Which Model

Hi, I'm a new comer and I hope this question has not been asked too
many times before.

I'm looking into a light bush plane type, kind like a PA-11. I'm
interested in one that can take two people and take off and clear 50'
in around 700', possible to be put on a float. I've looked at Kitfox,
Rans, CH701, Capella, Bushcaddy, and of course the J3 / PA-11.

I'm looking into the flight quality, sturdiness and safety, building
and maintainance easiness, and factory and builder support. I
understand that they are all quite similar with the standard kits cost
just below $20k, and will probably cost a total of close to $50k when
ready to fly. Will take just over 1k hours for an average person.

The other bench mark airplane is a Cessna 150/152 which I have quite a
bit of time in. I really like the flight quality and overal quality. I
also flown a few hours on a J3. Kind of drafty and strange. It could
be that I just need to get used to it. Now the C150 will need almost
1400' at gross. But it has a somewhat higher gross. One question is
that could the C150 be made to take off in less than 1000'. In terms
of cost, you can get one nice Cessna 150/152 at almost half of the
cost of the homebuilts that I mentioned.

Sorry I did not ask specific questions. I'd appreciate it if someone
can take the subjects and give some enlightenment and actual
experience.

Jizhong

wrote:

I'm looking into a light bush plane type, kind like a PA-11. I'm
interested in one that can take two people and take off and clear 50'
in around 700', possible to be put on a float. I've looked at Kitfox,
Rans, CH701, Capella, Bushcaddy, and of course the J3 / PA-11.

The other bench mark airplane is a Cessna 150/152 which I have quite a
bit of time in. I really like the flight quality and overal quality. I
also flown a few hours on a J3. Kind of drafty and strange. It could
be that I just need to get used to it. Now the C150 will need almost
1400' at gross. But it has a somewhat higher gross. One question is
that could the C150 be made to take off in less than 1000'. In terms
of cost, you can get one nice Cessna 150/152 at almost half of the
cost of the homebuilts that I mentioned.

Here's a 160hp C152 Texas Taildragger:
http://www.asadeancomputing.com/tdc/.../337forms.html

1200 FPM Climb
155 MPH WOT @ 3K'
74" prop

Conversion was done by:
A C T AERIAL SERVICES DIVISION
6245 AERODRMOME WAY, COUNTY HANGER
AIRCRAFT CONVERSION TECHNOLOGIES, INC
GEORGETOWN, CA 95634

They have/had conversions to I0-360 (180hp)
http://www.asadeancomputing.com/tdc/...20Forms/26.jpg
What the new gross weight is, will require additional research...

This link references the ability to use floats:
http://www.asadeancomputing.com/tdc/...20Forms/23.jpg

Here's a link to other mods:
http://www.aeroprice.com/aerolibrary/cessnase_mods.htm

Rans S7 without a doubt. Check out the factory. Yahoo has a S7 group. Lots
of guys with floats on.

Darrel,

Thanks about the info and links. Very cool. I like your tall gear
feature with the larger prop. 150hp is nice for a 150/152. 180hp is
propbably too much. For now, do you have a still have a lot of right
rudder left with the bigger engine and larger prop? What is your
gross, 1700#? What's your T/O and Landing distance (over 50') at
gross?

Thanks,

Jizhong


On Thu, 01 Apr 2004 20:05:13 -0600, Darrel Toepfer
wrote:

wrote:

I'm looking into a light bush plane type, kind like a PA-11. I'm
interested in one that can take two people and take off and clear 50'
in around 700', possible to be put on a float. I've looked at Kitfox,
Rans, CH701, Capella, Bushcaddy, and of course the J3 / PA-11.

The other bench mark airplane is a Cessna 150/152 which I have quite a
bit of time in. I really like the flight quality and overal quality. I
also flown a few hours on a J3. Kind of drafty and strange. It could
be that I just need to get used to it. Now the C150 will need almost
1400' at gross. But it has a somewhat higher gross. One question is
that could the C150 be made to take off in less than 1000'. In terms
of cost, you can get one nice Cessna 150/152 at almost half of the
cost of the homebuilts that I mentioned.

Here's a 160hp C152 Texas Taildragger:
http://www.asadeancomputing.com/tdc/.../337forms.html

1200 FPM Climb
155 MPH WOT @ 3K'
74" prop

Conversion was done by:
A C T AERIAL SERVICES DIVISION
6245 AERODRMOME WAY, COUNTY HANGER
AIRCRAFT CONVERSION TECHNOLOGIES, INC
GEORGETOWN, CA 95634

They have/had conversions to I0-360 (180hp)
http://www.asadeancomputing.com/tdc/...20Forms/26.jpg
What the new gross weight is, will require additional research...

This link references the ability to use floats:
http://www.asadeancomputing.com/tdc/...20Forms/23.jpg

Here's a link to other mods:
http://www.aeroprice.com/aerolibrary/cessnase_mods.htm

wrote:

Darrel,

Thanks about the info and links. Very cool. I like your tall gear
feature with the larger prop. 150hp is nice for a 150/152. 180hp is
propbably too much. For now, do you have a still have a lot of right
rudder left with the bigger engine and larger prop? What is your
gross, 1700#? What's your T/O and Landing distance (over 50') at
gross?

I found the links by doing a simple internet search...

Our C152 has 110hp and tricycle gear...

With its cupped wingtips, it can definitely get off the ground in under
1000'...

In
wrote:

Thanks about the info and links. Very cool. I like your tall gear
feature with the larger prop. 150hp is nice for a 150/152.

Waste of an O-320.

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

Del Rawlins wrote...

Thanks about the info and links. Very cool. I like your tall gear
feature with the larger prop. 150hp is nice for a 150/152.

Waste of an O-320.

I dunno, looong ago I found it kind of nice to be able to get
climb performance I didn't have to measure with a calendar.

Dave 'time in type' Hyde

In k.net nauga wrote:
Del Rawlins wrote...

Thanks about the info and links. Very cool. I like your tall gear
feature with the larger prop. 150hp is nice for a 150/152.

Waste of an O-320.

I dunno, looong ago I found it kind of nice to be able to get
climb performance I didn't have to measure with a calendar.

Dave 'time in type' Hyde


True, but when you bought an expensive Lycoming engine you didn't put it
in a 150/152.

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

On TAP, O-320 is advertised cheaper than O-235.

On 2 Apr 2004 21:38:41 GMT, Del Rawlins
wrote:

In
wrote:

Thanks about the info and links. Very cool. I like your tall gear
feature with the larger prop. 150hp is nice for a 150/152.

Waste of an O-320.

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/

An O-235 is literally a waste of parts. If you have an airplane that
can be upgraded to an O-320 (like a 7ECA Citabria) it isn't really any
more expensive to do so than to overhaul the 235. Just don't bother
with a 150/152. 8^)

In
wrote:
On TAP, O-320 is advertised cheaper than O-235.

On 2 Apr 2004 21:38:41 GMT, Del Rawlins
wrote:

In
wrote:

Thanks about the info and links. Very cool. I like your tall gear
feature with the larger prop. 150hp is nice for a 150/152.

Waste of an O-320.

----------------------------------------------------
Del Rawlins-
Remove _kills_spammers_ to reply via email.
Unofficial Bearhawk FAQ website:
http://www.rawlinsbrothers.org/bhfaq/