View Single Post
Old 01-27-2007, 10:52 PM   #140 (permalink)
Bill Baka
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: OT Interesting video

Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>
> 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

>
> I read it closer..this is a homebuilt.....
>

What are you guys arguing about this for? If it flies I'll fly it. My
personal favorite is a simple J-3 Cub. It gets off the ground, can
manage 80 MPH air speed, has a real stick, and lands at just over
walking speed. I can't knock a 152 either, even though they sound ready
to fall apart just idling on the ground, they rarely crash except for an
incompetent pilot. I almost bought a new Cessna back in 1978 after a
dealer demo flight, where I fell in love with the airplane, except that
my wife almost had a heart attack when she found out the salesman was
not the one flying the plane. The whole steering wheel approach has me
put off a bit though, kind of like flying a car. 43 years of flight
training and I still haven't gotten my license. That has to be a record
of some kind for procrastination.
Bill Baka
  Reply With Quote