Value of a knot

TTA Cherokee Driver wrote:

: typical? Is better routing and radar service a good enough reason to
: get the instrument rating, even if you don't plan to do much hard IFR?

Yes.
It's helpful for avoiding TFRs that suddenly pop up. It's helpful for avoiding
active MOA (IFR aircraft get separation from military traffic). It's helpful
for not having to dial up every stinkin class C & D from Boston to Miami. It's
helpful for not having to study the many shelves of the MOAs on the coast of
the Carolinas. It's helpful for landing at a class B main airport. etc.
--
Aaron Coolidge

Dude wrote:

Personally, It seems to me that a speed mod less than $1,000 a knot is
likely a good deal. I presently fly about 142 in a hurry, and 120 when I am
not.

Personally, I need additional carrying capacity. If I were in a position to afford
it, I would pay for that. I'm not interested in speed enough to pay that kind of
money for more.

BTW; my cruise is 103 knots.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

Dude wrote:

I am no math weenie, but I read an article once than basically said that
climbing higher always pays off, no matter the distance. In other words,
level cruise was less efficient than a plan where top of climb was the same
as the beginning of the descent.

Maybe that's true, as far as it goes, but I've seen many days when I can make 90
knots at 1,000' AGL and 50 knots at 6,000' AGL. You'd be a fool to climb under those
conditions.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

I think that this is only true in still air. Obviously you don't want to be
climbing into a rapidly increasing headwind.

Mike
MU-2

"Dude" wrote in message
...
I am no math weenie, but I read an article once than basically said that
climbing higher always pays off, no matter the distance. In other words,
level cruise was less efficient than a plan where top of climb was the
same
as the beginning of the descent.

I can't prove it though, so I will leave it up for debate like you.



"Elwood Dowd" wrote in message
...
Amen brother. Range was one of the main reasons we chose our Beech
Sierra---only 135-ish knots, but 6+ hours aloft make us faster than a
Bonanza on some trips. Not all, but some. Heck, if you have a Mooney
you get higher speed AND more range (but less headroom).

To answer the original question, if I could spend $1000 to get 5 knots I
would do it, but not 1. If I could spend $5000 and be guaranteed 5
knots I would think about it. If I could spend $10,000 on a turbo that
would take me up higher when I need to climb to be safe, I would
seriously think about it, but I wouldn't count on it to give me lots
more speed.

Regarding range---I have found that for our plane at least, a LOT of
fuel savings can be had by flying at 10,500 rather than 6,500. Speed is
very nearly the same while fuel use drops to about 8.9gph, vs. 10.5 at
the lower altitude. This is not a linear relationship and drops off
above about 13,500. I will leave it to the math weenies to tell me
exactly how long I have to fly for a given leg to get a positive return
from amortizing the climb, but on really long legs I always go up high
and it always pays off.

wrote in message news:4fp%c.4397$j62.2501@trnddc04...
On 7-Sep-2004, (C Kingsbury) wrote:

Anybody know of a mod to install a lavatory in place of the back seat in a
172?

Try:
http://www.sportys.com/acb/showdetl...._ID=297&DID=19

Cheap, too!

I was wondering how long it would take somebody to suggest that.

To be honest, I hate sitting in any vehicle for more than 3 hours at a
stretch anyway. Even in a nice big couch-on-wheels car, I stop every
few hours and stretch out.

I remember one time on a trip back from MVY to BED (1 hour-ish) one of
my pax made the comment that he had to go "like a racehorse." He
asked, how long until we're home, I said an hour maybe, and he
grimaced. I said, no biggie, we'll just stop right down there, and 10
minutes later we were on the ground at PYM. I think that illustrated
the "freedom" of GA better than any lecture I could have given. You
want to stop? Just land at the next airport... He and the other pax
couldn't get over the novelty of the concept.

-cwk.

I find that if I transit the Phoenix Class B airspace as a VFR pop-up, ATC
sometimes treats me as a second class citizen. If I contact Tucson
departure as I leave the airport and request flight following into Phoenix,
things usually go much smoother. I now fly almost all of my long cross
country flights with flight following rather than a formal VFR flight plan
and have the extra security blanket of someone immediately available to talk
to when needed.
--
Regards,
Mike

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/amountainaero/fspic1.html
"TTA Cherokee Driver" wrote in message
...
Ben Jackson wrote:

If you're flying long distances and want to cut the total time, the most
cost effective way is to carry enough fuel that you don't have to stop.
If you can cut a 30 minute fuel stop out of a C-172 flightplan it's like
adding 15kts.

