Resource for choosing a plane?

On 5-Jan-2006, "Douglas Paterson" wrote:

Is your $10/hr "savings" based on going the same speed but burning ~2.5 -
3 gph less to do it in a retract (less drag, I assume)? I'm still getting
a feel for performance comparisons (hence this thread!), I don't want to
make a bad assumption on what you're saying....

Yes. Our 200 HP Arrow delivers about the same cruise and climb performance
as a 235 HP C-182 or Dakota, and burns about 3 GPH less per hour. That is a
BIG difference with today's fuel costs. Of course, some of the 182s and
Dakotas can use less expensive mogas, but only if you have a reliable and
reasonably convenient source. The 182 and Dakota also have a higher useful
load, but much of that is eaten up by the requirement to carry much more
fuel for a given mission, especially with IFR reserves (and particularly in
the West where it can be an hour's cruise between a destination and a
workable IFR alternate).



What about turbo vs normal aspiration? Another poster suggested ~$40K for
an overhaul of a (specific model) t/c engine, which seems to be ~2x what
I've read elsewhere. What about annual & "surprise" mx cost differences?

I've never owned a TC airplane, so can't give you even antecdotal numbers
for comparison. We recently put a factory rebuilt ("zero time") engine in
the Arrow. Total cost worked out to around $23K, including removal and
reinstallation, new oil lines, and that sort of stuff. We also overhauled
the prop at the same time, which cost an additional $3K or so. I imagine
that costs for a Continental TSIO-360 would be a bit higher. However, you
will probably get fewer hours out of a TC engine simply because they spend
more time putting out higher power, and at higher temps. We got over 2000
hours out of our "old" Lyc. IO-360 engine without any big maintenance costs.
(Never had to pull a cylinder, etc.) I doubt that a Continental TSIO-360
would be able to deliver that kind of service. There is a good article that
touches on this by Richard Collins in the December edition of Flying
Magazine.


If I'm understanding you correctly, the differences (not including turbo)
should be about a wash for flying 100 hrs/yr. Even if it's not (or if I
fall into the apparently common category of overestimating my annual
flying), $1K / yr extra doesn't scare me....

As long as you remember to put the gear down for landing.... Actually, the
real cost potential for RG is not routine maintenance but rather the
consequences of gear failure (i.e. failure to extend/lock) for landing.
This is true for both human error and mechanical failure. That is why you
pay higher insurance premiums for the RG. We had just such an instance a
few years ago in the Arrow when the nosewheel failed to fully extend. A
backed-out bolt in the gear scissors got hung up on the gear trunion.
Anyway, all repairs were covered by insurance, and our premiums didn't even
go up the next year. (It helped that the pilot -- a partner, not me -- was
able to stop the engine with the prop horizontal prior to landing, so there
was no engine/prop damage.)

The way I see it, since the likelihood of injury or death in a gear failure
incident in a light single is very low, the risk is purely financial, and
that is covered by insurance.

--
-Elliott Drucker

wrote in message
news:cDIvf.287$sa4.102@trnddc07...

[snipped great discussion of extra costs associated w/ complex vs
non-complex SEL]

Elliott:

Great info, thanks!!

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

wrote:
: Actually, the Continental TSIO-360 is a 6 cyl engine. Otherwise, I think
: Jay's comments are accurate. The Turbo Dakota is really much more a fixed
: gear version of the Turbo Arrow. (Same engine, airframe, similar useful
: load, but quite a bit slower due to the fixed gear.)

My mechanic owns a Turbo Arrow with the TSIO-360 in it. He loves it, but I
wouldn't consider an aircraft with that engine in it for anything I would own. It's
not really all that high-strung, it's just abused in its implementation. It's
essentially a beefed up C-172 O-300 engine. IIRC, 210hp at 7:1 CR. It needs the
turbo to make marginally more HP than a Lycoming IO-360 on the same displacement.
Stock "wastegate" blows goats (and cylinders)... throttled compressed intake gasses is
a horribly stupid idea. It was extremely twitchy and easy to overboost with the stock
system, and only marginally better with the aftermarket wastegate controller he added.

