Post by Tom Goodrick on Aug 26, 2008 19:03:32 GMT -5
Topic: Mitsubishi MU-2B (Read 58 times)
flaminghotsauce
Member
Posts: 680
Mitsubishi MU-2B
« on: Apr 13th, 2008, 6:40pm » Quote Modify Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flying also had an article this month about the MU-2 and how it's generally pilots that cause their poor safety record. American pilots need not get a type rating in this aircraft, so just a twin engine high performance signoff is enough to get one into the MU2.
I didn't have this aircraft, so I went digging around and found one my Bjorn Buchner, I believe. Painted with a silly whale design, but a nice aircraft. I took a quick hop from KIRK to KDSM to try it out. It seems to fly quite ordinarily enough. I didn't have much trouble with it. It uses the King Air panel, so no surprises there.
The only oddity noted was the groundspeed. My IAS was 186 knots, while the groundspeed was showing on the GPS as 233knots. NO wind.
Oh, then I noticed Tom's MU2 showed up on the Google search list.
207.119.105.95
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Barring all differences, they're identical!"
Tom Goodrick
Administrator
Simaholic
Posts: 3589
Re: Mitsubishi MU-2B
« Reply #1 on: Apr 13th, 2008, 8:30pm » Quote Modify Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your "oddity" simply tells me you were flying at 15,000 ft. What is odd about that?
The Mu-2 on my web site is very realistic. It can get dangerous if you are careless. The roll control is mostly by spoilers. The trailing edges are all flaps. This was needed to get a suitably low stall speed from this design. The design has a very high wing loading. The version on my web site is a -60, a;so known as an MU-2N which has the buldge beside the belly for the landing gear. It has a wing loading of 65 lbs per sq ft - more than twice that of the King Air C90 and 50% more than the King Air B200. The full-span flaps change the stall speed from 105 KIAS to 79 KIAS and change the approach speed from 136 to 103 KIAS.
This means that if you learn to fly the bird properly it does fine. But it is ready to drop like a rock if you cut power before getting some flaps out during the approach. Its spoilers can also be deployed together for deceleration during descent. But this can be dangerous and fatal if done during an approach.
I notice that you have to get the Avanti if you want all the panel gauges. I hope there are V2 and Vref gauges with it. My panels gauges are a little mixed up as I have developed them at different times and have not gone through all downloads to make sure they have full sets of gauges. If you just get all my aircraft, you'll have a pretty full set of gauges except for the V2 and Vref gauges some will be missing (you can make your own without much difficulty) and the new power guages. (On turboprops, one TPOWER gauge fits all.)
216.180.4.123
flaminghotsauce
Member
Posts: 680
Re: Mitsubishi MU-2B
« Reply #2 on: Apr 13th, 2008, 9:45pm » Quote Modify Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was at 10-12 thousand when I saw that speed. Without doing the math, it seemed too great a disparity. I see that regularly when there is wind, as it usually seems to turn to a tailwind.
I didn't have any trouble with the approach as I knew to keep the speed up, but taxiing the darn thing was hazardous. My model seems to want to tip over fairly easily, and I was having difficulty using my brakes. My pedals were slipping on the hardwood! Not realistic.
207.119.105.95
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Barring all differences, they're identical!"
Tom Goodrick
Administrator
Simaholic
Posts: 3589
Re: Mitsubishi MU-2B
« Reply #3 on: Apr 13th, 2008, 11:31pm » Quote Modify Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't do math. Believe the gauges. The density ratio at 15,000 ft makes the ratio of KTAS to KIAS exactly equal to what you reported. The groundspeed with no wind is the true airspeed. If you must do math, my table of airspeed ratios shows 1.201 at 12,000 ft, 1.241 at 14,000 ft and 1.282 at 16,000 ft. 233/186 = 1.253 which looks good for 15,000 ft. The groundspeed on the GPS can be believed when you have turned off the wind. If you did not turn off the wind then you could get that at a lower altitude. FS always agrees with my table unless some nutty FD designer has cranked up the indicated airspeed factor. They do that sometimes but it is never advisable.
I just made two landings. I flew the King Air 350 around the pattern first to refresh my memory on turboprops. It touched down at 85.95 KIAS and -246 fpm. I followed the checklist and used plenty of power (30 to 40%) on final with full flaps. With the MU-2 I touched down at 77.49% and -100 fpm but landed well down the runway. I used 35-45% most of the way. I made the mistake of adding full flaps about 1/2 mile out. That takes a while and messed up my speed and attitude. I had to push for 50% power briefly as the flaps took effect and reduced the airspeed. I was using 100 KIAS for the approach.
I have never been as comfortable flying the MU-2 as the King 350. I have 147 hours in the King 350 and only 15 hours in the MU-2. I suppose I should put more hours into the MU-2 before comparing them. But my approach in the King 350 was slow and deliberate while my apporach in the MU-2 was hurried. It is quite a handful.
