Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Aerobatics' started by John Cardaci, Dec 5, 2019.
A T-6 is noisy and not that fast in cruise.but its a real airplane. Go try one.
Isn't the Swick T-Craft single seat? I know Duane Cole's was. Even a stock T-Craft is "cozy" for two, with a very small baggage area.
A Nanchang CJ-6 is another good option but you better be comfortable with a lot of maintenance.
The Swick mod replaces the yokes with a center stick, you do what you want with the stock bench seat. It's meant to be flown solo sitting in the center, using the outside set of rudder pedals. But you can still fly two up, but it's not very ergonomic with the center stick set up. It is a really nice flying airplane, but IMO an odd choice for a XC cruiser/acro plane.
RV4 and 6’s are available at very reasonable prices. If cost is a factor they are great values with very low operating costs. Well below a 172.
Oh, that Italian beauty is very good!
What about 152 Aerobat? XC-wise it is an option
Besides you get to feel like Doug Masters every once in a while.
Are there any insurance costs to consider over a 172? Seems I've heard experimental may carry a higher premium. Might not be enough to offset other costs, but just wondering.
If the RV is a taildragger (as opposed to the nosewheel "A" models) then hull insurance rates will likely depend on how much tailwheel time the pilot has.
Is that the one from my local home-drome? The story I heard was this guy spent years restoring it, then had medical problems. I spoke to him recently and he said he got his medical back and was getting ready to fly it. I just saw it landing at KAWO (Arlington, WA) last week. Very Nice airplane!
To stay on topic, if you're like me and do 90% of your flying solo, an RV-8 is a great cross-country plane for 1 person. It does sportsman class aerobatics and a few actually compete.
My RV-8 is coming together:
I have no idea, that staggerwing photo has been in my album of covetable things for a few years now.
Glad to see the progress on your -8. For me, that’s one of two kits I’d be interested in building.
I second this. The RV has pretty descent speed, and like mentioned above, most are aero capable.
CT4E - perfect in all respects, 150 cruise, 300 hp engine, +6 -3 limitations and very nicely handled.
We are not born with talent, it must be acquired. The whole point of building is learning how to do it. But as has already been stated, building is not required. RV's come up for sale all the time and as often as not, can be bought for about what they would cost to build if not a little less.
Or in many cases, a lot less.
In fact, unless you have a burning desire to build, you may be better off buying one from a builder who's selling.
Hell of an excuse to leave them home!
Insurance for my -8A (hull value $89K) with zero time in type, five hours dual in a -6A, commercial and CFI certificates with 800 total time was $1200. Better than I expected, very reasonable price.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
I’m sure it’s a nice plane based on limited experience with a 150 HP Airtourer, but like many ex-military aircraft it seems speed and fuel efficiency were not foremost among the CT4E priorities. On the other hand it’s surely faster than a Bulldog and cheaper than an SF260!
No acro in an RV-9
And @steingar - RV-6 is great for XC, and not too hard on the wallet to get the ladies gear delivered via FedEx.
FedEx - The best kept secret at Airventure.
Looks like we chased the OP away.
Member Sinceec 5, 2019
John Cardaci was last seen:
Dec 8, 2019
As you might imagine, I'm thrilled to discover this great forum and the spectacular pics. Hope to return to hangin' in the straps soon. Y'all maintain positive attitudes in Life, and be safe regardless of attitudes in the Air!
Yes I know. But it’s the same fuselage as a 7 and a little bigger than a 6. So I thought I would mention it’s plenty comfy to cross country in.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Yep, CT4E - is one of the best choices I've been flying on.
I don't like the way either of them spin. An Airtourer T-6 seems to be the best value between them. For the price of a CT-4E one could have a very nice tourer and an extremely good aerobatic airplane.