Throwing Shade on the Beech Musketeer?

Mooney Fan

Mooney Fan

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Sep 17, 2017
Messages
998
Location
Indian Mound, TN
Display Name
Display name:
Mooney Fan
Any CFI's/pilots with B-23 experience have any comments about the bad rap they have for landings? I'm kicking tires on one (160/hp) and found this article.
-----------------
These airplanes have developed a reputation for providing some ego-crushing landings for even experienced pilots. Student pilots who were unfortunate enough to endure training in the Sport all too often wound up with more than their egos crushed.

https://www.avweb.com/features/beech-model-19-23/
 
I almost acquired a nice A23/24 Super III when I was shopping for a 4-place. (The taxman got it before I could buy it from the owner.) My instructor at the time flew one and he said it climbed well with a full load, and would tolerate a load of ice better than most aircraft this size. Like most of the Musketeers, it is not the fastest in its power class. I don't remember it having any bad habits. The 160 hp models are a little more anemic in climb compared to the 180 or 200 hp models, but I thought they were nice little airplanes, and would make a good regional IFR ride. The Lycoming O-320 is one of the most reliable engines around.
 
chemgeek said:
I almost acquired a nice A23/24 Super III when I was shopping for a 4-place. (The taxman got it before I could buy it from the owner.) My instructor at the time flew one and he said it climbed well with a full load, and would tolerate a load of ice better than most aircraft this size. Like most of the Musketeers, it is not the fastest in its power class. I don't remember it having any bad habits. The 160 hp models are a little more anemic in climb compared to the 180 or 200 hp models, but I thought they were nice little airplanes, and would make a good regional IFR ride. The Lycoming O-320 is one of the most reliable engines around.
Click to expand...
Thx. And +1 on the Lycoming 0-320.
 
You have about a 5mph range in the flare where the landing will be greased-on smooth.

Too fast and try to force it onto the mains, and it will bounce in the air due to the shock-discs ("rubber donuts") in the landing gear -- no oleos to absorb your mistakes. On its way back into the air, it will shed 5kts for you. a blip of power will smooth the re-entry. This is the "porpoising" that is lamented about these planes

Ignore the porpoise and the third "bounce" will hit so hard it will collapse the nosegear.

Too slow and it just slams the nose.

My first plane was a sundowner, and we ran it briefly at our flight school. It did indeed make a grown man cry and quit aviation, the day before his checkride.

They are decried for being 5-10kt slower than their horsepower equals, not because of landing habits. Also the IO-346 engine, while smooth, is an orphan, so values for those planes are basically at scrap value -- a shame, as it's a good engine. The cabin is ginormous and wonderful and built like a brick outhouse. I think the Super A23-24 is one of the best deals going for light 4-pax fixed gear singles.

$0.02 :)
 
Back in the '70s I transitioned from a Cessna 120 to a Beech Sport with approximately zero hours of dual. Biggest problem for me was getting used to using flaps. Don't recall any issues with the actual landings.
 
I have a little Musketeer time. It does have a large cabin, and it just feels "solid". I don't know exactly how they did it, but it just feels much more stable than other planes of its size. I don't remember anything troublesome about landings, maybe I was just having a couple of good days when I was flying it. I do remember a placard about taking off with less than 1/4(?) tanks.

I liked that airplane.
 
Head over to the Beech Aero Club and learn all you want. It’s a wealth of information for $50.
 
schmookeeg said:
Too fast and try to force it onto the mains, and it will bounce in the air due to the shock-discs ("rubber donuts") in the landing gear -- no oleos to absorb your mistakes. On its way back into the air, it will shed 5kts for you. a blip of power will smooth the re-entry. This is the "porpoising" that is lamented about these planes

Ignore the porpoise and the third "bounce" will hit so hard it will collapse the nosegear.
Click to expand...

I try not to land on porpoise.
 
Owned a Sport 150 since 1996. Flown it coast to coast, slow fun plane to fly is how I describe it. Landings are no big deal, like any plane hit your numbers and you are good to go
 
Now I flew a Sundowner and loved that airplane, an easy plane for greasers IMO. One or two in front and the nose was heavy in the flare, but as long as you held it off it landed great. Let the nose drop, especially on a bounce and you better go around quickly. But I loved that airplane.
 
I had one for a while, until it was totaled in its hangar by a hurricane. Got it because I was familiar with the type and it was cheap. I got my Inst rating in one years before. Yes you can run out of the fwd cg limit with two up front, full fuel and no baggage. I kept a couple of sand bags in the baggage compt. Landings are an idiots delight. The MLG is almost twelve feet apart with a trailing link suspension, like an Ercoupe. It had a quirk on landing. Its called wheel barrowing. FAA issued an AC on this without naming names. Now canceled.
It is caused by: (1) the stabilator has lots of authority. (2) The airfoil still has lots of lift at low angle of attack. (3) Fwd cg. (4) Some pilots like to apply fwd stick after touchdown to ensure the nosewheel is down firmly. (5) If flaps are still down, it makes a big air cushion. The mains now raise off the ground and only the nose wheel is on the ground. Factor in a cross wind, a rudder correction and it has nose wheel steering (connected to the rudder). It is well known for it doing a ground loop about the nose wheel as it leaves the RW. Remember, a tail wheel airplane has the cg only inches from the mains. In a trike, the nosewheel is now several feet from the cg and the nose wheel is the pivot point. Check the logs for ground loop repairs.
The 19 with 150 hp has a 20 lb chunk of lead in the tail and no cg problems. There is an aerobatic version of the 19. They are strong as a tank. I knew a Beachcraft test pilot that was amazed by the stress the 23/19 wings could stand.
 
I always had the best luck with power off landings. "Those people" who like to carry power through the landing until the last bit of flare, or drive it onto the runway will be bitten by the significant difference in stabilator authority with and without power.

I like it for its "in-between" handling and it was a good way to introduce Cessna pilots to a good sink rate, much like heavier airplanes...
 
Last edited:
I have a A23/24 Super III. Just passed my check ride last week. Being a new pilot (that’s fun to say) I’m still getting used to the airspeed indicator with both KIAS and MPH. It’s not a great “short field” plane. But, as stated above, if you fly the numbers it preforms well. Overall, it’s been a great (inexpensive) plane.
 
Whats short field? I'm in Florida where it's hot and I've flown frequently to Cedar Key and Everglade City which is 2350 and 2400 feet respectively and never been worried about stopping the plane or taking off there.
I have a super III as well. If you want to get good at Short field go out and practice your slow flight.


Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top