Mitsubishi MU-2

[rocket66]

Evening lads,

was flickng through the cao's today and came across the requirements for an MU-2 endorsement. I have heard that these machines are "widow makers" and am wondering why this is the case. They are sleek high performance machines to say the least.


Rocket

[eocvictim]

Google (http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=1440&bih=786&q=mu2&oq=mu2&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=557l1100l0l1311l3l3l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0)

About 10 links within the first page.

[troppo]

Caribbean drug runners and bank cheques (checks). Now there are two organisations that know how to make money. Often thought that an 11 seat Marquise could take on the Tauranga - Wellington sector against Air NZ Link with business passengers...but then again go read the other feedback :}

[DX Wombat]

The nickname says it all. RIP Don Ende. Look him up if you don't already know his story. A very courageous man, a true hero.
PS: I thought they were banned in Oz but could be wrong.

[jas24zzk]

Nope,
not banned. Special endoresement and currency requirements/limitations tho.

[DX Wombat]

Thanks Jas. :ok:

[rocket66]

Some things that I have read indicate that pulling the flaps up with an EFATO is the suicidal move. It seems leaving the flaps down is the way to go. Has anyone ever had, and survived and E-failure of any kind in one of these machines?

Rocket

[gnomie]

I cant remember the exact figures only that it was a long way from take off safety speed (?) to blue line speed. During training was taught and demonstrated that leaving flaps where they were was the way to go. Different to other light twins in that regard. If you flew it similar to a heavy you would fly away with it, ie. level flight acceleration to your SE climb speed and then get the flaps in, similar to the 3rd sector acceleration/cleanup, however this introduced another problem of climb gradient after EFTO.

By far though the biggest problem was ice, the tailplane appeared unable to shed the ice it accumulated which caused control issues.

Like most airframes they start out as relatively simple designs and then they get stretched out, put bigger powerplants in them and before you know it your aircraft is bigger faster and more complicated than it was originally intended, don't know for sure but guess this is what happened to the MU-2.

Having said that though I found it a nice aircraft to fly, as solid as and generally equal to or better reliability though most other aircraft in its class (with exception of the fuel system), wouldn't mind a Solitaire as a private aircraft.

[LexAir]

There is a short body MU2 (Solitair?) for sale at Essendon. Nice clean aircraft. A lot of aircraft for very little money.

[slackie]

Who remembers Air Central that used to operate MU-2's between Napier, Gisborne, Palmy Nth, Wellington, etc back in the errrr 80's?? Remember taking (as a pax) the "Rice Rocket" to Napier from PM (I think) back in the day. I believe CT has a bit of time in them.

There was also one operating out of HN recently in Air Ambulance configuration... it rocked!

If memory serves the problem is that if you retract flap in an EFATO then you effectively dump all your lift... wing is approx the same area as a C172. I believe if flown by the book then they are no more a "widow maker" than any other aircraft... just had many pilots that flew them like other aircraft and ignored the book, particularly in EFATO stage... and that rarely ended well.

Always had the "wants" for an MU-2 as a personal transport if I'd won Lotto, as mentioned elsewhere they are a lot of aircraft for camparitively little $$$.

[jas24zzk]

Agreed, but i get torn between the moo2 and the merlin

[henry crun]

If you do win Lotto slackie, you could make an offer to the RNZAF for one of theirs. :)

[tinhorse]

During my MU2 conversion at Smyrna,Tennessee - my instructor Reece Howell 3rd, who had over 12,000 hours just in MU2 aircraft said "Boy I am gonna make you do a flapless takeoff - just so you never do one again". Over 12,000 feet of runway, and we only just made it over the fence. Message received and will be complied with! A great airplane to fly, just so long as you dont let it get in front of you - you have to be ultra aware at all times of the conditions you are flying in. Great auto pilot - holds the airplane rock steady at any altitude that I flew - up to 20,000 feet.

