Newbe to the MU-2

[launchn]

The MU2 and Merlin fall into a group of aircraft like the Mooney and the Aerostar that has a small group that loves them and a large group that hates them and there is nothing in between. Personally I do not like the MU-2, but I only have a few hours in them. They do require a bit better than average pilot ability. I have flown the SA226 and 227 in various forms. And I enjoyed flying the aircraft. Especially the Metro 3, the Merlin 3C and the Metro 2's with the -10 upgrade. It also requires better than averge pilot ability. In fact, it has been my experience when I was doing training for previous employers, that pilots who were upgrading into the Lear 24/25 had a much easier time of it, if they had previous MU2 or Metro/Merlin time.

Finally a voice of reason. Well said.

 

[someguy]

Normally I sit back and read these posts as entertainment, however, this is a topic that I just cannot resist chiming in on. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the MU2, period! The simple fact of the matter is that it is a very unique airplane in more than one aspect. The bottom line is that it is very unforgiving. It's a high performance turbine that is relatively inexpensive and is popular among the owner/operators. Generally, this is a bad combination. This is a major contributing factor leading to the bad reputation that this airplane has received. In my humble opinion, somebody with no experience in the airplane has absolutely no business babysitting somebody else - regardless of the training. Train at Howell Enterprises in Smyrna, TN. and let one of their instructors do the babysitting!

 

[HS125]

Deus vobiscum.

Deus Vobiscum

Latin for God be with you.

Appropriate! :laugh:

 

[HS125]

Im MY expert opinion they are both old Piece of $hits....and there isn't enough money on Earth to be a babysitter for an MU2 owner.

how bout that?

Direct, to the point and said with conviction, I like it.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

You probably don't want to get mixed up in that situation if you have no real time the plane. It has very tempermental handling chracteristics when you lose an engine in it. As another poster mentioned, do a search of mu-2 accidents...you'll find a lot.

 

[someguy]

You probably don't want to get mixed up in that situation if you have no real time the plane. It has very tempermental handling chracteristics when you lose an engine in it. As another poster mentioned, do a search of mu-2 accidents...you'll find a lot.

I agree that getting into this situation without any experience in the airplane is asking for trouble. However, I have to say, the airplane handles just fine on one engine. What would doing a search of MU2 accidents accomplish? It would be no different that doing a search on Lear 23 or 24 accidents. It is a high wing loaded, high performance, turbo prop. It is simply UNFORGIVING.

 

[RkyMtnHigh]

Know the facts

You probably don't want to get mixed up in that situation if you have no real time the plane. It has very tempermental handling chracteristics when you lose an engine in it. As another poster mentioned, do a search of mu-2 accidents...you'll find a lot.

I do have to agree that you don't want to get yourself into a situation babysitting when neither of you have any experience. As for the airplane itself, it is by far the best performing, most reliable airplane in it's class, and those of you who think otherwise are just showing off how little you know about the subject.

The MU-2 has no "tempermental" characteristics on one engine, in fact, the airplane performs better than most twin turbines operate on two engines. (That insight does come from experience.) And doing an accident search (and actually researching the accidents) only goes farther to show that the airplane has never been the problem. The MU-2 does require a "professional" pilot behind the controls, and most of the plane bashing comes from the people who are "not" professionals and just need to boost their egos by trying to make people think that they actually know something.

Bottom line, if you want to fly the airplane, please get the training, and just have respect for what the airplane was designed to do. And that goes for every airplane out there. Reese Howell is one of the best instructors that I have had the opportunity to fly with, and if you have a question about the MU-2, there is the guy you need to ask (over 25,000 hours in the MU-2 probabaly makes him somewhat of an expert.)

 

[Amish RakeFight]

I don't mean to join along and condemn the plane, but the original poster should be forewarned that he's not babbysitting a newly minted private on some long x-ctry's.

I have no personal experience in the MU-2, and for that perhaps I should say nothing. But I have read a fair amount about the aircraft on this board from those who have flown it as well as independant reports on its handling including contreibuting factors in acident reports.

It would seem one needs some serious experience in that plane to ride along safely if you're to be of any help to the gentleman whom hires you to do so.

From what I have gathered, it has a very short arm aft of the CG, and along with spoilerons makes for a difficult time controllingthe plane during low speed flight regimes like takeoff and landing.

As others have already alluded to, the plane is not inheriently dangerous, it just takes sharp skills to handle it under abnormal conditions.

As far as reccomending to do a search on here about MU-2 accidents, its meant to direct the reader to look up additional discussion about he pros and cons of the MU-2, not to highlight any regularity in accidents that the plane may have and condemn it.

Point is, someone asked for adivce on a babysittign position in this plane, all I can say is, its a good thing he's inquiring about it.

good luck.

 

[GVFlyer]

It is a high wing loaded, high performance, turbo prop. It is simply UNFORGIVING.

The spoileron system also adversely affects stall and single-engine characteristics.

GV

 

[Say Again Over]

The spoileron system also adversely affects stall and single-engine characteristics. by GV

More ignorant statements by the uninformed, you going for a record today?

 

[Say Again Over]

From what I have gathered, it has a very short arm aft of the CG, and along with spoilerons makes for a difficult time controllingthe plane during low speed flight regimes like takeoff and landing.

Please spare me, this airplane has the roll rate of an F-4 when it's fully configured and at 90 knots, too many arm chair experts around here.

 

[G100driver]

More ignorant statements by the uninformed, you going for a record today?

You do realize that you just flammed the designer of the B-2 flying wing ....

 

[someguy]

I must point out that the MU2 does NOT have spoilerons. Almost the entire trailing edge of the wing is flap. The roll control is provided only by SPOILERS. The exact same concept can be found on Diamonds and Beechjets. In fact, its during the low speed regimes such as takeoff and most of all landing, that you have the most roll authority. You have more roll authority with flaps full than you do with no flaps at all. Its a common misconception but the concept makes perfect sense when thought out.

 

[Say Again Over]

Designer of the B-2 aircraft?

 

[Amish RakeFight]

The thread can be summed up by stating that the plane requires some finess during slow speed maneuvering especially if you lose an engine and perhaps having an aft CG.

It's a safe and fine plane for what it is, you just need to be more careful with it.

I think the original poster more or less has the jist of the MU-2 and what to expect.