Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

What would you get instead of a Mooney for the same mission?

 

Don't get me wrong, I love my Mooney but sometimes I look at all the avionics and other options available for Experimental at 1/2 the cost and I get a little jealous.  That certificate definitely adds some ownership expense...

Posted
6 minutes ago, bcg said:

What would you get instead of a Mooney for the same mission?

 

Don't get me wrong, I love my Mooney but sometimes I look at all the avionics and other options available for Experimental at 1/2 the cost and I get a little jealous.  That certificate definitely adds some ownership expense...

For me, it would have to be something very different than a Mooney.  A high wing (Vans, Sling, Glastar), or an RV-8 or a Velocity.  A completely different experience.  Always "dreamed" about a Berkut.  Even visited the factory once.  Wish they could have kept that going and made it easy to build.  

  • Like 1
Posted

Since I fly by myself I guess I could consider something like a Curtiss P-40 or a P-51 in the same mission category....:D

But I think maybe a Pipestrel Panthera, even though I know nothing about them and they may be terrible airplanes...they look cool and fly fast.  Or maybe a Lancair of some sort.  I would avoid the Vans Aircraft line of planes just because I don't want to look dorky with my gear always hanging out...:D

  • Haha 2
Posted
22 minutes ago, bcg said:

What would you get instead of a Mooney for the same mission?

There are very few 4-place Experimentals . . . And even fewer with reasonable fuel burn / mileage. Even my old C gets 15+ nmpg. My wife can't travel for a weekend with less luggage space than is provided by my back seat and baggage area, stacked to the ceiling. That eliminates many, many Experimentals, and the 500+ AMUs to purchase some that may work eliminates many more.

  • Like 2
Posted

I would want to go to the next level…

and follow Turbine Tom in his Lanceair…

I’m not a big fan of Experiemntal… but Lanceair is certainly one of the best…

The person doing the building… has a huge impact on the final result…

Best regards,

-a-

Posted

In terms of similarly capable to several Mooney models (speed, range, useful load, 4 place) I think the RV-10 is a good candidate.  It is cheaper than very new long bodies, but more expensive than most Mooney's.  

-dan

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)

Whenever I look at a RV10 I think that would be a great replacement for my 67 F, but when I step away and look at the much higher acquisition costs, the build time, higher fuel burn for the same speed, and lower baggage compartment weight capacity, I am happy to keep my old Mooney another year.  While a new experimental with all the wizz bang electronics would be nice, I just want to fly and a lightweight 67 F with manual gear/flaps and a couple simple ADs sure is hard to improve upon.

Edited by Culver LFA
  • Like 10
Posted
13 hours ago, Hank said:

Holy crap! Can you imagine that with the 1400 hp turbine????

How much transition training would be required for that much hp?

1) A week…

2) A month…

3) A year…

All the excess HP… + it’s a tail wheel…

The torque effects must be huge…

Rotating wind stream at a maximum…

and the Coriolis affect as the tail wheel rises…

 

T/O procedure probably includes dance steps of a salsa dance… on the rudders…

Sounds like a blast!

:)

Best regards,

-a-

Posted
11 minutes ago, carusoam said:

How much transition training would be required for that much hp?

1) A week…

2) A month…

3) A year…

All the excess HP… + it’s a tail wheel…

The torque effects must be huge…

Rotating wind stream at a maximum…

and the Coriolis affect as the tail wheel rises…

 

T/O procedure probably includes dance steps of a salsa dance… on the rudders…

Sounds like a blast!

:)

Best regards,

-a-

How long did it take them to train pilots from zero experience to combat theater in a P51 in WWII?

That is such an interesting airplane.  If I were just a little more nutty - I would get one!

Posted
13 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

How long did it take them to train pilots from zero experience to combat theater in a P51 in WWII?

That is such an interesting airplane.  If I were just a little more nutty - I would get one!

Not enough…

Those boys had their orders, tools, and fuel… training was on the fly… :)

What my mis-worded question was intended to mean…

How much time it would it take ME to learn to fly a beast like that..!  :)

 

It has some upside…

1) Plenty of HP

2) Composite construction of a laminar wing…. Extra smooooth.

 

Need to look up the cruise speed for that…!

and see if the prop can be put in beta mode… for braking.

 

Best regards,

-a-

  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.