[Howard Hughes]

Mitsubishi designers must have been away the day they covered ailerons at university...;)

[rocket66]

What's the go with the ailerons? If they don't have any what do they use in thier place? What sort of engines were common on them?

Rocket.

[gnomie]

I tried a flapless takeoff once and once only in a MU-2 at SY off rwy 16R full length. The aircraft was empty with just myself and fuel for Melbourne, I had been told that flapless takeoffs were not the go, but by this time I had about 7-800hrs on type, as the aircraft was empty and the weather was good I thought I would find out for myself. The aircraft accelerated and attained terminal velocity with absolutely no indication that flight would occur prior to aquaplaning across Botany Bay. I chickened out and selected flap, first stage was very slow to run and on this occasion it felt like ages. Once takeoff flap was achieved the aircraft flew off as advertised. Not sure what the guys in the tower thought, but lesson learnt.

[Oliver Klozof]

What's the go with the ailerons? If they don't have any what do they use in thier place? What sort of engines were common on them?

The MU2 has full-span flaps and uses spoilers for roll control. There are roll trim tabs on the flaps that are usually best left alone because of their sensitivity.

All MU2s were fitted with the Garret TPE331 in various forms. Very early models had the 575SHP -25As while the last of them had the 715 SHP -10s.

The aircraft has a fairly undeserved reputation IMHO. Unfortunately a number of high profile accidents tarnished its reputation early on, accidents mainly caused by a lack of training or pilot error rather than any inherent design flaw with the aircraft. In fact, the aircraft underwent a full special type certification review and came out with a clean bill of health.

As it's under 12,500lbs (5,700KG), not type rating was required to fly it in the US (something that the owners association lobbied the FAA to change), so theoretically a pilot could move from something like a Duchess to an MU2 with very little training.

Flown by the numbers, it's a rock solid, capable and fast machine.

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Apparently, the MU-2 was renowned for ice accumulation on the underside of the fuselage. The more ice you accrued, the higher AoA required to maintain altitude and the larger the surface area that was subsequently presented for further accumulation.

Nasty results.

[Tinstaafl]

With only spoilers for roll control it meant that holding an angle of bank (including 0 deg) using the control column as per 'normal' light twins while asymmetric was a no-no. Spoilers reduce lift & add drag so not exactly desirable to fly with a spoiler cracked open. Better to wind in aileron trim so that the roll trim 'ailerons' would hold the desired AoB, leaving the roll spoiler closed except for transient inputs.

CASA also requires additional training for flight into known icing in them.

[AdamFrisch]

Apparently, since FAA introduced the yearly mandatory proficiency training, the accidents have gone to almost zero. In fact, counting the years after the training, it has one of the best safety records of any turboprop twin with just one loss. So I think it was just too much airplane for people stepping up without any training in type.

[Grivation]

I started flying one in the US with about 500TT after coming off a 310 with a bare 3 hour checkout and flew it though two North American winters. How the f^&k I didn't kill myself still amazes me to this day. :\

[DX Wombat]

So I think it was just too much airplane for people stepping up without any training in type. Not so, Adam, Don Ende was an very experienced pilot who died in a MU2 and whose actions during that crash saved the lives of many future pilots. He is still greatly respected in Oz. This is what I wrote elsewhere some time ago:

It was during the time when there were a lot of unexplained MU2 crashes. Don encountered a problem - icing if I remember correctly, realised what was happening and talked calmly all the way to the point of impact, describing what was happening, how he was trying to resolve it and what effects his actions were having. His bravery saved many lives as the problem was then known. This isn't a myth, it is fact. His brother Jan, a former RFDS pilot, has restored a C180C formerly of the RFDS, and dedicated it to Don.

