What GA needs

"Andrew Sarangan" wrote in message
ups.com...

In order to appeal to the next generation, this is what I think we
need:
- a small turbine engine suitable for GA aircraft with fewer moving
parts and smoother operation
- gas mileage comparable to an SUV
- a fully composite airframe
- molded aesthetic interiors
- cost about 2-3x the price of a luxury car


Rotary engine - Poor boys turbine. Greatly reduce the moving part count, for
weight, cost and reliability, and keep some of the fuel efficiency.

Noise - The need for wearing a headset has to go.

Vibration - Hard for me to understand with today's technology, why we are
still flying aircraft with reciprocating engines, hard coupled to flywheels
(propellers). Every other vehicle I can think of provides some kind of
dampening between the engine and final drive. Would make a tremendous
deference in creature comforts, if not reliability as well.

Maxwell wrote:

Noise - The need for wearing a headset has to go.


Oh you kids. When I got my PP-SEL back in 79 nobody at the airport wore
headsets. Of course we are all deaf today. But I don't see headsets as a
negative. Kids grow up wearing bike helmets and iPod ear buds. They are used
to wearing stuff on their heads.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Maxwell wrote:

Noise - The need for wearing a headset has to go.


Oh you kids. When I got my PP-SEL back in 79 nobody at the airport wore
headsets. Of course we are all deaf today. But I don't see headsets as a
negative. Kids grow up wearing bike helmets and iPod ear buds. They are
used to wearing stuff on their heads.


I hear ya, I soloed in 71, and got my PP in 72. So spent a lot of years
flying without them too. If fact, if I could still rent aircraft with decent
overhead speakers, I probably still wouldn't use them. But it seems most
rental aircraft have the speakers blown out from renters wearing ear plugs,
and cranking up the volume.

But from my experience, noise levels have always been a consideration to a
lot of the people I have introduced to GA. And the world is becoming more
demanding of creature comforts every day.

Maxwell wrote:


But from my experience, noise levels have always been a consideration
to a lot of the people I have introduced to GA. And the world is
becoming more demanding of creature comforts every day.

No Sh!t, how do you think Bose gets away with selling $1000 headsets.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Maxwell wrote:


But from my experience, noise levels have always been a consideration
to a lot of the people I have introduced to GA. And the world is
becoming more demanding of creature comforts every day.

No Sh!t, how do you think Bose gets away with selling $1000 headsets.


But if people will pay $1000 for headsets, what would they pay for an
aircraft that doesn't require them?

And how many more people would be attracted to GA, if they didn't have to
decide between noise - and the discomfort, cost and inconvenience of
headsets. And before you answer, consider the battle in the motorcycle
community over helmets.

I really believe most pilots today, are pilots because they love to fly. And
most would continue to fly even if they had to wear a space suit. But we
will never know how much noise, vibration and inconvenience has handicapped
aviation's ability to compete with other pursuits, until we have eliminated
them.

Maxwell wrote:
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
Maxwell wrote:


But from my experience, noise levels have always been a
consideration to a lot of the people I have introduced to GA. And
the world is becoming more demanding of creature comforts every day.

No Sh!t, how do you think Bose gets away with selling $1000 headsets.


But if people will pay $1000 for headsets, what would they pay for an
aircraft that doesn't require them?

Which is cheaper? A $1000 pair of headsets or the multi hundred pounds it
will take to make aircraft quieter in the cockpit. And before you answer we
aren't just talking insullation here we are talking a bigger engine to carry
the weight of the insullation, more fuel and fuel burn because of the bigger
engine and probably 100 other things I haven't even thought of.



And how many more people would be attracted to GA, if they didn't
have to decide between noise - and the discomfort, cost and
inconvenience of headsets. And before you answer, consider the battle
in the motorcycle community over helmets.


The fact is most people that ride motorcycles DO where helments. I personaly
got ****ed as hell that in the same session of the Arkansas legislature they
passed a law that adults could ride without them and at then turned around
and passed a law that requires that same adult to put on a seat belt in a
car that has airbags all around the driver.



I really believe most pilots today, are pilots because they love to
fly. And most would continue to fly even if they had to wear a space
suit. But we will never know how much noise, vibration and
inconvenience has handicapped aviation's ability to compete with
other pursuits, until we have eliminated them.

You are right that there are probably some folks out there that don't fly
for that reason. But motorcycles are loud, jetskis are loud, ski and bass
boats are loud. Being loud isn't the problem. The same goes for vibration.

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...

Which is cheaper? A $1000 pair of headsets or the multi hundred pounds it
will take to make aircraft quieter in the cockpit. And before you answer
we aren't just talking insullation here we are talking a bigger engine to
carry the weight of the insullation, more fuel and fuel burn because of
the bigger engine and probably 100 other things I haven't even thought of.

You might not have to add weight. The auto industry seems to have avoided
it.


You are right that there are probably some folks out there that don't fly
for that reason. But motorcycles are loud, jetskis are loud, ski and bass
boats are loud. Being loud isn't the problem. The same goes for vibration.


Perhaps not to you, but there are a lot of people out there that can easily
afford any small plane they choose. But they don't fly airplanes, ride jet
skis, motorcycles or bass boats. Most do however seem to drive a Lexus, or
something a whole lot like one.

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 16:49:36 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in
:

Which is cheaper? A $1000 pair of headsets or the multi hundred pounds it
will take to make aircraft quieter in the cockpit.

Now that the jet airliners are quieter than the light singles, isn't
it time for some noise reduction? What significant disadvantage would
there be to a muffler re-design to reduce noise? I realize there
isn't much room available for a larger muffler, and the increased heat
it might radiate would be a factor to consider. But I can recall when
police helos would awaken the neighborhood; now that's a thing of the
past. Surely there is some technologic expertise that could be
applied to aircraft noise reduction, isn't there? Aren't Q-tip props
quieter?

In article , "Maxwell"
wrote:

But if people will pay $1000 for headsets, what would they pay for an
aircraft that doesn't require them?

nothing.

And how many more people would be attracted to GA, if they didn't have to
decide between noise - and the discomfort, cost and inconvenience of
headsets.

Do you know anyone who said something like "I'd fly but these airplanes
are just too noisy"?

And before you answer, consider the battle in the motorcycle
community over helmets.

Is anyone requiring pilots to wear headsets? No. Your comparison
to nanny-state requirements for helmets is invalid.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article , "Maxwell"

wrote:

But if people will pay $1000 for headsets, what would they pay for an
aircraft that doesn't require them?

nothing.

Nonsense. You cut the noise level on GA 50%, and pilots would be lining up.


And how many more people would be attracted to GA, if they didn't have to
decide between noise - and the discomfort, cost and inconvenience of
headsets.

Do you know anyone who said something like "I'd fly but these airplanes
are just too noisy"?

Yes. I have know a couple of pilots that gave it up because their wives had
problems with noise, and I would certainly enjoy it more myself.


And before you answer, consider the battle in the motorcycle
community over helmets.

Is anyone requiring pilots to wear headsets? No. Your comparison
to nanny-state requirements for helmets is invalid.

I think you missed the point on that one, Bob. I think as many pilots would
like to loose their headset, as bikers would their helmets. But they don't
want to suffer the loss of hearing or safety.