Thought experiment... what’s the step up model?

[KLRDMD]

5 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Speeds for the F seem to vary a bit by year but 150ktas is not atypical for the early models.  I can personally verify this to be the case. I have actually done a bit better on non standard days but 150 is a number I can usually count on and what I use for flight planning. I am baffled as to why with 8,000 additional feet and 8" of additional MP your bird was just 5 kts faster.

Mine was a very early serial # 1967 model, 670006. [I have no recollection of who is in the right seat]

[MIm20c]

8 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Speeds for the F seem to vary a bit by year but 150ktas is not atypical for the early models.  I can personally verify this to be the case. I have actually done a bit better on non standard days but 150 is a number I can usually count on and what I use for flight planning. I am baffled as to why with 8,000 additional feet and 8" of additional MP your bird was just 5 kts faster.

I find that if I level off at climb power 25 squared I’m only about 12-13 kts faster at 14,500 vs substantially lower fuel burn at 8-10k.  Planning on getting a o2 tank and trying a max speed run at 18k but I’m limited to 2500/27 continuous, not sure I can break into the 170’s. 

[jetdriven]

2500 RPM continuous?

[Shadrach]

10 hours ago, MIm20c said:

I find that if I level off at climb power 25 squared I’m only about 12-13 kts faster at 14,500 vs substantially lower fuel burn at 8-10k.  Planning on getting a o2 tank and trying a max speed run at 18k but I’m limited to 2500/27 continuous, not sure I can break into the 170’s. 

The fuel burn for cruising "25 squared" should remain constant regardless of altitude.  I can do 150kts all day long at 7500. On a standard day I should get around 22-23" with the ram air open at that altitude.  Forget 27", let's just pretend I'm TN'd and leave it at 22.5 "  all the way up... how does an extra 8000' of altitude not result in significantly higher TAS at the same setting.  There is something missing in this equation.  I believe the good doctor's operating experience, but the math does not work. Does the rajay equiped IO360 make significantly less power at a given MP and mixture setting?  It should technically be more thermally efficient than the Conti TSIO 360 given the significantly higher compression ratio and it should therefore produce more power on less gas. 

[MIm20c]

3 hours ago, Shadrach said:

The fuel burn for cruising "25 squared" should remain constant regardless of altitude.  I can do 150kts all day long at 7500. On a standard day I should get around 22-23" with the ram air open at that altitude.  Forget 27", let's just pretend I'm TN'd and leave it at 22.5 "  all the way up... how does an extra 8000' of altitude not result in significantly higher TAS at the same setting.  There is something missing in this equation.  I believe the good doctor's operating experience, but the math does not work. Does the rajay equiped IO360 make significantly less power at a given MP and mixture setting?  It should technically be more thermally efficient than the Conti TSIO 360 given the significantly higher compression ratio and it should therefore produce more power on less gas. 

I was trying to support @KLRDMD claim that I feel the efficiency of the NA engine is reduced when engaging the turbo.  It does even out my egt/cht values but the speed increase at non o2 altitudes is not very good.  The climb performance is great though. 

6 hours ago, jetdriven said:

2500 RPM continuous?

That’s the revised STC max continuous power setting. Reduced slightly from the 26/28 that it was originally certified with. I never cruise above 22/24 and lately I’ve been enjoying 19.2/2350 for my training and cruising around. 

[peevee]

15 hours ago, KLRDMD said:

I don't care much for the term "driver" but yes I did own and fly a P337.

I still want one but I refuse to own another cmi engine. Let alone two.

 

Plus my partners are a bunch of vaginas.

[Shadrach]

3 hours ago, peevee said:

Plus my partners are a bunch of vaginas.

Could be worse!

Edited January 31, 2018 by Shadrach

[KLRDMD]

4 hours ago, peevee said:

Plus my partners are a bunch of vaginas.

We all knew that when they insisted you buy a Cirrus 

[peevee]

11 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

We all knew that when they insisted you buy a Cirrus 

It's a lovely airplane to travel in. I'll miss it. Given the choice again between the 22 and acclaim... I think I'd do the 22 again. Who knows. No one wants to partner on an acclaim so it's not an option. If I list a 22t share for sale I have people lined up within a few weeks ready to buy....

As I've said, I'll never own another certified airplane. Unfortunately prices have gone up a bunch and there aren't many nice exps on the market at what I consider a fair price.. I'm basically looking for a 360 or glasair ii at this point. I need to sit in a 360 to see if I fit.

Short of that there's a nice baron for rent locally, if it's under 300 an hour it's probably worth it.

[KLRDMD]

3 minutes ago, peevee said:

Short of that there's a nice baron for rent locally, if it's under 300 an hour it's probably worth it.

I had a fantastic flight from Tucson to Las Vegas in the Baron today. Nary a bump, 10-15 kt headwinds but that’s normal for that route. Couldn’t have asked for a better flight and over all that terrain with no good places to put down in the event of an engine failure, very comforting having the second engine. Well worth any extra expense, at least to me.

[peevee]

4 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

I had a fantastic flight from Tucson to Las Vegas in the Baron today. Nary a bump, 10-15 kt headwinds but that’s normal for that route. Couldn’t have asked for a better flight and over all that terrain with no good places to put down in the event of an engine failure, very comforting having the second engine. Well worth any extra expense, at least to me.