I'm sure someone from West Oz will be able to fill in more of the details for you.
VH-FDH "Don Ende"

http://www.nachohat.org/albums/aircraft_busselton_airshow_2003/PICT0018.jpg

[Tinstaafl]

DX, I think AdamF is referring to US statistics only. Over here there isn't a requirement for endorsements on non-jet types below 12,500lb (5700kg). Get a multi-engine licence in a Duchess and you're legal to fly an MU2, Kingair 200 etc. As a result the MU2 had a particularly poor safety record here compared to other multis <12,500lb. Unlike something like a Kingair which feels much like a Baron to fly, the MU2's handling is more akin to a jet.

The record was bad enough to cause a special review of the certification but was found to meet certification standards. Eventually the FAA introduced special training & recurrency requirements for MU2s - rather similar to Oz' normal endorsement practices for <5700kg multis - which seems to have resolved the issue.

As I recall, Don Ende's brave actions resulted in CASA requiring additional training for flight into known icing for the MU2. Don't think there's an equivalent requirement for it here in the US? I'd have to check the FARs to see what's specified for the MU2's training.

[DX Wombat]

Thanks Tinstaafl. :ok: I had got the impression that he was talking about all of the pilots who were killed and Don Ende was anything BUT inexperienced. I had the great pleasure of taking part in the 2003 RFDS Outback Air Safari along with his brother Jan and his wife and also the late lamented Wiz as well as many others.

[splitty]

I remember listening To Don talking to Perth as he struggled to regain control of his Aircraft that Night .......Another aircraft described his aircraft movements as it Spun into the Ground all Very Sad.

[walschaert valve]

Interesting thread this. I remember the Don Ende accident. I also remember a MU2 that came into Mascot after shedding a propeller blade over Newcastle somewhere. The aircraft was uneconomical to repair if I recall correctly.

A few years ago I found myself sitting next to Greg Feith (ex NTSB) at a dinner. Having left the NTSB one of his projects was to resore the reputation of the MU2. He considered that in the hands of properly trained people it was a very capable aircraft.

He was very enthusiastic about them, I'm would imagine that he would help anyone interested in operating them, probably as a consultant or something.

[VH-XXX]

Happened to see one of the MU2's at Essendon almost ready for flight again after quite a break having some components replaced.

Coming to a charter operator near you! (if you live in Melbourne)

[1Charlie]

Slackie, I think the aircraft you're talking about was ZK-KOH doing the ambo runs. A lot of the HN GS sectors. Dunno what happened to it. Was run by Phillips I think

[Bladeangle]

Have a listen to MU2 emergency severe icing ATC audio on youtube, pretty lucky guys that day.

[tinhorse]

By far the best aircraft that I have flown from USA to OZ - and in fact the best performing aircraft I have ever flown - absolutely solid in flight and the best autopilot that I have personally used - although the TO out of Oakland was a bit concerning because of fog - I really did not know how high the Golden Gate was - the rest of the flight was uneventful and a joy. Rule # 1 DO NOT FORGET TO PUT FLAPS DOWN FOR TO.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Who remembers Air Central that used to operate MU-2's between Napier, Gisborne, Palmy Nth, Wellington, etc back in the errrr 80's??

I do! :ok:

Dr :8

[Centaurus]

"Boy I am gonna make you do a flapless takeoff - just so you never do one again". Over 12,000 feet of runway, and we only just made it over the fence.

Not your fault of course but that must have been one very stupid and very cocky overconfident instructor. What about the tyre speeds? A classic example of the term "practicing bleeding".

[onetrack]

Here is the link to the BASI report for the VH-MUA and VH-BBA accidents, both of which were shock MU-2 crashes in Western Australia in late 1988 and early 1990.
The BASI report is particularly extensive and involved - and without taking anything away from Don Endes record and character, the report does identify skills deficiencies, and a degree of casualness, in both PIC's performance, in both of these MU-2 crashes.
Don's extensive record as an investigator with BASI did not immediately make him a highly-skilled MU-2 operator. He was somewhat short on both MU-2 experience and skills.

