Stealth Pilot wrote in
:

On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 02:02:27 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:GXVJj.107598$yE1.37839@attbi_s21:

I'm not so sure, however, that even you aren't part of the
phenomenon
- no offense meant or implied, just making a non-judgmental
observation. After all, how many of those 235 horses your Dakota
(?)
has do you really need? Wouldn't an Archer do 99 percent of your
missions? And with a much lower fuel bill?

None taken. You are absolutely correct.

Which is why we're looking at entering a six-way partnership (flying
club, actually) on a 1946 Ercoupe. 85 horses, 2 seats, 4 gph.
The
Pathfinder (immediate predecessor to the Dakota) is an awesome plane
for hauling a family in style -- and we'll certainly keep it -- but
Atlas burns 25 gph at takeoff, which makes buzzing down to a pancake
breakfast something you tend to think twice about nowadays.


You are an idiot. I will fly as long as there is air. Gasoline be
damned. I started without it and I'll finish withour if needs be.

Bertie

I look at it this way. Do I want to go flying? yes.
...f**k the cost. Lets go flying.
flying is about aviation not accounting.
of course it helps to be flying an efficient homebuilt.


Exactly. Once the technology was licked ther was always going to be a
way.