![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Stealth Pilot" wrote in message
... never hinted that it was immune from anything. True, you didn't hint at it. You just came right out and claimed it. Bob wrote "the range for any aircraft is dependent on power setting", and you wrote "my experience doesnt [sic] support that". When in fact the range for any aircraft IS dependent on power setting. Bob's statement was somewhat inaccurate in that 50% power may or may not produce best range, and may not even be better range than normal cruise. But it's impossible that your experience would contradict that the range is dependent on power setting, because range DOES depend on power setting. [...] the overall performance of an aircraft is the result of the performance of a lot of its component systems. selecting one in isolation wont necessarily give you a clue as to the final figures for the overall aircraft. The basic aerodynamic characteristic -- namely, the fact that there's a L/Dmax, and that flying slower or faster than that speed causes an increase in drag -- is immutable. The specifics may indeed change based on "the performance of a lot of its component systems", but the fact will always remain that there will always been a speed at which the least drag occurs, and that flying above or below that speed will result in more fuel consumed for the same distance. btw I wasnt making any attempt at best range. I was merely flying across 300 miles of desert with a chap in a piper cub for moral support. you do assume a lot in some of your comments. Such as? All I have done is disagree with statements that YOU MADE. I made no assumptions, I took your false statements at face value and explained why they MUST be false. I never said that you were making an attempt at best range. What I said was that your experience could not have contradicted the FACT that range depends on power setting. now instead of leaping down my throat can you give the guy who asked the original question some assistance in selecting a suitable aircraft? His question is far too broad for any answer to be useful. I tried to make a sensible reply when his first post showed up, and found that there was not enough information in his original question to provide any concise answer. I doubt he was looking for the three-page reply it would have required, nor did I have any interest in spending that much time writing such a reply. IMHO, he has been provided plenty of *accurate* information in this thread -- your own posts notwithstanding -- to inform him regarding the issues specific to range, and a few different types of aircraft that might suit his needs. His budget is going to be the limiting factor in any case, and with only $40K to spend, none of the aircraft he might consider is going to go all that far with one fillup. Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Should I consider this plane - weird engine history | [email protected] | Owning | 12 | February 3rd 05 12:18 AM |
ROP masking of engine problems | Roger Long | Owning | 4 | September 27th 04 07:36 PM |
Lancair Columbia 400: The World's Fastest Certified Piston Single Engine Aircraft! | David Ross | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | August 24th 04 07:13 PM |
Real stats on engine failures? | Captain Wubba | Piloting | 127 | December 8th 03 04:09 PM |
The "Lightweight" Fighter is on the verge of overtaking the F-105 as the heaviest single engine fighter of all time. Talk about irony. | Scott Ferrin | Military Aviation | 1 | November 24th 03 03:12 PM |