NEW MU-2 in HAMILTON

[keen]

Been gone from NZ for while but hear there's a MU-2 to soon be based in Hamilton NZ.
Anyone know whats going on??

[gaunty]

Hope it's for freight only and they have some seriously experienced drivers.

Back to the future in NZ it seems.:rolleyes:

[Laikim Liklik Susu]

Mucked Up 2...

Hirohito's Revenge

Why anyone bothers is beyond me.

[gaunty]

When you buy one you are solving someone elses problem.

The answer is always in the used price, which is less than half similar vintage Conquest and B200.

If my memory serves me correctly Gross Weight gets you maybe mid 200s, right in the middle of the most dangerous place to be in an MU2.

With a Vyse if I recall around 150KTS you'd better hope Mr Garretts engines are kind to you.

Wing loading up there with the Lear 25s and F15s :rolleyes: on heaps less grunt.

[Laikim Liklik Susu]

A hang-over from Japan's last ditch WW2 fighter, the Shoki.

Such an apt cross-language name! Wing loading was HORRENDOUS, and killed more pilots trying to fly the damned thing than combat losses!

The Mucked Up 2 should have remained with the JASDF.

[Capt Fathom]

What a crock!
It's just a bloody aeorplane.
Fly it by the book like any other endorsement.

[oicur12]

It is like any other aircraft that has a terrible safety record. No other GA aircraft has had such a lousy record.

The problem child was the Marquis that could cruise up in the 20's, low IAS, high nose att and a venturi shaped belly that could ice up easily. Stay low with high IAS would greatly help.

High wing loading meant fickle stall qualities and higher app speeds than other turboprops but good in turbulence.

Gaunty, did you ever lay eyes on VH-SMZ late eighties with its new Douglas aviation paint scheme? Very flash.

[MrBlobby05]

Its probably the one that has been in the hangar in Taupo for the last four years being fixed because some monkeys ( no offence to those who look like monkeys) in Australia hacked it to pieces.

If it is the one its supposed to be used for Air Ambulance ops, but ill believe it when I see it. I dont imagine they will be able to get someone to fly it that will meet the insurance reqts, and that will accept the employment conditions. Unless however they change the conditions.

Its got the baby engines so dont expect it to be doing anything very fast.

[18-Wheeler]

The problem is that not many people are taught how to fly them properly.
As mentioned above, they're just a plane. They fly along just fine in icing condition - if you know how!

[InTransit]

Proper training will always mean your prepared for anything...;)

One of the other big problems for the Mu2 (other than body icing) is the fact that roll control is through the use of spoilers. As you can imagine, there is a BIG loss of lift when trying to turn (or keep the thing straight as the case maybe with an engine out).

[keen]

It is just an aeroplane, get training and fly it properly and you will enjoy and be safe.

The spoilers are a good lift dumper but for s.e operations they have trim ailerons which remove spoilers.

The MU2's reputation was earnt in the 70-80's, if you look at the accident rates for comparable types in the last 10years the MU2 is low as the training deficencys have been addressed.

The MU2 has a deceiving level of performance and can not be flown by a low time pilot.

Any air plane will fall from the sky if taken beyond its limits in icing conditions, they have no tendency for body icing untill you reach 160kts, funny enough the limit for flight in icing conditions is 180kts (all this was demonstrated in the FAA icing trials of '96)

If it is from Taupo any idea if they have crews yet?

[Laikim Liklik Susu]

The only reason the accident / incident rate for the MU-2 has dropped off is because no-one uses them! That's not a joke, but reality.

Granted, if you fly the aeroplane properly, it is just that - an aeroplane. But, it has quite a few vices that really need NOT be there in the first place!

In fact, I have not seen an MU-2 in Australian skies for at least a decade. I believe SOME linger in South Aus and perhaps WA, but haven't seen one FLYING on the east coast for a LONG time indeed.

[John Eacott]

I have not seen an MU-2 in Australian skies for at least a decade

There's one in my hangar, goes out regularly....and comes back in one piece, too :p

[Howard Hughes]

There's one in my hangar, goes out regularly....and comes back in one piece, too

Show off!! ;)

Can I have a turn??

Cheers, HH.

:ok:

[John Eacott]

Not mine:D

I let other brave mortals run up and down runways to get airborne these days; I stick to the sensible stuff that hovers and goes whichever way you point it ;)

[Howard Hughes]

Not mine

Oh well it was worth a try!!;)

Cheers, HH.

:ok:

[keen]

Laikim Liklik Susu, are you educated in respect of the MU2 or are you just making noise for the sake if it???

