or under the wing when you're fueling the outboards.

Other than a G model (long body with -1 engines, none of which still exist AFAIK), the -5 N model is the doggiest of MU2s. A -5 engine with 4 blade and long body make for rather poor performance.


I never saw the value. It takes 2 minutes to dump the tips and in an engine out situation, if you survive the next 10 seconds, the rest is easy. So they don't help during the critical moment. You aren't going to activate the dumps right when the engine fails anyway, focus on flying the airplane, so you dump only after the engine out drill.

They add the other new failure mode: asymmetric tip dump. If one sticks, or you only activate one, then things are going to be MUCH worse than if you had done nothing. 600 pounds out of balance is a major issue.

The only value for the tip dumps is not having an overweight landing on engine failure. This is not that big a deal, a simple inspection afterward and you are good to go.


Fueling an MU2 is no fun. I do self serve maybe once a year at most.

It should be noted that while the MU2 has 6 fuel caps, much of the refueling only involves the tip tanks. Of the 156 gallons in the main center tank, 75 to 100 of that is reserve, and there is only 30 gallons in the outers. So the 180 gallon tips are what get used for the most part. Only in the case where you are going to use all the range do you typically fuel all 6 ports.


I find departure to be more busy than approach and arrival. In 5 minutes, you are 10,000 ft high, 25 nm away, had 3 freq changes, 4 altitudes, 3 vectors, etc. By comparison, the approach is rather sedate.

The MU2 will teach you how to fly by the numbers and you will have a tight instrument scan. That being said, it isn't particularly hard, and it is very honest in that it does what you tell it to do.

The key to flying the MU2 is trim. If you are out of trim, it will wear you out. MU2 pilots have an epiphany when they get the trim right.


Boost pumps are consumables, about 1000 hours. I've had both mine redone. About $1K/each.

Same for starter/generators. About $1.2K each.

These are normal things for turbine aircraft.

Mike C.

Mike, have you had to put new boots on yet?

No. I think they are about 15 years old. Might get another 5 years out of them.

Mike C.

Mike,

Don't forget that the Solitaire and Marquise have more fuel in the outers (that's where the additional fuel capacity came from). Specifically (all numbers are usable fuel):

Main tank - 154 Gal
Outers - 69 Gal
Tips - 180 Gal

I personally always planned to land with about 600-700 lbs of fuel onboard, so it was ALWAYS a case of topping off the main, filling the outers and then a matter of how much I was putting in the tips for a given flight...of course that was just my experience and how I operated.

Dave

Same here.

You guys are landing with too much fuel. You have a bird that will land without drama on a thousand feet and a half of road or field. Unless WX is exceptionally shitty, in which case I carry enough fuel to get me to a MVFR place and approach 3x, I land with VFR reserve.

In a TP or twin piston, granny gas will make life uncomfortable if one quits. To each his own.

Let's refresh.

Fuel to make the 1st airport of intended landing, shoot an approach, miss, go to your filed alternate, shoot an approach, miss, another 45 minutes at normal cruising speed.

If the weather requires an alternate, it can easily put you on the ground with an hour or more of fuel. If the weather is above the 1-2-3 rule and has a published approach, you can land with 30 minutes fuel.

I will add that 300 lbs. of fuel is not much if somebody gears up in front of you, you have to manually extend your gear or you get vectors for the OPEC 1 arrival.

Fuel is the preferred antiperspirant of experienced airline crew. Period.

That is definitely "by the book", nothing wrong with that.

On many flights, however, the mains are not down enough to make it worthwhile to fill them for the next flight (I like a lot of reserve), so filling the tips provides enough at significantly less effort. Also reduces damage to boots from fuel hoses, and linemen turning my prop backwards.

Obviously, if you need full fuel, you do all tanks.

Mike C.

Shop found a stripped bolt in the nose gear. Replacing all of them. Check out flight scheduled Wednesday. Looks like if all goes well, it'll be February before I can start training due to scheduling conflicts the next few weeks.

Good catch on their part.

You will have a blast on that first flight.

300 lb's isn't a lot. But if you're gonna cut it that close, you play the game different. (See my post on the CLT Cirrus wreck)

1) you say "minimum fuel" to ATC
2) you say "unable" to the OPEC 1 the 5% of the time you get it and land at an outlying field for gas
3) you realize that landing under control gear up is better than running out of gas while putting gear down
4) you land on the parallel taxiway (or past the gear up) when somebody gears up

But I agree - I really don't like the way a gas gauge with VFR reserves looks when I'm 45 minutes out.

On a 2-3 hour flight figuring 65gph with an hour reserves I'm hearing topping off isn't the best option? I'd need 270 gallons max for that flight which would leave the tips half full for take off. Is this preferred rather than topping off?