Cycling Forums - View Single Post

01-26-2007, 03:26 PM

On Jan 26, 8:00 am, Mark Hickey <m...@habcycles.com> wrote:
> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <p...@vecchios.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Jan 24, 6:59 pm, Mark Hickey <m...@habcycles.com> wrote:
> >> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <p...@vecchios.com> wrote:
> >> >Can't really think of a general aviation A/C with liquid cooling tho.
> >> >None of the ones I have flown, bunch of Cessnas from 150/2 thru the
> >> >T-210. Military trainers, none were, T-34, T-28. Even WWll, except for
> >> >the Merlin/Griffon types, most were aircooled radials.
> >>Actually, quite a few of the new GA motors are water-cooled,
> >> particularly those those that meet the new Sport Pilot specs (which
> >> limits them to two seats among other things). The Rotax and Jabiru
> >> engines are quite popular among those aircraft and homebuilts. Of
> >> course, the ancient air-cooled opposed four and six motors are also
> >> still being built and used in aircraft.
>
> >But I put those A/C just a sliver above ultralights. These are the
> >Nissan Versas of A/C, granted a GA person can fly them in less time and
> >for less $, but they are so limited in what they can do...much less
> >performance than even the lowly Cessna 152, which has little
> >performance indeed.'Tain't so, Peter. The aluminum spam cans (Cessna, Piper, etc.) are
> known for being over-designed - especially those like the humble
> Cessna 150 and 152 which were designed for ham-fisted low-hour pilots
> to learn in.
>
> Some of the new 2-seat LSAs will fly circles around the 152, in every
> major respect. Here's a typical example - got a MUCH wider ****pit
> than the cramped 152, lands and takes off in less space, has well over
> double the range, burns less fuel, and "auto fuel" at that - not the
> endangered and expensive 100LL - and cruises about 25-30mph faster...
>
> http://www.sportaircraftworks.com/ot...ORTCRUISER.htm
>
> There are others that are a bit more "svelte" that have higher cruise
> speeds, and others that are designed around a particular parameter
> (like STOL performance). But in general the new LSA are lighter,
> stronger, faster and more comfortable than the spam cans they replace.
>
> Mark Hickey
> Habanero Cycleshttp://www.habcycles.com
> Home of the $795 ti frame

What kind of license do you have? I have lots of hours in Cessna(I have
an ATP) and a C-172 will have comparible performance, uses car gas,
holds 4 people and was designed in the 60s. I'd be willing to bet the
A/C you mentioned rents for more than the $95wet, available locally in
Boulder. 'Spam cans', until you tell me your flight experience, I'll
hold off saying anything about 'real' a/c and rehashed, semi mass
produced ultralights. If Cessna decides to enter the sportr a/c market,
I'll be willing to bet it will be a nicer product than that one shown.
Geezzz mark, you sound lie you have flown this new wunderplane and are
all amazed...Rotax..aircooled?

01-26-2007, 03:26 PM	#136 (permalink)
Qui si parla Campagnolo Guest Posts: n/a	Re: OT Interesting video On Jan 26, 8:00 am, Mark Hickey <m...@habcycles.com> wrote: > "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <p...@vecchios.com> wrote: > > > > >On Jan 24, 6:59 pm, Mark Hickey <m...@habcycles.com> wrote: > >> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <p...@vecchios.com> wrote: > >> >Can't really think of a general aviation A/C with liquid cooling tho. > >> >None of the ones I have flown, bunch of Cessnas from 150/2 thru the > >> >T-210. Military trainers, none were, T-34, T-28. Even WWll, except for > >> >the Merlin/Griffon types, most were aircooled radials. > >>Actually, quite a few of the new GA motors are water-cooled, > >> particularly those those that meet the new Sport Pilot specs (which > >> limits them to two seats among other things). The Rotax and Jabiru > >> engines are quite popular among those aircraft and homebuilts. Of > >> course, the ancient air-cooled opposed four and six motors are also > >> still being built and used in aircraft. > > >But I put those A/C just a sliver above ultralights. These are the > >Nissan Versas of A/C, granted a GA person can fly them in less time and > >for less $, but they are so limited in what they can do...much less > >performance than even the lowly Cessna 152, which has little > >performance indeed.'Tain't so, Peter. The aluminum spam cans (Cessna, Piper, etc.) are > known for being over-designed - especially those like the humble > Cessna 150 and 152 which were designed for ham-fisted low-hour pilots > to learn in. > > Some of the new 2-seat LSAs will fly circles around the 152, in every > major respect. Here's a typical example - got a MUCH wider ****pit > than the cramped 152, lands and takes off in less space, has well over > double the range, burns less fuel, and "auto fuel" at that - not the > endangered and expensive 100LL - and cruises about 25-30mph faster... > > http://www.sportaircraftworks.com/ot...ORTCRUISER.htm > > There are others that are a bit more "svelte" that have higher cruise > speeds, and others that are designed around a particular parameter > (like STOL performance). But in general the new LSA are lighter, > stronger, faster and more comfortable than the spam cans they replace. > > Mark Hickey > Habanero Cycleshttp://www.habcycles.com > Home of the $795 ti frame What kind of license do you have? I have lots of hours in Cessna(I have an ATP) and a C-172 will have comparible performance, uses car gas, holds 4 people and was designed in the 60s. I'd be willing to bet the A/C you mentioned rents for more than the $95wet, available locally in Boulder. 'Spam cans', until you tell me your flight experience, I'll hold off saying anything about 'real' a/c and rehashed, semi mass produced ultralights. If Cessna decides to enter the sportr a/c market, I'll be willing to bet it will be a nicer product than that one shown. Geezzz mark, you sound lie you have flown this new wunderplane and are all amazed...Rotax..aircooled?