What do you mean when you say vices, are you refering to the uneque characteristics that the MU2 has, due to the fact that it was designed well ahead of its time??? All these things are perfectly normal sideeffects of the advanced design and so long as one is educated about them they are no problem.

There are still pleanty of MU2's flying in the U.S, where incidently the is a larger percentage of KingAir, C208 or Lear accidents.

[Laikim Liklik Susu]

I must be just making noises for the fun of it eh...

Yes, the MU2 is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO advanced, even for its time that still noone, some 40+ years after it first flew, has bothered copying most of it's characteristics and design marvels. You call them "unique traits" or somesuch. And what is the difference between a unique trait and a vice? A degree of Potato, potatoe, tomato, tomatoe...

There is a larger percentage of KingAir, Learjet etc accidents in the USA because they use them more than MU2's! It's that damned simple! They made 800 MU2's in total. Now, if you think there are fewer Lears and Kingairs and Metros in the USA than MU2's plying their trade, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

Like I said previously, it is just an aeroplane, and if you are taught to fly it properly, there is reduced room for errors, but the aeroplane DOES indeed have "unique traits"...

[tinpis]

I let other brave mortals run up and down runways to get airborne these days; I stick to the sensible stuff that hovers and goes whichever way you point it

The MU2 of the Helo world? The R22?

:}

[John Eacott]

R22 :yuk:

Go wash your mouth out ;)

[splatgothebugs]

As far as i know it is being used for air ambulance work and has a high time driver lined up already.

2nd hand info from a realiable source

splat :ok:

[Captain Starlight]

One of the major problems with the MU2 was the characteristic that ice would accumulate on the belly.
It would get heavier, the auto pilot would trim back to maintain altitude until
it eventually stalled and spun in with a tonne or more ice accretion underneath.

The Dash 8 has a similar exposure in certain flight regimes and in icing conditions to do the same.
A procedure exists to minimize the probability of picking up a lot more ice on a lot bigger belly.

Aviation is like that, it learns from experience and modifies procedures and designs.

A lot was learned from the WA MU2 that spun in with the pilot describing in detail all actions and the results.

Two significant A/D's were mandated to address the MU2 Icing Spin.
One was a fuselage Ice Detection Warning System and the other was an Autopilot mod to auto disengage if IAS dropped to 130kias.

To the best of my knowledge, the only two MU2 prangs in Australia were ice related.

The Cessna Caravan also has a tragic record in icing encounters, even if equipped with deicing. (more than 26 fatals).
Flight Safety teach Caravan drivers some deicing flight manoeuvres that assist in ice shedding.

With both aircraft, known icing encounters can be a challenging environment.

Both types respond well to serious training, particularly the little rice burner.

It is a pocket rocket, yet it didn't seem to kill the night freight drivers when it was the weapon of choice.
One factor there was that most had failed cabin pressure controllers and didn't venture into the flight levels.

NZ operations are more likely to have serious icing encounters, the A/D's should be a partial defence.

When it's not killing you, it's one hell of an exhilerating machine,
giving near jet performance.
Yes, it does ask a lot of it's drivers, just knowing the numbers and flying the numbers.

One of the two N registered ones at Essendon is owned by a private pilot who bought it when he had 300hrs total time.
He now has 1,100 hrs MU2 time, and goes to the States once a year for recurrent training.

[Howard Hughes]

To the best of my knowledge, the only two MU2 prangs in Australia were ice related.

What about the one on final at Tullamarine in the late eighties/early nineties?

Anyone know the cause of that one? Inexperienced pilot perhaps?

Cheers, HH.

:ok:

[St Elmos Fire]

And the one in Bathurst in the early 90's. No Ice there either. It was also on final. :(

[The Messiah]

Lack of training is the problem, not the aeroplane.

Someone said earlier about its nasty stall characteristics, what a load of rubbish. The spoilers remained effective right throughout the stall and it stalled like a C150. With ice I'm sure it was a different story but I always aimed not to stall it when I got ice, which seemed to work.

Everyone I know who flew it thoroughly enjoyed every second of it as did I.

[1279shp]

Love em, some of the most fun flying times. Agree training was prob.

Here's some facts

Wing area 177sq/ft - same as C177 Cardinal!
Max T/O 10,800lbs.
Wing load 61lbs-sq/ft!

The 'G' model I gunned had 665shp '-1-151A' Garretts and three bladers, later versions had 1000(derated 715) and 4 blades. The short bodies were very quik!

Marquise (http://www.airliners.net/open.file/336987/M/)