Navion in flames.

In article ,
Newps wrote:

OK, so it's a little slow in cruise, 10-12 knots less than my 520
powered Bo, but looks like you can land it short. I assume because it
was designed 100 years ago the gear was made to land in rough areas and
you could fly final at about 60 MPH indicated. So 1200 foot strips
shouldn't be a problem?

You should watch the sales video they did in Texas. VERY short approach
and landing over tall trees.

Newps wrote:


Ron Natalie wrote:

Newps wrote:



Margy Natalie wrote:

Jay Honeck wrote:

Jay, I now know you understand what a really cool airplane is!!



What does the Navion cruise at at 75%? How slow can it go on final
with one person and a half tank of gas?



With the IO-550 ours bops along at 160 kts ground speed quite nicely.

Approach speeds are very much skyhawk-like. I think the Vso is 47
in knots. You gotta be below 87 to even drop the gear.



OK, so it's a little slow in cruise, 10-12 knots less than my 520
powered Bo, but looks like you can land it short. I assume because it
was designed 100 years ago the gear was made to land in rough areas and
you could fly final at about 60 MPH indicated. So 1200 foot strips
shouldn't be a problem?
It's a Navion, it's always been a bit slower than a Bo. It was designed
to land in rough fields and I pull off mid-field on a 3,000' grass strip
without doing a short field landing and not landing anywhere near the
end. I think if I worked at it I could get 800', but I don't work that
hard :-).

Margy

Ron Natalie wrote:
The Meyers 200 blows the doors off a Navion, tho', and has the way cool looks also...

Doors are for barns.

And Rangemasters :-))


John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200704/1

Margy Natalie wrote:
Newps wrote:



Ron Natalie wrote:

Newps wrote:



Margy Natalie wrote:

Jay Honeck wrote:

Jay, I now know you understand what a really cool airplane is!!




What does the Navion cruise at at 75%? How slow can it go on final
with one person and a half tank of gas?




With the IO-550 ours bops along at 160 kts ground speed quite nicely.

Approach speeds are very much skyhawk-like. I think the Vso is 47
in knots. You gotta be below 87 to even drop the gear.




OK, so it's a little slow in cruise, 10-12 knots less than my 520
powered Bo, but looks like you can land it short. I assume because
it was designed 100 years ago the gear was made to land in rough areas
and you could fly final at about 60 MPH indicated. So 1200 foot
strips shouldn't be a problem?

It's a Navion, it's always been a bit slower than a Bo. It was designed
to land in rough fields and I pull off mid-field on a 3,000' grass strip
without doing a short field landing and not landing anywhere near the
end. I think if I worked at it I could get 800', but I don't work that
hard :-).

Margy
With a 10 knot headwind, and honking the brakes more than I like, I can
get down and off the runway in 380 feet. And actually live to tell about
it! ;-)
Figures are from the extended threshold at Danbury (DXR)RWY26 to the
first exit (Taxiway Bravo).

Now, getting off again with my E-185 engine is another matter altogether.

Rip
5186K

Margy Natalie wrote:


It's a Navion, it's always been a bit slower than a Bo. It was designed
to land in rough fields and I pull off mid-field on a 3,000' grass strip
without doing a short field landing and not landing anywhere near the
end. I think if I worked at it I could get 800', but I don't work that
hard :-).

That was my main concern when I decided to sell the 182 and get the
Bonanza. I wanted to be able to get to most of the strips I used in my
182. The Bonanza folks are no help because all they care about is going
fast and most of them are scared to death to get slower than 100 mph
unless they are directly over the runway. My Bo only needs 100 feet
more runway than the 182 with the same load, me and 40 gallons. I can
takeoff in 550 feet and land in the same distance of total runway used.
That's at a DA of 5000. You should be able to get that Navion stopped
more like my 182, about 450 feet.

On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 09:28:25 -0600, Newps wrote:



Ron Natalie wrote:
Newps wrote:



Margy Natalie wrote:

Jay Honeck wrote:

Jay, I now know you understand what a really cool airplane is!!


What does the Navion cruise at at 75%? How slow can it go on final
with one person and a half tank of gas?


With the IO-550 ours bops along at 160 kts ground speed quite nicely.

I get about 160 to 165 with an IO470N and 14 GPH.


