A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Running dry?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 26th 05, 06:55 AM
Roger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 21:18:25 -0400, Roger
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 08:17:01 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:


snip

It is, but the 33 is still 2 1/2" wider than the 35, yet still more

The 33's envelope goes two inches farther aft but starts two inches
farther aft too because the tail weighs more.

Gotcha...I was thinking of something else and did a reference fart.

There are 33s and then there are 33s and there is a big difference
between useful load and CG. Early 33s (prior to 74) had roughly a
100# useful load while those after had a 1400# useful load. I don't


Oops... That 1000# versus 1400#, but I'd guess every one figured that
out any way:-))

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
know about the ones near the end of the production run.

With the early ones you didn't have much worry about CG change with
fuel burn either.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

  #2  
Old August 26th 05, 03:47 PM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Roger" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 21:18:25 -0400, Roger
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 08:17:01 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
wrote:


snip

It is, but the 33 is still 2 1/2" wider than the 35, yet still more

The 33's envelope goes two inches farther aft but starts two inches
farther aft too because the tail weighs more.

Gotcha...I was thinking of something else and did a reference fart.

There are 33s and then there are 33s and there is a big difference
between useful load and CG. Early 33s (prior to 74) had roughly a
100# useful load while those after had a 1400# useful load. I don't


Oops... That 1000# versus 1400#, but I'd guess every one figured that
out any way:-))


I understand the 33's with a IO-550 and Turbonormalizer max out at something
like 3750 MTOW and have about 1350 useful load. The heavier weight from the
engine & turbo do nice things for the CG, too. Add an oxygen system
(installed under the co-pilots) seat and it's even better.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Time, running out of fuel and fuel gauges Dylan Smith Piloting 29 February 3rd 08 07:04 PM
Engine running again, the good, bad and ugly Corky Scott Home Built 34 July 6th 05 05:04 PM
It's finally running! Corky Scott Home Built 19 April 29th 05 04:53 PM
Rotax 503 won't stop running Tracy Home Built 2 March 28th 04 04:56 PM
Leaving all engines running at the gate John Piloting 12 February 5th 04 03:46 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.