My model won't give you those handling problems. But taxiing turboprops does take a little practice. In many cases you need to touch a little reverse thrust now and then while taxiing. It is also good to reduce RPM during cruise and descent in the turboprop though it should be max on final. Turboprops fly differently than either pistons or fanjets.
« Last Edit: Apr 13th, 2008, 11:36pm by Tom Goodrick » 216.180.4.72
Ed_Burke
Member
It's fun that keeps us alive; not healthy living!
Posts: 434
Re: Mitsubishi MU-2B
« Reply #4 on: Apr 14th, 2008, 6:26am » Quote Modify Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Until flight sim gets a whole lot more sophisticated we are not going to be able to experience the pitfalls of this aircraft. It cannot carry ice.
Several crashes have killed people in this type in Australia including a good friend of mine, a very experienced pilot but with low hours on the type. Cruising on autopilot at FL210, he tweaked the heading bug to initiate a 20 or 30 degree heading change and the aircraft, which had quickly bled off quite a bit of speed unnoticed immediately before this heading change, flicked into a spin from which it was impossible to recover.
As a result of the crash investigation, single pilot operations in the MU-2 using autopilot were banned in Oz.
A good performance aircraft but very much a maverick.
Ed
220.237.226.90
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ED B
Tom Goodrick
Administrator
Simaholic
Posts: 3589
Re: Mitsubishi MU-2B
« Reply #5 on: Apr 14th, 2008, 10:21am » Quote Modify Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree FS does not model ice effects in any reasonable way. I have never seen an ice effect other than an inoperable pitot tube. Ice has caused peculiar problems with many aircraft including the Canadair CL-604 jet, the ATR-72 turboprop and even the venerable Beech King Air B200. It seems to have the worst effect on aircraft with a high wing loading. In the case of the MU-2, when any turn is made the inboard spoiler deflects to cause the turn by dropping the inboard wing a little. Certainly a build up of ice on the wing could drastically alter the forces with spoiler deflected causing a sudden snap roll. With such a high wing loading, that snap roll would quickly become very bad.
I have tried several times to experience icing in FS. It used to be you could make a takeoff in icing conditions and the aircraft would lose the ability to maintain airspeed and altitude. But that was several versions ago before wegot all the new bells and whistles. With Real Weather it is easy to find icing conditions in the winter time. It is a shame FS does not allow this to develop. All aircraft that fly above 10,000 ft are liable to encounter ice any time of year as they fly through clouds.
Clearly this aircraft requires special treatment and imposes special requirements on pilot training and experience. Single pilot operation does not seem wise in any event.
flaminghotsauce
Member
Posts: 680
Mitsubishi MU-2B
« on: Apr 13th, 2008, 6:40pm » Quote Modify Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flying also had an article this month about the MU-2 and how it's generally pilots that cause their poor safety record. American pilots need not get a type rating in this aircraft, so just a twin engine high performance signoff is enough to get one into the MU2.
I didn't have this aircraft, so I went digging around and found one my Bjorn Buchner, I believe. Painted with a silly whale design, but a nice aircraft. I took a quick hop from KIRK to KDSM to try it out. It seems to fly quite ordinarily enough. I didn't have much trouble with it. It uses the King Air panel, so no surprises there.
The only oddity noted was the groundspeed. My IAS was 186 knots, while the groundspeed was showing on the GPS as 233knots. NO wind.
Oh, then I noticed Tom's MU2 showed up on the Google search list.
207.119.105.95
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Barring all differences, they're identical!"
Tom Goodrick
Administrator
Simaholic
Posts: 3589
Re: Mitsubishi MU-2B
« Reply #1 on: Apr 13th, 2008, 8:30pm » Quote Modify Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your "oddity" simply tells me you were flying at 15,000 ft. What is odd about that?
The Mu-2 on my web site is very realistic. It can get dangerous if you are careless. The roll control is mostly by spoilers. The trailing edges are all flaps. This was needed to get a suitably low stall speed from this design. The design has a very high wing loading. The version on my web site is a -60, a;so known as an MU-2N which has the buldge beside the belly for the landing gear. It has a wing loading of 65 lbs per sq ft - more than twice that of the King Air C90 and 50% more than the King Air B200. The full-span flaps change the stall speed from 105 KIAS to 79 KIAS and change the approach speed from 136 to 103 KIAS.
This means that if you learn to fly the bird properly it does fine. But it is ready to drop like a rock if you cut power before getting some flaps out during the approach. Its spoilers can also be deployed together for deceleration during descent. But this can be dangerous and fatal if done during an approach.
I notice that you have to get the Avanti if you want all the panel gauges. I hope there are V2 and Vref gauges with it. My panels gauges are a little mixed up as I have developed them at different times and have not gone through all downloads to make sure they have full sets of gauges. If you just get all my aircraft, you'll have a pretty full set of gauges except for the V2 and Vref gauges some will be missing (you can make your own without much difficulty) and the new power guages. (On turboprops, one TPOWER gauge fits all.)