Approach speeds are very much skyhawk-like. I think the Vso is 47
in knots. You gotta be below 87 to even drop the gear.

And I though 140 was bad in the old Deb.



OK, so it's a little slow in cruise, 10-12 knots less than my 520
powered Bo, but looks like you can land it short. I assume because it

Even book figures on a Bo (at least the older ones) are shorter than a
172. Final is only slightly faster. According to the AirSafety
Foundation and American Bonanza Society the vast majority of Bo pilots
land they way too fast.

was designed 100 years ago the gear was made to land in rough areas and
you could fly final at about 60 MPH indicated. So 1200 foot strips

I might make the 60 MPH as Vso is 55 (Me and half fuel) or 60 at
gross, but I do like a bit more of a cushion than that. 1.3 X 55 = 71,
while 1.3 X 60 = 78. I typically fly final some where between 75 and
80 MPH. The Bo can get in and out of very short fields, BUT that tiny
nose gear was not meant for rough fields.
OTOH I have flown in and out of a friends pasture a few times. He had
one *relatively* flat strip for his 150.

I was flying in and out of a friends 1200 foot strip for several
years. OTOH he didn't have any trees at either end, but he did have
telephone lines at the one end.

shouldn't be a problem?

I'd think the Navion would handle rough fields far better than the Bo.

A couple years ago we had a pair of Navions take off together and
those two blade props were deafening. Naturally they did it off 18
which put them right over the noise sensitive area at just a few
hundred feet :-)) I keep saying we need a couple of T-6s on the
field, or a Skyraider.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 13:10:46 -0600, Newps wrote:

Oh no, mine's much newer. It just looks like the first one.

Mines the first one off the assembly line (straight tail), but it
looks like a modern F-33. (Airworthyness cert is 9/11/59) It has 30
hours of pre production flight testing in the log.




Montblack wrote:
("Newps" wrote)

I assume because it was designed 100 years ago the gear was made to land
in rough areas and you could fly final at about 60 MPH indicated.



As opposed to entering production 60 years ago. g

2007 - 1947 ....first Bo


Montblack


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 20:49:33 -0600, Newps wrote:



Margy Natalie wrote:


It's a Navion, it's always been a bit slower than a Bo. It was designed
to land in rough fields and I pull off mid-field on a 3,000' grass strip
without doing a short field landing and not landing anywhere near the
end. I think if I worked at it I could get 800', but I don't work that
hard :-).

That was my main concern when I decided to sell the 182 and get the
Bonanza. I wanted to be able to get to most of the strips I used in my
182. The Bonanza folks are no help because all they care about is going
fast and most of them are scared to death to get slower than 100 mph

You should have heard them when they were told we'd be flying book
figures for TO and landing at Bo specific proficency training. That
and calculating speeds for each.

unless they are directly over the runway. My Bo only needs 100 feet
more runway than the 182 with the same load, me and 40 gallons. I can
takeoff in 550 feet and land in the same distance of total runway used.
That's at a DA of 5000. You should be able to get that Navion stopped
more like my 182, about 450 feet.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Newps wrote:


OK, so it's a little slow in cruise, 10-12 knots less than my 520
powered Bo, but looks like you can land it short. I assume because it
was designed 100 years ago the gear was made to land in rough areas and
you could fly final at about 60 MPH indicated. So 1200 foot strips
shouldn't be a problem?

The ground roll with the Gopher engine was 850', 1100 for the 50'
obstacle. Certainly we were off by midfield on a 2400 strip.
I operate off a 3000' grass, and I'm certainly off by midfield
with the current engine.

The thing has huge squishy 7.00x8 tires in addition to big oleos on the
mains. It was designed for unimproved strips.

Roger wrote:

The Bo can get in and out of very short fields, BUT that tiny
nose gear was not meant for rough fields.

That nose gear is stronger than the nose gear on a 182. The 182 gear is
attached to the firewall and is a well known weak link. It also is
quite a ways behind the prop so any time you put your nosewheel in a
hole the prop gets lower than the hole is deep. The Bo nosewheel is
immediately behind the prop so doesn't have that problem plus the
attaching points are much better than a 182. The limiting factor is
tire size, you have to use the 5.00x5 tire because that's all that will
fit in the well. But the gear itself is hell for stout.