Misubishi MU-2 Photos

This is my second office. It just got out of the engine shop for hot section inspections. The engines are running very strong and they start cooler and quicker than before the engine work.

<img src="" />

Cool. Several of my friends are private pilots, but I have yet to be up in one of their birds.

Nice!

Random trivia: the Air Force uses MU-2s to train their Air Battle Managers. Those dudes are weird. I've wondered why the AF chose a plane that size for that job. You'd think a 172 would be a cheaper option.

I forgot to add that the first shot is the air inlet to the engine and the second shot is the exhaust and third stage turbine wheel. The probe in the inlet is an air pressure sensor. The 10 probes behind the turbine are EGT probes.

In reply to Osterkraut:

I tried to get that job but they only hire retired USAF fighter pilots. Which I ain't.

pilotbraden wrote: In reply to Osterkraut: I tried to get that job but they only hire retired USAF fighter pilots. Which I ain't.

Seems like a pretty sweet gig to me.

Fact or Fiction:

• MU-2's have no ailerons

• The engines in an MU-2 essentially have no throttles (Garret engines?). They are at full throttle all the time, power is adjusted by the props pitch.

The second one was mentioned to me by by step brother (A&P) while watching a OV2 Bronco (very loudly) taxi, which I believe has the same engines.

In reply to aircooled:

Roll is controlled with spoilers. This is because it has full span flaps. There are 2 tiny ailerons on each flap. These are used as trim tabs.

The Garrett engines are constant speed engines. The engine turns 41,000 rpm at 100% rpm, the prop turns 1591 rpm at 100%. The engine is set to the selected rpm, 76%rpm is idle, operational rpm is 97%-100%. As fuel is added,by advancing the power lever, the propellor governor changes the blade angle to take a "bigger bite" and maintain the selected rpm. As you reduce power it takes a "smaller bite" to maintain rpm. This allows the engine to respond very quickly to power changes unlike most tubine engines that have to spool up. The engine is capable of 1000 hp, but is limited to 765hp due to airframe reasons.

Seems like it wouldn't be very fuel efficient, but that throttle response has to be nice!

It is the most fuel efficient turboprop engine around. At 100% torque it burns about 460-470 lbs of fuel per hour per engine. A similar Pratt and Whitney will burn 10%-15% more fuel for the same power. And the response is nice.

Makes sense. If an engine is designed to only run a certain RPM it can be very efficient. To make that all car-related, GM was looking at making the Volt's on-board recharger a rotary engine as it was more efficient at a steady RPM than the current I-4.

Thanks for sharing!

Constant speed, that makes more sense (I knew I must have miss-heard what he was saying). There are many constant speed piston aircraft out there, of course they allow you to change the speed.

I knew about the spoilers, I just thought it was an interesting bit of trivia.

I am told the planes are quite sporty. My sister used to fly in one for an air ambulance. Something about buzzing the delta (NorCal)...

I had even heard of an idea years ago of making a new race class at Reno using Misti's. That would have been interesting to watch, but the taxi out to take off for the race group would have been deafening!

Are you assigned one plane? What's your job, exactly?

I saw one of those today aborting a landing at Atlantic City International. Both the southern approaches cross over local roads.. Watched this one come in way too low and way too fast over the trees.. and he attempted the landing.. got within 20 feet of the runway and decided to rolloff and try another pass. I am sure that the ATC were happy with him

In reply to Osterkraut:

I work for an insurance agency, primarily selling aircraft insurance. From 1994-2010 I worked for several aircharter companies hauling freight and execs. I started out flying twin Cessnas and moved up to Lears, King Airs and Mitsubishis. In 2010 I was between flying jobs and started in the aviation department at my father and brother's agency. This Mitsubishi is owned by the agency. I am trying to arrange some lease agreements so that I can fly it for other businesses in the area. My brother and I are also considering starting an aircharter service using the airplane.

you're making me want to get my pilot's license something bad

Doesn't the MU-2 have a sketchy safety record? It may have something to do with the constant speed engines. Seems experienced pilots love them.

I know little about planes, but that thing is pimpin!

Kind of ironic that an insurance company uses one since they're more difficult to insure.

I used to fly a 441 with those engines and it was really loud. Fast but loud, how's the noise in the MU-2?

In reply to spitfirebill:

The procedure for handling an engine failure is slightly different than what is used in other twin engine aircraft. If the correct procedure is used the MU-2 performs very well with one engine shut down. In an airplane with ailerons one is instructed to raise the wing with the failed engine using the aileron, this improves directional control. In a spoiler equipped airplane,MU-2, if you try to raise the wing you have deployed the spoiler on the side with the operating engine destroying lift when you most need it. Another issue on one engine is that you are instructed to retract the landing gear and flaps to improve the aerodynamics. If you do that at low altitude and airspeed in a MU-2 you will sink into the ground. All you need to do is maintain directional control, accelerate and climb to a safe altitude then retract your gear and flaps. The airplane will climb on one engine with the flaps at 20 degrees and the landing gear extended at a rate of 400-800 feet per minute. When pilots transition into the airplane without proper training an engine failure after takeoff often resulted in a crash.

In response to bluesideup the airplane is noisy on the ground but when the door seal inflates it quiets down nicely. Above 12,000 feet or so I find it as quiet as a 441 or Aero Commander 690, not quite as quiet as a King Air.