11 May 2025, 08:27 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 10:21 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 04/09/16 Posts: 562 Post Likes: +167 Location: Utah
Aircraft: MU-2, L-39, SA341B
|
|
Username Protected wrote: For operators, how often does the 18 knot crosswind landing limitation affect you? How hairy is it at that limit? I have encountered a 2x demonstrated cross wind. Was pretty uneventful. Plenty of rudder authority, you also have the ability to use the engines to control the yaw. I would say on a single engine it might be a much bigger issue.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 10:22 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 08/13/20 Posts: 228 Post Likes: +177 Location: KLOU/KJVY
|
|
Username Protected wrote: For operators, how often does the 18 knot crosswind landing limitation affect you? How hairy is it at that limit? Has not effected me. It's a heavy plane, small wing, handles well in crosswinds.
_________________ -Citation 501 -Robinson R66
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 10:29 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/30/12 Posts: 4724 Post Likes: +5320 Location: Santa Fe, NM (KSAF)
Aircraft: B200, 500B
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have encountered a 2x demonstrated cross wind. It's not a demonstrated crosswind component - it's an AFM limitation. I haven't run into another small GA plane with a crosswind limitation.
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 10:59 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/08/12 Posts: 7295 Post Likes: +4789 Location: Live in San Carlos, CA - based Hayward, CA KHWD
Aircraft: Piaggio Avanti
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It's not a demonstrated crosswind component - it's an AFM limitation. I haven't run into another small GA plane with a crosswind limitation. Never really noticed that before and could swear it was taught to me as max demonstrated. As supporting evidence, the crosswind does not appear as a limitation in the AFM section of the manual, it appears only in the POH section (which is not the FAA approved part). In the AFM section, mine is listed as max demonstrated crosswind. I’ve been in high crosswinds. No more challenging than any other airplane in those winds.
_________________ -Jon C.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 11:05 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/30/12 Posts: 4724 Post Likes: +5320 Location: Santa Fe, NM (KSAF)
Aircraft: B200, 500B
|
|
Username Protected wrote: the crosswind does not appear as a limitation in the AFM section of the manual, it appears only in the POH section (which is not the FAA approved part). In the AFM section, mine is listed as max demonstrated crosswind. I found it here. Is this limitation removed in later models? In the copy of the POM I have, it's also listed as a limitation that must be placarded on the center windshield post.
Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 11:43 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/08/12 Posts: 7295 Post Likes: +4789 Location: Live in San Carlos, CA - based Hayward, CA KHWD
Aircraft: Piaggio Avanti
|
|
Username Protected wrote: In the copy of the POM I have, it's also listed as a limitation that must be placarded on the center windshield post.
Interesting. In mine it is in the POH section as a limitation (and shown on placard). But in AFM section it is listed as demonstrated. Check your email…
_________________ -Jon C.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 11:45 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/07/17 Posts: 6976 Post Likes: +5868 Company: Malco Power Design Location: KLVJ
Aircraft: 1976 Baron 58
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It's not a demonstrated crosswind component - it's an AFM limitation. I haven't run into another small GA plane with a crosswind limitation. Never really noticed that before and could swear it was taught to me as max demonstrated. As supporting evidence, the crosswind does not appear as a limitation in the AFM section of the manual, it appears only in the POH section (which is not the FAA approved part). In the AFM section, mine is listed as max demonstrated crosswind. I’ve been in high crosswinds. No more challenging than any other airplane in those winds.
Jon
Now that you know your plane has this debilitating limitation I’ll be happy to take it off your hands.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 11:51 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/30/12 Posts: 4724 Post Likes: +5320 Location: Santa Fe, NM (KSAF)
Aircraft: B200, 500B
|
|
Username Protected wrote: In the copy of the POM I have, it's also listed as a limitation that must be placarded on the center windshield post.
Interesting. In mine it is in the POH section as a limitation (and shown on placard). But in AFM section it is listed as demonstrated. Check your email… Interesting - the placard is also mentioned in the AFM (Page 2-12.)