Another way might be to get an instrument rating.

I only have one data point for this, but this spring a fleet of 4
Warriors took a club trip from TTA to IAD. It was a VFR day. The one
flying VFR put 6.1 hours on the hobbes. The three flying IFR all put
5.1 hours on. I was the VFR one. The ADIZ did not slow me down as far
as I can tell. As far as I can tell the penalty was due to:

1. Worse ATC service. Once in the ADIZ and class B, every time I was
switched to a different frequency, I had to wait for several stretches
for there to be a break in the servicing of IFR traffic before I could
even get acknowledged and get a vector. Not to mention how nervous you
can get flying right at the prohibited area (or later, right at the
airport at 3500) on the vector the last guy gave you and the new guy
hasn't acknowledged you for several minutes.

2. More vectoring. While my compatriots were being cleared direct to
Brooke VOR then to IAD, I was getting vectored around the RDU Class C,
and then once in the ADIZ and class B I was vectored all over the place
to basically get me out of the way while the IFR traffic landed, then
they worked me into a gap in the IFR traffic for landing. My first time
on a 13 mile final in a Warrior!

I don't know if this is typical, but assuming an instrutment rating
costs $5-6000 to get working the $/effective knot here might be a pretty
good number. So pilots who fly both IFR and VFR, is that experience
typical? Is better routing and radar service a good enough reason to
get the instrument rating, even if you don't plan to do much hard IFR?

Yes, that was assuming winds did not work against you higher up.


"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
k.net...
I think that this is only true in still air. Obviously you don't want to
be
climbing into a rapidly increasing headwind.

Mike
MU-2

"Dude" wrote in message
...
I am no math weenie, but I read an article once than basically said that
climbing higher always pays off, no matter the distance. In other
words,
level cruise was less efficient than a plan where top of climb was the
same
as the beginning of the descent.

I can't prove it though, so I will leave it up for debate like you.



"Elwood Dowd" wrote in message
...
Amen brother. Range was one of the main reasons we chose our Beech
Sierra---only 135-ish knots, but 6+ hours aloft make us faster than a
Bonanza on some trips. Not all, but some. Heck, if you have a Mooney
you get higher speed AND more range (but less headroom).

To answer the original question, if I could spend $1000 to get 5 knots
I
would do it, but not 1. If I could spend $5000 and be guaranteed 5
knots I would think about it. If I could spend $10,000 on a turbo that
would take me up higher when I need to climb to be safe, I would
seriously think about it, but I wouldn't count on it to give me lots
more speed.

Regarding range---I have found that for our plane at least, a LOT of
fuel savings can be had by flying at 10,500 rather than 6,500. Speed
is
very nearly the same while fuel use drops to about 8.9gph, vs. 10.5 at
the lower altitude. This is not a linear relationship and drops off
above about 13,500. I will leave it to the math weenies to tell me
exactly how long I have to fly for a given leg to get a positive return
from amortizing the climb, but on really long legs I always go up high
and it always pays off.

Well, that would be a neat mod, but the only way I can think to get that on
most planes is to improve efficiency and leave more fuel on the ground.



"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


Dude wrote:

Personally, It seems to me that a speed mod less than $1,000 a knot is
likely a good deal. I presently fly about 142 in a hurry, and 120 when
I am
not.

Personally, I need additional carrying capacity. If I were in a position
to afford
it, I would pay for that. I'm not interested in speed enough to pay that
kind of
money for more.

BTW; my cruise is 103 knots.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

I don't know if this is typical, but assuming an instrutment rating
costs $5-6000 to get working the $/effective knot here might be a pretty
good number. So pilots who fly both IFR and VFR, is that experience
typical?

Certainly not in case of non-turbo'd airplanes in the West... VFR is
almost always more efficient, routing-wise. However, I agree IFR tends
to be a lot easier in busy class-B areas.

On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 00:28:46 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote:



Dude wrote:

Personally, It seems to me that a speed mod less than $1,000 a knot is
likely a good deal. I presently fly about 142 in a hurry, and 120 when I am
not.

Personally, I need additional carrying capacity. If I were in a position to afford
it, I would pay for that. I'm not interested in speed enough to pay that kind of
money for more.

BTW; my cruise is 103 knots.

I cruise at 75%, I play at 75% and I do maneuvers at considerably
less.


George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

Beautiful movie stars, people with power.... Sounds good to me.

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