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 |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
On 15-Jan-2007, Frank Stutzman wrote: I'm not a particularly tall person so I find I can sit under the ruddervators and it works almost as well as a cessna wing. The T-Tail on my Arrow IV serves the same function, and it's tall enough for just about anybody to stand under. -Elliott Drucker |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
"Newps" wrote in message . .. Gas is slightly higher now than its low point last fall. It is currently falling and today it's at $2.11. Go to www.montanagasprices.com to see the price. Substitute any state for montana to see that area. Many areas are well below $2 now. http://autos.msn.com/everyday/GasSta...81401&x=7&y=10 Station by station; plug in your own zipcode We're higher due to being in the midst of ski resorts. -- Matt --------------------- Matthew W. Barrow Site-Fill Homes, LLC. Montrose, CO (MTJ) |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
If you fly into only improved fields, over friendly terrain and are a
fair weather flier (Jay's mission profile), then I won't argue that a 235 is probably a good choice. If you fly in inclement weather, over hostile terrain where finding an emergency landing area may be tricky, like more room, etc., then the 182 is a better choice. While that is my mission profile, what you've forgotten to mention are the four most important reasons I'd choose a Pathfinder over a Skylane: 1. Useful load 2. Speed 3. Handling. And, of course, #4 (and most important of all): Mary DESPISED flying a 182... ;-) "If Momma ain't happy, ain't NO ONE happy..." -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
What's your experience been at higher elevation airfields and/or higher
operating altitudes? Ceiling and climb capability concerns, again.... We've operated as high as 13K feet, flying into Reno, Nevada. We've flown into and around Wyoming on 100 degree days. We flew out of Rapid City on a day when the temperature on the ground was 116 degrees. All with full (84 gallon) tanks, and four people. All on car gas. No problems. It's a wonderful -- and affordable -- aircraft. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
And here's a comparison for you. Have Jay take his plane out with two
seats in and 40 gallons. At a density altitude of 5500 my 182 would get off the ground in 450 feet, it would land in the same distance. If you can't or don't want to remove the rear seats then reduce the fuel load accordingly. With the back seats removed (they pop out in seconds, without tools -- a *very* handy option) and less than half tanks, I'd be hanging on the prop in about the same distance. Almost all of my flights are with four people, and full tanks. However, I clearly remember test-flying the plane with my 135-pound instructor, and about 25 gallons on board. 'Bout scared the crap outta myself, seeing only sky and an impossible deck angle on departure. I was whooping and hollering like an Indian, while my CFI just sat there laughing... Coming from a 150 horse Warrior, I thought I was flying a rocketship... ;-) -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Jay Honeck wrote:
Coming from a 150 horse Warrior, I thought I was flying a rocketship... You were/are! |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
"Don Tuite" wrote in message
... On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 11:57:59 -0700, "Douglas Paterson" wrote: May I ask *why* you think the Comanche is better than the Trinidad (or the Bonanza for that matter, though I'm not really looking at those--no offense, Newps! ) "Better compared" as in "It is better to compare the Comanche to x and y than to compare it to z." Sorry for the imprecision. Don Ah. OK, I see what you meant now. For the record, I completely agree. I mention the Pathfinder et al with the Comanche & Trinidad not because I think they're apples-to-apples airplanes. I include the Pathfinder because it's the only (*only*) fixed-gear aircraft my research uncovered that met my mission description (I looked hard at the Cherokee Six [PA-32] line, but decided it was bigger than I wanted or needed and, largely as a result of that excess size/capacity, provided less bang/buck than the other options). When I first started, I'd no idea I'd still be looking a year later. Circumstances. However, I think it was Day One, Lesson One, in Aircraft Buying 101, both here and in every book I read, that the best method is to define your mission first, then pick the plane that fits it. In that regard, these three planes form a consistent (though hardly all-inclusive) grouping. -- 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) |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
"Newps" wrote in message
... Douglas Paterson wrote: the Bonanza for that matter, though I'm not really looking at those--no offense, Newps! ) But don't rule it out. Get all the facts/numbers. I doubt I have "all" the facts--will I ever? But, I did rule out the Bonanza for essentially three reasons: 1) The throw-over yoke. That's just downright weird--and, especially my first time out, I'm deliberately avoiding weird. "Baby steps." 2) The reversed controls. Weird again. 3) Cost. Based on your post, I guess you'd disagree with this one. Seems like everything I read, though, indicated that the Bos are pricey to buy and pricey to maintain. Everything I've read *also* seems to indicate that the Bos are great airplanes--just not the right one for me, not this time. Thanks for the input! -- 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) |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
Husky carries only 50 pounds of baggage.
I carry more survival equipment than that! Karl Super Cubs N4201Z, N7474D "Curator" N185KG "Doug" wrote in message ups.com... Husky's outperform Supercubs in speed, comfort, instruments and on floats. The Supercub will come down steeper and can be lighter. Both land short. They are comparably priced. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Cherokee 235 vs Trinidad vs Comanche
"Frank Stutzman" wrote in message
... The Commanche sure was nice looking on the ground, but the view from the inside was like being in a cave. Probably really wasn't that bad the the plane I was looking at had a sort of a dark orange interior that probably didn't help the situation. Interesting comment. That's one thing I find very attractive about the Trinidad--lots of windows, it feels very "open." Another is the cabin width--I'm rather broad of shoulder (and none too skinny of waist, if you catch my drift), the Trinidad feels downright agoraphobic compared to the Pipers.... The further I get in this process, the more I'm leaning away from the Comanche and toward the Trinidad (which is a 180 from where I was last March). The Pathfinder is the wild card--definitely cheaper to buy, and almost certainly cheaper to own/operate. Hmmmm..... Thanks for the thoughts! -- 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) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Narrowing it down... Comanche? | Douglas Paterson | Owning | 18 | February 26th 06 12:51 AM |
Cherokee Pilots Association Fly-In Just Gets Better and Better | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 7 | August 8th 05 07:18 PM |
Comanche accident averted last evening | [email protected] | Piloting | 23 | April 13th 05 10:02 AM |
Cherokee National Fly-In & Convention | Don | Piloting | 0 | May 5th 04 08:14 PM |
Cherokee National Fly-In & Convention | Don | General Aviation | 0 | March 20th 04 02:15 AM |