![]() |
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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote: Big John wrote: On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 03:47:32 -0800, cavalamb himself wrote: jan olieslagers wrote: jan olieslagers schreef: Morgans schreef: "Rich S." wrote Isn't that about like a DC-3? Now *there's* a failure as a design! ![]() Is that so? Fuel load for around 4 hours of flight, and only one pilot on board, and it can only do 400 FPM at 3000 feet? Dunno. I would have thought it better than that. Nowdays, I would think that is still pretty poor for a brand-new designed twin. Anyone else have an opinion on the subject? Opinions are plenty, and cheap... But you asked, so here goes: The single-engine rate-of-climb seems little relevant to me. I always understood if one engine quits, the mission is to come down safely, not to go up. And then again, 400 fpm isn't that bad after one engine quits. Few single-engined planes can claim such a figure! Such stuff... Where did you get that misguided notion? Take off at Denver in the summer in a 150 and see what your rate of climb is. Is that even possible? :-) Depends on how late at night you try. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Twin engine prop rotation? | Chris Wells | General Aviation | 12 | December 19th 07 08:52 PM |
FAA To Change Twin-Engine Airliner Regulations | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 6 | June 13th 06 12:30 AM |
Twin Engine Cessna 172 crashs :) | Robert M. Gary | Piloting | 3 | August 19th 04 04:17 PM |
Twin Engine Cessna 172 crashs :) | Robert M. Gary | Piloting | 2 | August 19th 04 01:13 PM |
pressurized twin-engine, 16 to 19 seats buy | Federico Prüssmann | Owning | 0 | September 25th 03 06:44 PM |