Plane You Do NOT Like

So what does post-crash fire have to do with status symbol purchases and advertising? I'm having trouble finding a connection.

KSCessnaDriver said:
Last I checked this was a thread about planes you don't like. I was simply pointing out why I don't like the Cirrus. Don't really feel like justifying it. Other than the post impact fire reasoning.
Click to expand...
 
Other than a few taildraggers, where do you find such configuration in the GA fleet?


Seanaldinho said:
Thats my preference. I dont like flying with left hand on the yoke and right hand on the throttle :rolleyes:

I also prefer a stick to a yoke.
Click to expand...
 
Given your left-hand/right-hand preferences, which of the powered fleet do you dislike least?
Seanaldinho said:
Gliders. Thats where I started. I always fly with right hand on the stick and left hand on the dive brakes. (throttle)
Click to expand...
 
Unfortunately I dont have much powered experience having been confined to a Cessna 140, a Bird Dog, and the 172. The only one to provide my preference is the Bird Dog. It has a center stick and a left hand throttle.
 
Thanks. I thought the Slingsby used by USAF might be in that group as well, but memory will not cooperate.

gtmule said:
DA20, DA40. Nosegear RV's. GlassAirs
Click to expand...
 
Fly anything from the right seat, just flip the panel and build it out; no worries mate.
 
Henning said:
Fly anything from the right seat, just flip the panel and build it out; no worries mate.
Click to expand...

Yeah, when and if I buy my airplane it will be heavily modified for my comfort. Center stick, throttle on the left, reclined seats like that of a glider, and a few others.
 
gtmule said:
DA20, DA40, DA42. Nosegear RV's. GlassAirs
Click to expand...

Fixed :D



Seanaldinho said:
Yeah, when and if I buy my airplane it will be heavily modified for my comfort. Center stick, throttle on the left, reclined seats like that of a glider, and a few others.
Click to expand...

Just buy a Diamond, it already has all that. The PFD is still on the left but you can transfer that stuff to the MFD. Also I believe you should be able to easily change the position of LRUs so your PFD will be on the left.
 
Last edited:
MachFly said:
Fixed :D





Just buy a Diamond, it already has all that. The PFD is still on the left but you can transfer that stuff to the MFD. Also I believe you should be able to easily change the position of LRUs so your PFD will be on the left.
Click to expand...

Dont get me wrong the Diamond is a great looking plane, but Im thinking Beech 17 Staggerwing. Get one for ~80k and throw 30-40k in work on it to bring it up to modern standards. Including the changes I mentioned. Glass cockpit and a big 800 hp radial. Keep the retro look with modern functianlity.
 
Seanaldinho said:
Dont get me wrong the Diamond is a great looking plane, but Im thinking Beech 17 Staggerwing. Get one for ~80k and throw 30-40k in work on it to bring it up to modern standards. Including the changes I mentioned. Glass cockpit and a big 800 hp radial. Keep the retro look with modern functianlity.
Click to expand...

Seems like a great plane. I never flown one, never even seen one in person. I wouldn't compare it to the Diamond because it's in a different class.

I really would not put a G1000 in it though, I think it's going to ruin the classic effect of that plane.
I seen a very nice P-51 at an airshow a few years back. While I was looking at it I got up to check out the cockpit, the guy put a G1000 in it. That messed up the whole classic effect. After that I was looking at is as some hybrid that is neither modern nor classic.

I personally do not like the G1000 in any airframe that was designed before 1990, maybe that's a bit too extreme but please do not put it in a 1940s airplane. I mostly fly with a G1000 and I can really appreciate all the modern avionics, but I think a classic airplane should really stay classic.
 
Glass is the final thing that would go in and since I will no doubt run over budget in this little dream of mine, I probably will stick with steam.

Definitly losing the yoke and moving the throttle though.
 
Seanaldinho said:
Glass is the final thing that would go in and since I will no doubt run over budget in this little dream of mine, I probably will stick with steam.

Definitly losing the yoke and moving the throttle though.
Click to expand...

I realize that you have most of your time with sticks (so do I as a matter of fact) but yokes are really not that bad as long as there is room in the cockpit for it.
 
MachFly said:
It lacks a lot of crash worthy stuff that other planes have, that's why it has a chute to compensate.
Click to expand...

Give me an example. The cabin is reinforced. The seats are 26G. Starting with the G2 the firewall is designed to have the cabin ride up over the engine in an off field landing. Airbags have been standard for a long time. The panel is designed to be less dangerous in a crash. It is lower and lacks the protrusion of a yoke. Four point seat belts have been standard since day one. The airframe is extremely strong. The only in air breakup I know of was a dive at almost 300 knots when the chute was deployed.
 
wabower said:
All prior to the III were a prop or tail strike waiting to happen. Stiff 26-g seats were very uncomfortable and door to seat placement geometry was poor. And I prefer to set the prop RPM independent of throttle position.
Click to expand...