In almost all situations (except for all-out automotive performance and
aircraft useage), turbochargers on gasoline engines are a dumb idea. I'm not opposed
to owning an aircraft with one, but it would be turbo-normalized at most... no
full-time turbo since you have to throw away HP with CR just to gain it back (and
burn more fuel, require more octane, and cook your jugs).

Maybe something with an aftermarket turbo-normalizer? Comanche-260?

My opinion... YMMV

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

wrote)
In almost all situations (except for all-out automotive performance and
aircraft useage), turbochargers on gasoline engines are a dumb idea. I'm
not opposed to owning an aircraft with one, but it would be
turbo-normalized at most... no full-time turbo since you have to throw
away HP with CR just to gain it back (and burn more fuel, require more
octane, and cook your jugs).


What is CR?


Montblack

Montblack wrote:
: wrote)
: In almost all situations (except for all-out automotive performance and
: aircraft useage), turbochargers on gasoline engines are a dumb idea. I'm
: not opposed to owning an aircraft with one, but it would be
: turbo-normalized at most... no full-time turbo since you have to throw
: away HP with CR just to gain it back (and burn more fuel, require more
: octane, and cook your jugs).


: What is CR?

Compression Ratio. The TSIO-360 runs I think a 7:1 compression ratio vs. the
8.5 (8.9?)-ish for the normally-aspirated Lyc IO-360.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

The PA28-235 is a great plane, but is this true in Colorado Springs?
In the summer?

Actually, yes.

My Cherokee 180 serves as a wonderful 2-place in the Midwest, but when
I visited Boulder in the summer, takeoff and climbout were less than
spectacular, and I was 200lbs under gross.

Did you lean the engine for departure?

There is a DRAMATIC difference between taking off with a properly
leaned engine (above 3000 MSL) and an engine running full rich.

Yes, I teach mountain flying in the Cherokee-180 in the Colorado
Rockys.

The Colorado Pilots Association will present the mountain flying
course in May an August this year at Centennial Airport (APA), south
of Denver.

I am available for mountain flight instruction (your airplane or
mine) any time, at your convenience.

Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction/mountain flying are my vocation!" Eberhard

--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jeratfrii.com http://users.frii.com/jer/
C-206 N9513G, CFII Airplane&Glider FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot BM218 HAM N0FZD 235 Young Eagles!

Combining my response to several posters, all with great information. I'm
"new" here, yet this group is already giving me a mile when I asked for an
inch--thanks everyone for the advice! I've responded individually to a
couple of posters who touched on some points I have a specific follow-up
about, but I appreciate ALL of the responses.

Careful--you guys keep being nice to me, I may stick around....
--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

wrote in message ...
The PA28-235 is a great plane, but is this true in Colorado Springs?
In the summer?

Actually, yes.

My Cherokee 180 serves as a wonderful 2-place in the Midwest, but when
I visited Boulder in the summer, takeoff and climbout were less than
spectacular, and I was 200lbs under gross.

Did you lean the engine for departure?

There is a DRAMATIC difference between taking off with a properly
leaned engine (above 3000 MSL) and an engine running full rich.

Yes, I teach mountain flying in the Cherokee-180 in the Colorado
Rockys.

The Colorado Pilots Association will present the mountain flying
course in May an August this year at Centennial Airport (APA), south
of Denver.

I am available for mountain flight instruction (your airplane or
mine) any time, at your convenience.

Best regards,

Jer/ "Flight instruction/mountain flying are my vocation!" Eberhard

--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, Mountain Flying Aviation, LTD, Ft Collins, CO
CELL 970 231-6325 EMAIL jeratfrii.com http://users.frii.com/jer/
C-206 N9513G, CFII Airplane&Glider FAA-DEN Aviation Safety Counselor
CAP-CO Mission&Aircraft CheckPilot BM218 HAM N0FZD 235 Young Eagles!