I hate you. 

 

I really like this 360, but feel it's overpriced

https://www.barnstormers.com/classified_1318271_Fast+Lancair+360!.html

 

I flat out can't afford the mx on a certified twin. There's no fing way.

There's a ratty 310 around for like 230 an hour but they want a few hundred multi to solo it. The baron I don't know what they want. There's a twin star too for under 200 but it's not a diesel.

[MIm20c]

1 hour ago, peevee said:

IThere's a twin star too for under 200 but it's not a diesel.

200 wet?  I’d be all over that.  An F model rents for $170 in these parts. 

[peevee]

12 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

200 wet?  I’d be all over that.  An F model rents for $170 in these parts. 

Don't remember. It's pretty slow though...

 

Looks like my memory was off, 249 wet

http://www.westernairflightacademy.com/fleet/#!/n980ja-diamond-da42-twinstar

[KLRDMD]

3 hours ago, peevee said:

I really like this 360, but feel it's overpriced

https://www.barnstormers.com/classified_1318271_Fast+Lancair+360!.html

I flat out can't afford the mx on a certified twin. There's no fing way.

The Lancair looks a little overpriced but not too bad. Probably within negotiating $$.

If you can afford the buy in on a SR-22T, you can afford to own and maintain a twin.

[peevee]

3 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

The Lancair looks a little overpriced but not too bad. Probably within negotiating $$.

If you can afford the buy in on a SR-22T, you can afford to own and maintain a twin.

Not by myself I can't. I have partners on the 22.

[KLRDMD]

1 hour ago, peevee said:

Don't remember. It's pretty slow though...

Looks like my memory was off, 249 wet

http://www.westernairflightacademy.com/fleet/#!/n980ja-diamond-da42-twinstar

1087 lb useful load, for a twin that ain't much. $249 wet is a pretty good deal on a twin, though.

[KLRDMD]

2 minutes ago, peevee said:

Not by myself I can't. I have partners on the 22.

Get partners on a Baron.

[carusoam]

Special for you, PV!

Engine similar to the acclaim’s... but more HP, 350...

http://lancair.com/for-sale/1997-lancair-ivp-n2zm/

You might not be able to keep up with THE Yooperman.  

This is not a recommendation for Brad...

(High strung single engine with a landing speed that is too fast for flying through the trees with a family on board)

Now, If it was a LIVPT It wouldn’t be so high strung....

best regards,

-a-

[peevee]

5 minutes ago, carusoam said:

Special for you, PV!

Engine similar to the acclaim’s... but more HP, 350...

http://lancair.com/for-sale/1997-lancair-ivp-n2zm/

You might not be able to keep up with THE Yooperman.  

This is not a recommendation for Brad...

(High strung single engine with a landing speed that is too fast for flying through the trees with a family on board)

Now, If it was a LIVPT It wouldn’t be so high strung....

best regards,

-a-

I'd love a 4p or esp. I can't afford either or insure a 4p

If I had the scratch the mako looks sweet too

[peevee]

12 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

Get partners on a Baron.

Easier said than done, ime. Hard to get people together. Hate to leave the group I'm in because of it.

[bradp]

@peevee sounds like you need an RV-10. 

[Guest]

12 hours ago, peevee said:

It's a lovely airplane to travel in. I'll miss it. Given the choice again between the 22 and acclaim... I think I'd do the 22 again. Who knows. No one wants to partner on an acclaim so it's not an option. If I list a 22t share for sale I have people lined up within a few weeks ready to buy....

As I've said, I'll never own another certified airplane. Unfortunately prices have gone up a bunch and there aren't many nice exps on the market at what I consider a fair price.. I'm basically looking for a 360 or glasair ii at this point. I need to sit in a 360 to see if I fit.

Short of that there's a nice baron for rent locally, if it's under 300 an hour it's probably worth it.

Time to look at PA30/39 twin Comanches.  Cheap and reliable, parallel valve IO230’s, factory zinc chromate,fuel bladders.......

Something like this,

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/23068681/1969-piper-twin-comanche

Clarence

Edited February 1, 2018 by M20Doc

[peevee]

1 hour ago, bradp said:

@peevee sounds like you need an RV-10. 

Too slow and I don't need 4 seats.

[peevee]

1 hour ago, M20Doc said:

Time to look at PA30/39 twin Comanches.  Cheap and reliable, parallel valve IO230’s, factory zinc chromate,fuel bladders.......

Something like this,

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/23068681/1969-piper-twin-comanche

Clarence

Yeah, maybe with rayjays.

[MB65E]

14 hours ago, peevee said:

I hate you. 

 

I really like this 360, but feel it's overpriced

https://www.barnstormers.com/classified_1318271_Fast+Lancair+360!.html

 

I flat out can't afford the mx on a certified twin. There's no fing way.

There's a ratty 310 around for like 230 an hour but they want a few hundred multi to solo it. The baron I don't know what they want. There's a twin star too for under 200 but it's not a diesel.

Good looking 360. It's a good airplane it looks like. Anything cheaper I'd worry about the build quality! It looks like money was not an issue during the build. They'll do 195kts all day!  An older NA legacy would be fun! But I would prefer the 360 as I think I could make the cylinders last longer than on the Conti. 

Don't skimp on having it looked at by a builder that has built a few. The build quality is all over the place on most. 

-Matt