Narrowing it down... Comanche?

wrote in message
...
Douglas Paterson wrote:
: Note, I'm not knocking turbo--it's just not for me, not this time....

... then you need lots of engine.


No doubt. I know that was a somewhat tongue-in-cheek comment, but it does
point to a serious question I've had brewing:

How big is "lots of" (i.e., "enough") engine? Is the 250/260 hp of the
Comanche's "big enough"?

--
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)

"Douglas Paterson" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
Douglas Paterson wrote:
: Note, I'm not knocking turbo--it's just not for me, not this time....

... then you need lots of engine.


No doubt. I know that was a somewhat tongue-in-cheek comment, but it does
point to a serious question I've had brewing:

How big is "lots of" (i.e., "enough") engine?
..
Enough to generate sufficient rate-of-climb given your normal load factor.

Is the 250/260 hp of the Comanche's "big enough"?

Depends on which way you're going.