While the G3 improved the situation I don'r see tail strikes still being an issue. If you look at the pitch required for a tail strike it is pretty extreme. It is mostly an issue when practicing zero flap landings. While the G3 helped raise prop clearance, the improved nose gear damping on the latest G3 models probably helps a lot too. The seats can indeed feel stiff because of the honeycomb crash structure underneath. However, I don't understand the door to seat issue. Ingress and egress is easier than most other four place singles. It is certainly easier than a Mooney or Bonanza. At first I thought I would miss a prop control but the single handle actually allows setting rpm to the extent that I desire so I now prefer the simplicity.
 
MachFly said:
Also it does have a problem climbing. Because the engine keeps overheating you can never climb at Vy, in the end you end up doing 200ft/min.
Click to expand...

You must be talking about the SR20. The SR22 only drops to 200'/min around 17k' and that is for the normally aspirated version. The turbo will climb ROP at 1000'/min into the high teens on a hot day and 500'/min or so LOP if OAT's aren't too crazy. In the interest of full disclosure, the turbo numbers are based on comments from others rather than personal experience.

I did have to decrease climb rate to more like 500'/min coming out of North Las Vegas on a very hot day in order to keep CHT's in range.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Lack of integral fuel tank, which appears to lead to many post impact fires that other, similarly designed aircraft don't have.
Click to expand...

The tank is a wet wing design as is the Bonanza and many other planes. I prefer the design used by Diamond but they are pretty unique in their design.
 
Last edited:
A DPE friend bought a 22 with the intent of training a co-owner to fly it. During the process he became aware of the excessive prop and tail strikes and researched the issue. He said the pre-G3 fleet strike rate was more than 20%. They decided to find something else.

During a subsequent lunch with the owner of the Cirrus service center at KADS, he said they don't keep stats on the frequency of such events, but that prop/tail strikes and electrical problems are two of their most-frequent service issues.

I measured the clearance of two airplanes sitting side by side in another shop (temporairly stored there during a threatened hail storm) and was impressed by the additional clearances provided by the redesign.


peppy said:
While the G3 improved the situation I don'r see tail strikes still being an issue. If you look at the pitch required for a tail strike it is pretty extreme. It is mostly an issue when practicing zero flap landings. While the G3 helped raise prop clearance, the improved nose gear damping on the latest G3 models probably helps a lot too. The seats can indeed feel stiff because of the honeycomb crash structure underneath. However, I don't understand the door to seat issue. Ingress and egress is easier than most other four place singles. It is certainly easier than a Mooney or Bonanza. At first I thought I would miss a prop control but the single handle actually allows setting rpm to the extent that I desire so I now prefer the simplicity.
Click to expand...
 
MachFly said:
I realize that you have most of your time with sticks (so do I as a matter of fact) but yokes are really not that bad as long as there is room in the cockpit for it.
Click to expand...

I feel like a bus driver with a yoke. I prefer to feel like a fighter jock. Hence the stick :)
 
Seanaldinho said:
Yeah, when and if I buy my airplane it will be heavily modified for my comfort. Center stick, throttle on the left, reclined seats like that of a glider, and a few others.
Click to expand...

There are very interesting motor glider options including turbine.
 
N801BH said:
Seeing the tag on your profile that says CAP cadet.. I am guessing you are about 14-15 years old. :dunno::dunno:
Click to expand...
:rofl::rofl::rofl: you can find the DA 20 Fs out there from the USAFA program of old with the right hand position panel.
 
Last edited:
Seanaldinho said:
Im thinking Beech 17 Staggerwing. Get one for ~80k and throw 30-40k in work on it to bring it up to modern standards
Click to expand...

:goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy:

pffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffft. You find a flying Staggerwing for $80k, I'll buy it TODAY.
 
gtmule said:
:goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy:

pffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffft. You find a flying Staggerwing for $80k, I'll buy it TODAY.
Click to expand...

No kidding. You might be able to find an airworthy cabin Waco (poor man's BE-17) for around that price, but be prepared to spend at least twice that for a decent Staggerwing.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Fearless Tower said:
No kidding. You might be able to find an airworthy cabin Waco (poor man's BE-17) for around that price, but be prepared to spend at least twice that for a decent Staggerwing.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...

Or a properly decent C-195....which I'd be totally fine with. First thing I'll look at when my family outgrows the RV-7
 
Last edited:
peppy said:
Give me an example. The cabin is reinforced. The seats are 26G. Starting with the G2 the firewall is designed to have the cabin ride up over the engine in an off field landing. Airbags have been standard for a long time. The panel is designed to be less dangerous in a crash. It is lower and lacks the protrusion of a yoke. Four point seat belts have been standard since day one. The airframe is extremely strong. The only in air breakup I know of was a dive at almost 300 knots when the chute was deployed.
Click to expand...

During an off field landing the engine tends to separate and the firewall gets pushed into the cockpit.
I know that in the G2 they did something to the firewall, don't know whether or not that modification stayed with the G3.
Could you elaborate as to what exactly they did in the G2?



peppy said:
You must be talking about the SR20. The SR22 only drops to 200'/min around 17k' and that is for the normally aspirated version. The turbo will climb ROP at 1000'/min into the high teens on a hot day and 500'/min or so LOP if OAT's aren't too crazy. In the interest of full disclosure, the turbo numbers are based on comments from others rather than personal experience.

