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 7,000
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
I get that from my own experience and that of the folks whose airplanes are maintained by the shop that works on my Arrow. Your experience doesn't invalidate mine. I'm not knocking on retractables, I own one.
My A&P does charge a premium on the flat rate for retracts versus fixed gear, so at least in my case, the annual inspection flat rate in my home drone would be cheaper if I had a HP fixed gear. Of course, my total cost would be silly higher on a cirrus just on the capital alone, so the fixed gear is a moot point in the first place. What he charges for a multi is even worse, so good bad or indifferent, that kinda influences my behavior towards what kind of airplanes I choose. Just like availability of hangars influences people's decisions to own airplanes or not, outright. I recognize that has nothing to do with the physical merits of the gear, just merely stating that there can be associated indirect costs.
I don't doubt you've had good experiences with your gear. If you re read my post you'd see I lumped the Cessna/Comanche retracts on a category of their own. The only time my gear has hurt my dispatch rate was 3 weeks ago when the power pack failed, and in my airplane failure to retract is the only problem associated with that. Failure to extend is not a failure mode in my airplane, which is awesome and why I own it. Beyond that, nothing other than the added fee for the annual and a Mickey mouse visual inspection every 500 hours on the side braces. So 2 amus in 4 years plus the delta in annual flat rate over a fixed gear (600 buck delta per annual)? I can live with that.
So our experience is not all that divergent really. All I was saying is that it'd be intellectually dishonest to look at the case study of your airplane or even mine, and extrapolate that Cessna retracts are gonna give ya similar economy. No effing way. A single cracked housing in a 182rg and you are up the creek. You could pay for the gas to fly an empty welded Cherokee 6 at rental power for a decade on the money you'd be set back by that kind of mx repair action on a Cessna retract. That absolutely favors a fixed gear airplane selection, especially when youre going less than 3 miles a minute on either airplane and the arrival difference is ballwash.
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
Depends on what you fly, my arrow never had a gear repair save for a blown hydraulic gasket and my Mooney not a one, but I'd never buy a Cessna retract. Pulling up the gear is a bigger benefit the faster the airplane as well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
Two of the locals here have an SR22 and the other a Mooney, both love their planes and swear by it, and both aren't shy about advertising their "half million dollar planes." I suppose there can be some headache from the potential to have maintenance issues with a retractable but I've never actually met an Arrow or Mooney owner who've had any notable issues with their gear, and frankly I don't think a slightly higher A&P charge would turn off someone when their about to drove $500K on a plane. And something that few people here seem to mention, but the Cirrus, while maybe savings some $$ on gear issues, will no doubt offset that with the eventual headache and cost of the chute repack, etc (10 year, $10K). Anyway, the Cirrus folks I've met seem to, without a doubt, fall back on these three reasons why they bought Cirrus:
1.) the parachute makes my wife and family feel safe
2.) it's very comfortable and modern inside
3.) it's fast
The biggest complaints I've heard about Mooneys:
-it feels cramped inside
-it's hard to land
^^but that's usually only a very small price to pay for these folks to have a plane that feels like a sports car and "like an extension of themselves" - point is the gear has never been brought up as an issue "I wish my Mooney had a fixed gear"
Personally I've always been drawn to retracts, and when the day comes to buy my first plane I'll be looking at something like an Arrow, Trinidad, or of course a Bonanza. Nothing against Cirrus, and an SR20 wouldn't be out of the question if the stars lined up, but A.) as non-commercial pilot having the gear lever there is a personal goal and B.) it would always bother me knowing that for 90% of the time I'm using my plane the gear is just hanging there, in the slipstream, doing nothing. Even if Cirrus is selling the most planes, and the TTx is fast, and technology has advanced, ultimately the cleanest design will always favor having those gear retracted
To me it's like taking your boat out for a day on the water without detaching it from the trailer
1.) the parachute makes my wife and family feel safe
2.) it's very comfortable and modern inside
3.) it's fast
The biggest complaints I've heard about Mooneys:
-it feels cramped inside
-it's hard to land
^^but that's usually only a very small price to pay for these folks to have a plane that feels like a sports car and "like an extension of themselves" - point is the gear has never been brought up as an issue "I wish my Mooney had a fixed gear"
Personally I've always been drawn to retracts, and when the day comes to buy my first plane I'll be looking at something like an Arrow, Trinidad, or of course a Bonanza. Nothing against Cirrus, and an SR20 wouldn't be out of the question if the stars lined up, but A.) as non-commercial pilot having the gear lever there is a personal goal and B.) it would always bother me knowing that for 90% of the time I'm using my plane the gear is just hanging there, in the slipstream, doing nothing. Even if Cirrus is selling the most planes, and the TTx is fast, and technology has advanced, ultimately the cleanest design will always favor having those gear retracted
To me it's like taking your boat out for a day on the water without detaching it from the trailer
Today my son said "Dad I wish your plane had wheels that fold up." Me too, son. Me too.
