![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dan,
For a new, 4-place design, yes. Absolutely no! Totally depends on the mission. It doesn't fit yours, even with the long range tanks, because you need to move four people all the time over long distances? Ok, the Star is not for you. But I truly wonder how many people really need that. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Thomas Borchert" wrote: For a new, 4-place design, yes. Absolutely no! Totally depends on the mission. It doesn't fit yours, even with the long range tanks, because you need to move four people all the time over long distances? Ok, the Star is not for you. But I truly wonder how many people really need that. In Europe it is different, no doubt. But the D-40 seems too well equipped to be just another C-172/Archer level puddle jumper. I really like a lot of things about the airplane, it's just too bad it can't carry a little more a little farther. -- Dan C172RG at BFM |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dan,
In Europe, the Diesel is a total winner. As for the other things, IMHO it really depends on the mission. I see the DA40 showing up at more and more FBOs in the US. I can't see any negatives comparing them to a new 172 - and a lot of positives. IMHO, a creating a new 172/Archer makes a lot of sense, since both leave a lot to be desired - speed among them. Even if you only think of the Star as a 172 that's 20 knots faster, you stilll have a winner. And that doesn't take into account how well it flies and the great visibility. The amazing thing to me is that the SR20, similarly equipped, is just 10 or 15k more expensive. IMHO, you get a whole lot more airplane for that money. But then, for Europe, they don't have the right engine for the SR20 - and according to Cirrus, none is in sight, either. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Thomas Borchert" wrote: In Europe, the Diesel is a total winner. It should be here, too. IMHO, a creating a new 172/Archer makes a lot of sense, since both leave a lot to be desired - speed among them. I suppose so. It just disappointed me when such a good-looking airplane appeared but didn't quite manage to be a replacement for the one I already have. Even if you only think of the Star as a 172 that's 20 knots faster, you stilll have a winner. We'll see. And that doesn't take into account how well it flies and the great visibility. As I said, it's an attractive airplane. -- Dan C172RG at BFM |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dan,
In Europe, the Diesel is a total winner. It should be here, too. A totally new concept for an engine? In the US pilot community? Come on, you gotta be kidding. half g -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Dan Luke wrote: "Thomas Borchert" wrote: In Europe, the Diesel is a total winner. It should be here, too. There's no good argument for using them in the States. Gas isn't that much more expensive (if at all) than Jet-A, and gas is readily available in the lower 48. When that changes, you'll see more diesels here. Do a comparison of the diesel and gas Maules. The diesel costs more, is slower (due to cooling drag), and carries less weight (the engine weighs more). I also think it's pretty ugly, with that Hawker Typhoon style cowling, but that's a personal opinion. George Patterson In Idaho, tossing a rattlesnake into a crowded room is felony assault. In Tennessee, it's evangelism. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message ... Dan Luke wrote: "Thomas Borchert" wrote: In Europe, the Diesel is a total winner. It should be here, too. There's no good argument for using them in the States. Gas isn't that much more expensive (if at all) than Jet-A, and gas is readily available in the lower 48. When that changes, you'll see more diesels here. Do a comparison of the diesel and gas Maules. The diesel costs more, is slower (due to cooling drag), and carries less weight (the engine weighs more). I also think it's pretty ugly, with that Hawker Typhoon style cowling, but that's a personal opinion. The trouble is that the days of 100LL are numbered. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() C J Campbell wrote: The trouble is that the days of 100LL are numbered. But nearly all of our engines can run just fine on high-grade unleaded. That's what will be in the pumps a few years from now. Diesels are popular in Europe because gasoline costs four times what diesel costs. They will also be a good idea for pilots who fly to places where gas is hard to get, like some parts of Canada and Alaska. As long as there's something at the airport or the corner gas station that makes an O-whatever work well, and that fuel isn't significantly more expensive than diesel, diesels will not be common in U.S. GA aircraft. George Patterson In Idaho, tossing a rattlesnake into a crowded room is felony assault. In Tennessee, it's evangelism. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() C J Campbell wrote: The trouble is that the days of 100LL are numbered. I keep hearing that. And hearing that. And hearing that.... |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
There is a good argument, potentially, cost of operation.
The Centurion could, if well supported, and up to its marketing, replace about every engine in the 140 to 180 HP range. That is a lot of engines. Only problem is the chicken and the egg. Who will pay to get all the mechanics trained? Will they put together good english manuals, pdf's, videos? Will there be someone to call during normal US hours who speaks english and knows the engine and the FAA regs? 100LL is not necessarily going away, but its possible that when it does, it will go quickly. Also, the less we use, the more expensive it will get ( at least that is my guess, perhaps someone else knows better.) "G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message ... Dan Luke wrote: "Thomas Borchert" wrote: In Europe, the Diesel is a total winner. It should be here, too. There's no good argument for using them in the States. Gas isn't that much more expensive (if at all) than Jet-A, and gas is readily available in the lower 48. When that changes, you'll see more diesels here. Do a comparison of the diesel and gas Maules. The diesel costs more, is slower (due to cooling drag), and carries less weight (the engine weighs more). I also think it's pretty ugly, with that Hawker Typhoon style cowling, but that's a personal opinion. George Patterson In Idaho, tossing a rattlesnake into a crowded room is felony assault. In Tennessee, it's evangelism. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Revisiting lapse rates (From: How high is that cloud?) | Icebound | Instrument Flight Rules | 5 | November 26th 04 09:41 PM |
Question, Diamond distance as unsuccessful triangle. | Roger | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | November 22nd 04 07:34 PM |
Cessna 182T w. G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Instrument Flight Rules | 63 | July 22nd 04 07:06 PM |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Instrument Flight Rules | 117 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
P-38 Exhaust | Stephen Harding | Military Aviation | 10 | April 19th 04 07:03 AM |