I did have to decrease climb rate to more like 500'/min coming out of North Las Vegas on a very hot day in order to keep CHT's in range.
Click to expand...

Yes I am talking about the SR20, should have specified it.
 
Seanaldinho said:
I feel like a bus driver with a yoke. I prefer to feel like a fighter jock. Hence the stick :)
Click to expand...

Ever seen a P-38? :)

cockpit-close.jpg
 
Henning said:
:rofl::rofl::rofl: you can find the DA 20 Fs out there from the USAFA program of old with the right hand position panel.
Click to expand...

DA20 is a great plane, I got my PPL in it. One of the best handling planes I've ever flown. I don't think I would ever buy one though, it has only two seats and it's not aerobatic. For a non-aerobatic plane I'd want to have at least 4 seats.

Also it's incredibly hard to spot in the air. They are always painted white, the whole airframe is extremely small, the tail is so think that it's next to invisible, and the bauble canopy makes the fuselage seem much smaller than it is.
I assume the wooden prop and the composite structure makes similar problems on radar.
Ask yourself this; have you ever seen a DA20 in the air? There is a reason for it. :wink2:
 
N801BH said:
Seeing the tag on your profile that says CAP cadet.. I am guessing you are about 14-15 years old. :dunno::dunno:
Click to expand...

16. Your point is?

gtmule said:
:goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy::goofy:

pffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffft. You find a flying Staggerwing for $80k, I'll buy it TODAY.
Click to expand...


I dont intend on getting a flying one. Ill be doing alot of work, again this is a pipe dream. Dont ruin it for me.
 
Seanaldinho said:
Indeed I have. Its my favorite warbird infact. Interesting story about why they used a yoke, leverage. Test pilots felt with a stick they had to pull alot harder to get the same results.
Click to expand...

Yep. If the yoke was really bad then after they installed hydraulic ailerons in the L they could have installed the stick because the primary purpose of why it had a yoke originally was gone, yet they kept it.
 
peppy said:
The tank is a wet wing design as is the Bonanza and many other planes. I prefer the design used by Diamond but they are pretty unique in their design.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with a wet wing, IMO. It's the fact that the material has a tendency in a Cirrus to not break, but rather just shatter.

Henning said:
:rofl::rofl::rofl: you can find the DA 20 Fs out there from the USAFA program of old with the right hand position panel.
Click to expand...

I got my private ticket in a ex-USAFA Diamond 20. Great airplane, had been converted back to normal, and was a blast to fly, until it was totaled.
 
MachFly said:
What happened?
Click to expand...

Older student pilot, flared extremely high. Bounced it in, prop strike, pilot didn't really know what happened, and went through the process of recovering from a bounce. Full power, go around, and try again. Well, the prop decided to completely fall apart about 1/2 off the departure end. Pilot put the aircraft in a field, albeit the edge. Went into the forest, steered it between trees, sheered the wings, and went into a creek, which flipped the fuselage over. Pilot walked away, once help arrived to flip the aircraft over to help him out.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
Older student pilot, flared extremely high. Bounced it in, prop strike, pilot didn't really know what happened, and went through the process of recovering from a bounce. Full power, go around, and try again. Well, the prop decided to completely fall apart about 1/2 off the departure end. Pilot put the aircraft in a field, albeit the edge. Went into the forest, steered it between trees, sheered the wings, and went into a creek, which flipped the fuselage over. Pilot walked away, once help arrived to flip the aircraft over to help him out.
Click to expand...

That sucks. Good plane.




While were on topic, take a look at this report:

NTSB Identification: ERA09CA192
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Thursday, March 05, 2009 in Morristown, NJ
Probable Cause Approval Date: 06/11/2009
Aircraft: DIAMOND AIRCRAFT IND INC DA 20-C1, registration: N176MA
Injuries: 1 Uninjured.​

The solo student pilot had accumulated a total of 14 flight hours at the time of the accident. For his second solo flight, he received a flight release from his instructor to conduct touch-and-go landings. During the first takeoff on runway 23, the student added full power for the takeoff roll. As the front wheel began to lift off, the airplane drifted off the left side of the 150-foot-wide runway. The left wing struck the runway distance sign marked "5," destroying the sign that was situated approximately 36 feet from the runway edge. The student "had no sensation of a collision," and conducted three touch-and-go landings and a full stop before he terminated the flight. The student told the controller in the air traffic control tower that he experienced a momentary loss of control. Damage to the wing was discovered when the student returned the airplane to the flight school. The leading edge of the left wing was damaged from the landing light inboard for approximately 3 feet. The inboard end of the damaged area exhibited splintering and separation of composite finish, binder, and cloth layers. The underside of the wing had an approximately 6-inch hole that also exhibited splintered layers of composite finish, binder, and cloth material. The manager of the flight school reported that there were no airplane malfunctions or mechanical failures either before or after the collision. The student indicated that the airport Automated Terminal Information Service reported winds to be from 210 degrees at 9 knots.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

The student pilot's failure to maintain directional control during the takeoff roll.
Click to expand...

Ripped of a chunk of wing and still few back, amazing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top