The CAA made it very clear during their response to the investigation of the MU-2 crashes in W.A., that the MU-2 was an aircraft with unique handling characteristics - an unforgiving aircraft to any PIC who adopted a casual attitude towards icing - and that there was a need to ensure that anyone requiring an endorsement on the MU-2 should receive substantial and adequate training with regard to the MU-2's specific foibles - that could pose a very real danger in the hands of anyone unprepared, or casual, or with inadequate skills and hours in control of the aircraft.
There remains an overhanging question as to why Don Ende did not refuel at Meekatharra, and continued on his flight with a highly questionable fuel reserve.
This factor alone shows a degree of boldness that might have been a accident-contributing character flaw, in Don Endes piloting skills.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/media/1537356/aair198800143.pdf

[Old Akro]

The FAA took the unusual step of conducting a certification review of the MU-2. From memory it found no fault with the aircraft, but found fault with the training regime for endorsements. Something in my memory says that after the endorsement syllabus changes there were very few accidents.

Start reading here:

https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/small_airplanes/cos/mu2_foia/

[Tinstaafl]

The FAR's don't require 'endorsements' or 'type ratings' for non-jet aircraft below 12500 lb MTOW ie Kingair 200 size & lighter. Get a licence valid for multis in a Duchess then you're legal to fly a Kingair and the like. That included the MU2. The significantly higher MU2 accident rate led to a certification review. The aircraft was found to meet the requirements. The next step was to mandate MU2 training & recurrency requirements via a Special FAR which seems to have done the trick.

[tinhorse]

Bladeangle - instructor Reece Howell - at the time I did my endorsement had over 12,00 hours just in MU2 type - no idea what other hours in other types - his knowledge of the aircraft was outstanding - he spent just over an hour at the aircraft - N756Q showing me how everything worked and why - I only had 3962 command hours at that time - the actual conversion flight time was 3.6 hours.

[60 & below]

I was lucky enough to operate MU2s on bank runs and night freight in the late 80s. They were a hand full, but when you got used to them they were a lot of fun. During my endorsement I was told a couple of home truths.


Fly them like a Fighter and you will be OK.
If you have a failure at MTOW lower the nose and accelerate from rotation speed 110kts to Single Engine climb speed 152kts below 500ft there may not be enough height to accelerate, if so close both thrust levers and land straight ahead.


We did some high level manoeuvres during this phase he mentioned.
If you get into a spin put in the correct actions and accept it will take a long time to recover. The props cover 3/4 of the length of the wing and there is not much clean airflow over the wing to recover. He suggested that you could feather both props which would give you more clean airflow over the wings to recover in a quicker time (yes the props would still be turning due to the spin but they would be causing less disturbance) If you had enough height relight the engines.
(Never had to try it out, would love to try it in a Sim)


During my time on the MU2s we found a higher climb speed in icing conditions produced less ice deposits on the underbelly (this is where a lot of ICE builds up at high angle of attack during the climb or cruise at altitude) As you have less ice deposits less extra weight and there for better margins and higher possible FL to get clear of the icing conditions.


Be safe

[Capt Claret]

Was it an MU2 that became the inaugural aircraft of The Collinsville Gliding Club? :E

[gnomie]

Yes it was, the MU2 had five tanks, the tips x2, the aux's x2 and a central main tank which supplied the engines. The tips held most of the fuel and fuel transfer to the centre tank was provided by pressurizing the tips with bleed air from the engines, the aux tanks held very little fuel and transfer was by electric pumps.
The early model aircraft had manual transfer only, so if transfer was not started early in the flight you set yourself up for potential problems later in the flight, fuel management in the MU2 was critical! A lot of pilots if using the aux tanks transferred these last as you could at least transfer fuel albeit slowly from electrical power.
If the main tank was allowed to run dry (and no aux tanks) the engines would stop-no bleed air-no fuel transfer from available from the tips and you have now created a well fueled glider. Another problem with the system was refuellers hanging the refuel nozzle out of the tank inlet as the hose was fairly heavy up high, this could damage the tank seal and prevent the tank from pressurizing, which you usually didn't know about until you were on your way.