It sounds like it "should be" a demonstrated component and not a limitation. 18 kts is very low for a high-wing twin and it can clearly do better.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 12:13 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 08/13/20 Posts: 228 Post Likes: +177 Location: KLOU/KJVY
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Thanks to all of the owners for answering all of these annoying nit questions! Here are a few more:
The continuous icing speed minimum is listed as 180 KIAS. Vy climb speeds start at 150 KIAS and slow to 130 at higher altitudes. It seems that speeds below 180 KIAS are allowed and expected during climbs in ice, as long as you accelerate to 180 in cruise.
How much ice do you get on the underside of the wing during climb at speeds below 180? You usually pop through the icing layers quickly and its moot point. I have never had ice accrue outside of the boots. I also never climb at Vy. The plane can handle a larger amount of ice than I'm comfortable with. The most ice ive ever accrued was during my initial and i'm glad my CFI was with me to show me what's still acceptable. Quote: Have you ever picked up so much in climb you couldn't accelerate to 180 in cruise? No. Quote: Is there ever a time during normal cruise when your IAS is below 180? No.
_________________ -Citation 501 -Robinson R66
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 13:29 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 03/23/08 Posts: 7357 Post Likes: +4085 Company: AssuredPartners Aerospace Phx. Location: KDVT, 46U
Aircraft: IAR823, LrJet, 240Z
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Thanks to all of the owners for answering all of these annoying nit questions! Here are a few more:
The continuous icing speed minimum is listed as 180 KIAS. Vy climb speeds start at 150 KIAS and slow to 130 at higher altitudes. It seems that speeds below 180 KIAS are allowed and expected during climbs in ice, as long as you accelerate to 180 in cruise.
How much ice do you get on the underside of the wing during climb at speeds below 180?
Have you ever picked up so much in climb you couldn't accelerate to 180 in cruise?
Is there ever a time during normal cruise when your IAS is below 180? Only performance issue I had was in an anemic -5 Longbody in summer over the rockies and storms grew around us. That combination of little engine heavy Mu2 just isn't well suited to mountain west operations (at least not in the afternoons of summer). Only time I ever needed a "block" altitude (all below me). All the others were non-issue as noted above by JD. TJ
_________________ Tom Johnson-Az/Wy AssuredPartners Aerospace Insurance Tj.Johnson@AssuredPartners.com C: 602-628-2701
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 13:43 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/30/12 Posts: 4724 Post Likes: +5320 Location: Santa Fe, NM (KSAF)
Aircraft: B200, 500B
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Only performance issue I had was in an anemic -5 Where does the high altitude performance of the -6 fall with respect to the -5 and -10? It is in between or is it a completely different animal?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 13:49 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 03/23/08 Posts: 7357 Post Likes: +4085 Company: AssuredPartners Aerospace Phx. Location: KDVT, 46U
Aircraft: IAR823, LrJet, 240Z
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Only performance issue I had was in an anemic -5 Where does the high altitude performance of the -6 fall with respect to the -5 and -10? It is in between or is it a completely different animal? -5 and -6 are similar in raw performance. Maybe the 3 blade does a little better than a 4 blade -10 is a different world.
Long Body is 1000 pounds heavier than short body and that is a lot for essentially the same horsepower and wing. That is the big distinction for me. A -6 shortbody is not much different from a -10 long body (that might be a stretch). A -5 longbody is a modest performer at best (probably the worse combo)
_________________ Tom Johnson-Az/Wy AssuredPartners Aerospace Insurance Tj.Johnson@AssuredPartners.com C: 602-628-2701
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Mitsubishi MU-2 Posted: 02 May 2023, 17:53 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/06/20 Posts: 1610 Post Likes: +1682 Location: Tulsa, OK - KRVS
Aircraft: C501SP
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I have encountered a 2x demonstrated cross wind. It's not a demonstrated crosswind component - it's an AFM limitation. I haven't run into another small GA plane with a crosswind limitation. The HondaJet has a 20 knot crosswind limitation.
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|