The insurance will probably require that, but even if it doesn't, it would be a real good idea. If you'll be training your friend, make sure that CFI also demonstrates common trainee errors in the type -- some of them might surprise you if you haven't seen them before. The biggest issues are speed control on final, ballooning in the flare, and dropping the nose to plant the nosewheel on landing.
Yes. Max speed is 113 K/130 mph indicated, and the canopy must not be opened past a mark on the rail (about 8 inches). Make sure there's no loose stuff (especially no sectionals on the glare shield), as the airflow is out, not in, when the canopy is opened only to that point.
If you do the Crosby O-360 STC on a Traveler (assuming you can find a Tiger air box to do it), you don't get the extra 200 lb GW, but you do get about a 50 lb increase in empty weight, so you have a very fast but more weight-limited Traveler. In addition, unless you already own a creampuff AA-5/5A, it's not cost effective. You can buy a Tiger for less than it would cost to buy an equivalent Cheetah and upgrade it to Tiger status including both the firewall forward and the center spar replacement. Only way it makes sense is if you already own the Cheetah airframe and have access to a Tiger center spar (which is hard to find) and a Tiger air box (which is really hard to find). Been there, done that, got the Cheeger.
You have to replace the center spar as well as the firewall forward, and it isn't easy finding a Tiger air box -- harder to find that than the spar. You can still do the engine upgrade without the spar, but MGW remains 2200 while EW goes up about 50 lb.
The Crosby STC allows the engine swap on a Traveler, but not the spar swap -- again, MGW is the same but EW goes up. Also, you can't swap the Traveler's "short tank" wings with only 37 gallons total, so you are a bit limited on endurance at Tiger speeds.
Correct, which is why you can't do the spar swap on the Traveler to get the 2400 lb MGW.
The Cheetah and Traveler share the same center spar. Most Cheetahs were built with the "long tank" wings that hold 51 gallons total, and those that weren't can take the "long tank" wings because of the Tiger tail, but that starts making the total cost of conversion pretty uneconomical.
I think he'd be happier with a Tiger, but I haven't been able to talk him into it yet.
Maybe I can show him this thread.
Depends on his needs and his budget. You can pay a whole lot less for a Traveler compared to a Tiger, or get a whole lot nicer Traveler for the same money.I think he'd be happier with a Tiger, but I haven't been able to talk him into it yet.
Maybe I can show him this thread.
Actually, it's 30HP difference unless you have the Precision Engines High Compression STC. However, with just two adults and bags, the Traveler has quite enough power for anything short of a hot day in Denver, and the HC STC pretty well solves that, too.
I've already got a bird that will eat a Tiger up..
Not if you are on a strict budget. That's how we ended up with a Cheetah rather than a Tiger in 1990.
Agreed. Other than the initial purchase price, the ownership cost differential between the three is insignificant.
Agreed completely, but not everyone has the extra $10-15K that Tigers cost over comparable Cheetahs, and Travelers can usually be had for at least $5K less than comparable Cheetahs. So if your procurement budget is in the $30-40K range, a Traveler may be the only choice unless you want a "fixer-upper."
That wood isn't 50 years old and it is glued to a steel frame including a roll cage cabin.
RV-6..
You're right though, I am telling him he can always throttle back. He is concerned about the fuel flow.
...which is demonstrably less crashworthy than the honeycomb sandwich construction of the Grumman cabin.
What's your ballpark estimate of his purchase budget?
Aha -- new information. Lots of Traveler and Cheetah owners felt the same way and are quite happy with the choices they made. Main reason I went with a Tiger rather than a Cheetah this time around was that all my formation flying buddies have Tigers, and the Cheetah can't keep up on takeoff, in climb, or as #4 in an echelon turn.
In today's market, that should buy him a decent but not fantastic Traveler. It wouldn't get him a Tiger he'd want at all.
Only a few planes made around 1975 are affected, and Fletchair has the list of affected serial numbers. All planes before and after were made with the "good glue," and have no problems. Those made with the "purple glue" have been watched for several decades, and any issues identified have been dealt with IAW the Service Bulletin. So, there's no reason to avoid any Grummans not on that list, and for those with the purple glue, an inspection by a Grumman-savvy mechanic should identify any problems or otherwise allay concerns.
115 for the 72-74 Travelers and 120 for the Cheetahs and 75 Travelers (which have the Cheetah-style cowl) are good planning figures, with fuel burn of 8.5 gph.
