"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)