zaitcev
En-Route
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2010
- Messages
- 3,259
- Display Name
Display name:
Pete Zaitcev
I don't have any of those complaints.
What I hate the most about Mooney is the gear that is not well compatible with rough fields. You can say that I actually wanted a Bonanza, but had to settle for a Mooney. I am not fat, but I'm tall. In a Bonanza of an affordable vintage I'm very cramped in. In fact, I cannot even sit into any version from the 1950s, and often not in 1960s, if the radio stack is on the left. There's a massive control interference. I flew a 1976 Bo, and that was okay, but the cost of it was beyond my budget. In a Mooney, I can always be comfortable, even in older ones. Mooneys are more spacious than Bonanzas for me.
What I hate the second most about Mooney is that it has no BRS system. It's just ridiculous in 2017. It's like driving a car without seatbelts. Of course there's no problem as long as you don't crash, and I accepted the risk. Heck, I don't even have a shoulder harness (plan to add one soonish). But I'm not very happy about it.
Quite.
MBDiagMan
Final Approach
Huh?? Do you consider 15 to 17 knots delta to be trivial? Even if it were, the fuel savings and overall aerodynamic efficiency does not stop with the speed delta. Retractible gear provides numerous advantages and speed brakes is not even one I have ever thought much about.
After a few hours retractible time, the insurance price penalty is virtually nil. In fact, with tailwheel time, my retractible insurance quote did not seem to have any added cost even though I had zero retract time. You might want to check into the facts on the insurance costs before commenting.
Just curious, have you ever flown a retractible?
Last edited:
Grum.Man
En-Route
I own both a retract and fixed gear so.....
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2015
- Messages
- 9,306
- Display Name
Display name:
Aztec Flyer
MBDiagMan
Final Approach
...a retract with an all out top speed faster than the latest Mooney iirc.
That's great! What does this have to do with the claim that insurance is inordinately expensive and the only advantage that a retract offers is speed brakes?
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
colojo
Line Up and Wait
Wrong POH. That's for an Acclaim, not an Acclaim Type S. Here's the corresponding page from my POH:
I've also bumped mine from 280hp to 310hp, but that improves takeoff performance and climb rate, not top speed.
I love my retract Mooney at least as much as gsengle loves his, but objectively I do believe that if not endangered, retractable piston singles are certainly out of vogue. Exhibit A: Cirrus. Exhibit B: TTx. Exhibit C: The entire Vans RV lineup.
I own one of each, the Mooney and an RV-8, and I love them both. My RV is so damn fast and responsive that I never even think about the landing gear hanging down, but I rarely take it on long trips or above 10,000' MSL.
The Mooney is a different beast. Up in the flight levels, as I'm powering through the thin air LOP at 220KTAS for 4-5 hours at a time, I'm glad to be riding in a sleek airframe with the gear up.
To be fair, I've never gone high and far in a Cirrus Turbo. I'm sure they're nice. The sales numbers say so. Just not my cup of tea.