216.180.4.123
flaminghotsauce
Member
Posts: 680
Re: Mitsubishi MU-2B
« Reply #2 on: Apr 13th, 2008, 9:45pm » Quote Modify Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was at 10-12 thousand when I saw that speed. Without doing the math, it seemed too great a disparity. I see that regularly when there is wind, as it usually seems to turn to a tailwind.
I didn't have any trouble with the approach as I knew to keep the speed up, but taxiing the darn thing was hazardous. My model seems to want to tip over fairly easily, and I was having difficulty using my brakes. My pedals were slipping on the hardwood! Not realistic.
207.119.105.95
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Barring all differences, they're identical!"
Tom Goodrick
Administrator
Simaholic
Posts: 3589
Re: Mitsubishi MU-2B
« Reply #3 on: Apr 13th, 2008, 11:31pm » Quote Modify Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't do math. Believe the gauges. The density ratio at 15,000 ft makes the ratio of KTAS to KIAS exactly equal to what you reported. The groundspeed with no wind is the true airspeed. If you must do math, my table of airspeed ratios shows 1.201 at 12,000 ft, 1.241 at 14,000 ft and 1.282 at 16,000 ft. 233/186 = 1.253 which looks good for 15,000 ft. The groundspeed on the GPS can be believed when you have turned off the wind. If you did not turn off the wind then you could get that at a lower altitude. FS always agrees with my table unless some nutty FD designer has cranked up the indicated airspeed factor. They do that sometimes but it is never advisable.
I just made two landings. I flew the King Air 350 around the pattern first to refresh my memory on turboprops. It touched down at 85.95 KIAS and -246 fpm. I followed the checklist and used plenty of power (30 to 40%) on final with full flaps. With the MU-2 I touched down at 77.49% and -100 fpm but landed well down the runway. I used 35-45% most of the way. I made the mistake of adding full flaps about 1/2 mile out. That takes a while and messed up my speed and attitude. I had to push for 50% power briefly as the flaps took effect and reduced the airspeed. I was using 100 KIAS for the approach.
I have never been as comfortable flying the MU-2 as the King 350. I have 147 hours in the King 350 and only 15 hours in the MU-2. I suppose I should put more hours into the MU-2 before comparing them. But my approach in the King 350 was slow and deliberate while my apporach in the MU-2 was hurried. It is quite a handful.
My model won't give you those handling problems. But taxiing turboprops does take a little practice. In many cases you need to touch a little reverse thrust now and then while taxiing. It is also good to reduce RPM during cruise and descent in the turboprop though it should be max on final. Turboprops fly differently than either pistons or fanjets.
« Last Edit: Apr 13th, 2008, 11:36pm by Tom Goodrick » 216.180.4.72
Ed_Burke
Member
It's fun that keeps us alive; not healthy living!
Posts: 434
Re: Mitsubishi MU-2B
« Reply #4 on: Apr 14th, 2008, 6:26am » Quote Modify Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Until flight sim gets a whole lot more sophisticated we are not going to be able to experience the pitfalls of this aircraft. It cannot carry ice.
Several crashes have killed people in this type in Australia including a good friend of mine, a very experienced pilot but with low hours on the type. Cruising on autopilot at FL210, he tweaked the heading bug to initiate a 20 or 30 degree heading change and the aircraft, which had quickly bled off quite a bit of speed unnoticed immediately before this heading change, flicked into a spin from which it was impossible to recover.
As a result of the crash investigation, single pilot operations in the MU-2 using autopilot were banned in Oz.
A good performance aircraft but very much a maverick.
Ed
220.237.226.90
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ED B
Tom Goodrick
Administrator
Simaholic
Posts: 3589
Re: Mitsubishi MU-2B
« Reply #5 on: Apr 14th, 2008, 10:21am » Quote Modify Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree FS does not model ice effects in any reasonable way. I have never seen an ice effect other than an inoperable pitot tube. Ice has caused peculiar problems with many aircraft including the Canadair CL-604 jet, the ATR-72 turboprop and even the venerable Beech King Air B200. It seems to have the worst effect on aircraft with a high wing loading. In the case of the MU-2, when any turn is made the inboard spoiler deflects to cause the turn by dropping the inboard wing a little. Certainly a build up of ice on the wing could drastically alter the forces with spoiler deflected causing a sudden snap roll. With such a high wing loading, that snap roll would quickly become very bad.
I have tried several times to experience icing in FS. It used to be you could make a takeoff in icing conditions and the aircraft would lose the ability to maintain airspeed and altitude. But that was several versions ago before wegot all the new bells and whistles. With Real Weather it is easy to find icing conditions in the winter time. It is a shame FS does not allow this to develop. All aircraft that fly above 10,000 ft are liable to encounter ice any time of year as they fly through clouds.
Clearly this aircraft requires special treatment and imposes special requirements on pilot training and experience. Single pilot operation does not seem wise in any event.