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 » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Turbo Dakota question



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 26th 08, 02:32 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Mike Noel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 206
Default Turbo Dakota question

Happy Holidays to the group.

I would like to know more about the turbo Dakota. I understand it was built
for only about a year around 1979-80 and has a TSIO-360 200 HP engine on an
airframe similar to an ArcherII. Why only a year? Is it considered a
desirable airplane?

--
Best Regards,
Mike.

http://flickr.com/photos/mikenoel/

http://photoshow.comcast.net/mikenoel



Ads
  #2  
Old December 26th 08, 03:51 AM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Paul Tomblin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 688
Default Turbo Dakota question

In a previous article, "Mike Noel" said:
Happy Holidays to the group.
I would like to know more about the turbo Dakota. I understand it was built
for only about a year around 1979-80 and has a TSIO-360 200 HP engine on an
airframe similar to an ArcherII. Why only a year? Is it considered a
desirable airplane?


I doubt it's a 200 hp engine. The non-turbo Dakota has a 235 hp engine.
But yeah, it's the same fuselage as the Warrior, Archer, Arrow, etc.


--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
"using Outlook to read e-mail is like licking public toilets; using Outlook
with a virus checker is like taking antibiotics and then licking public
toilets (it might work, but it's hardly optimal" -- David Megginson
  #3  
Old December 26th 08, 01:09 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Bob Noel[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39
Default Turbo Dakota question

Mike Noel wrote:
Happy Holidays to the group.

I would like to know more about the turbo Dakota. I understand it was built
for only about a year around 1979-80 and has a TSIO-360 200 HP engine on an
airframe similar to an ArcherII. Why only a year? Is it considered a
desirable airplane?


Think of it as a fixed-gear version of the turbo arrow. Even though
it was called a Dakota, I believe it has more parts in common with
the arrow than the dakota.

  #4  
Old December 26th 08, 04:23 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Bob Noel[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39
Default Turbo Dakota question

Clark wrote:
Bob Noel wrote in :

Mike Noel wrote:
Happy Holidays to the group.

I would like to know more about the turbo Dakota. I understand it was
built for only about a year around 1979-80 and has a TSIO-360 200 HP
engine on an airframe similar to an ArcherII. Why only a year? Is it
considered a desirable airplane?

Think of it as a fixed-gear version of the turbo arrow. Even though
it was called a Dakota, I believe it has more parts in common with
the arrow than the dakota.


They're all the same airframe, just different engines and landing gear.


I believe the wing spar and other structural items are different between
the turbo dakota and the regular dakota.

  #5  
Old December 26th 08, 04:34 PM posted to rec.aviation.owning
Paul Tomblin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 688
Default Turbo Dakota question

In a previous article, Clark said:
(Paul Tomblin) wrote in
:
In a previous article, "Mike Noel" said:
Happy Holidays to the group.
I would like to know more about the turbo Dakota. I understand it was
built for only about a year around 1979-80 and has a TSIO-360 200 HP
engine on an airframe similar to an ArcherII. Why only a year? Is it
considered a desirable airplane?


I doubt it's a 200 hp engine. The non-turbo Dakota has a 235 hp engine.
But yeah, it's the same fuselage as the Warrior, Archer, Arrow, etc.


Why do you doubt it's a 200 hp engine? It's a TSIO-360 FB and Continental
rates it for 200 hp at 41 inches MP.


Because I stupidly assumed that if they called it a "Turbo Dakota" instead
of "Turbo Archer", it would have more in common with a Dakota than an
Arrow with the gear welded down.


--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
Microsoft: bringing the world to your desktop -- and your desktop to
the world.
-- Peter Gutmann
 




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
Turbo prop question Chris W Piloting 23 April 29th 08 12:02 PM
Question about the turbo commander GDBholdings Owning 2 December 24th 06 01:02 PM
Turbo question soxinbox Owning 13 June 10th 06 03:28 AM
Turbo performance vs non-turbo John Doe Owning 22 October 8th 05 02:34 AM
Converting engine from Turbo to non-Turbo Dick Kurtz Home Built 7 October 31st 03 05:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.