![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Peter Dohm" wrote That confirms what I have long suspected: I could only justify it to operate from a higher altitude airport--which is just not in the cards. I wouldn't think that would be the only justification. If your are going to operate at a lower airport, that will see some high density altitudes, due to high temperatures, for one. If you are going to operate close (or slightly over) to gross, would be another. If you plan to go into and out of airports that might be a little short, or have high obstructions at the end of the runways, as another. If you want to do cross countries often, that involving climbing to relatively high altitudes, it would be nice to have better climb. If you combine two or three (or more) of the above, it would be a slam dunk reason to go with the more HP engine! -- Jim in NC |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Tomahawk Launch | niceguy | Aviation Photos | 0 | November 15th 06 09:48 PM |
Tomahawk/ Skipper | W P Dixon | Piloting | 46 | November 18th 05 05:43 PM |
Complex / High Performance / Low Performance | R.T. | Owning | 22 | July 6th 04 08:04 AM |
New tactical tomahawk | BOB URZ | Military Aviation | 19 | June 23rd 04 07:22 PM |
Are these Tomahawk Engines? | Peter Strong | Military Aviation | 9 | April 8th 04 01:41 PM |