The Never Ending Fun Debate

[turboplanner]

10 hours ago, Kenlsa said:

Read an article in Kitplanes Magazine a few years ago comparing speeds with arrival times.  They used (from my memory) a 75/100/120 kt aircraft and flew the “normal “ hamburger run of one hour to a neighbouring strip.  
 

While there is a difference in transit times the advantage could be lost in both departing and arrival circuits.  There bottom line was that if you are flying for about an hour…..transit speed differences mattered little. It really only meant anything meaningful if you are approaching 2 hrs.

 

I put this to an informal test and flew out of an air show with traffic management so all ran smoothly.  Some had to turn right at 1000agl while the following had to turn left at 1000agl and so on.  A Gazelle departed only 5 minutes before me and with a 75kt cruise speed (had the very first Bolly prop approval).  He departed one direction and I the other.  He stayed low and I climbed 1000 ft higher than him @ at 100kts.

 

I handed a couple of minutes after him after a distance of 100 miles!

 

He flew low, not wasting time climbing and descending and probably picked up a more favourable wind, enjoying the scenery.

 

So all this “mine is bigger/faster than yours” is well…………pointless?

 

The engine part a couple of weeks ago certainly was. I started to research for it and found a can of worms that was not comparing apples with apples.

 

Some people were including prop specifications, but that needs to be extracted.

 

Some people were including airframes, but the airframe component needs to be broken into frontal area and coefficient of drag and more.

 

What you are discussing it true, but you can break it up to get a comparison (which will still pretty much come out the same as your comments, i.e. the longer the trip leg the quicker the fast aircraft does it.)

 

One of the pre-flight Performance & Operations calculations for a cross-country trip is fuel burn.

 

This diagramme shows the components of a flight; knowing your aircraft fuel burn per hour, cruise speed, climb rate you can calcuate his in a couple of minutes.

 

The time starts when you start the engine and the take off time at a busy city airport can take 20 minutes or at a farm strip just the #1 time.

 

You can see in this example that you only have an advantage in fast cruise for 90% of the time, and each trip and different aircraft calculation will make the result different.

 

The disadvantage of the faster aircraft is that it's harder for the average person to keep ahead of the aircraft, and plenty of accidets have come out of that.

 

The disadvantage of the slower aircraft is that headwinds are a much bigger percentage of cruise speed. plenty of rage and tubes cruising to a fly in at 65 kts in an unexpected 30 kt headwind have had to turn back and abandon the flight whereas 130 kt, less 30 kt still leaves 100 kt TAS.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Kenlsa]

Skippy, please read your 7 point discussion plan on your first post initiating this thread.  I feel that my previous post fits your criteria for discussion.  Please indicate where I was rude.

Ken

[facthunter]

Turbs, your info would only apply in still air. Distance / GROUNDSPED = time.  Nev

[facthunter]

Groundspeed x  time equals  distance covered..  (to put it another way.) Nev

[turboplanner]

Anyone else care to share how they do these P&O calculations?

[skippydiesel]

On 17/05/2024 at 1:37 PM, facthunter said:

Turbs, your info would only apply in still air. Distance / GROUNDSPED = time.  Nev

If making  crude comparison of efficiency, can only use still air, unless aircraft being studied fly exactly same alt/track.

Any other comparison will require sophisticated measuring equipment, so that variables can be adequately accommodated or removed.

Thats why I like competitions, for obtaining unbiased third party data.

[skippydiesel]

16 hours ago, turboplanner said:

Anyone else care to share how they do these P&O calculations?

The only P&O I know, is a shipping line 😈

[skippydiesel]

On 17/05/2024 at 11:35 AM, Kenlsa said:

Skippy, please read your 7 point discussion plan on your first post initiating this thread.  I feel that my previous post fits your criteria for discussion.  Please indicate where I was rude.

Ken

I do not recall targeting you with this statement.

[turboplanner]

21 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

The only P&O I know, is a shipping line 😈

I'm beginning to think RA have missed out on teaching it. Interesting that the Instructors are quiet as mice, but they have to sum up whether not teaching it constitutes a reasonably forseeable risk.

[facthunter]

So now groundspeed is not important when planning fuel etc???  Nev

[spacesailor]

P O

Pilot & Owners ( Association ) .

Pilot Operators.  ( Handbook )  .

PACIFIC &ORIENT ( Insurance )Company.

Pacific & ORIENT ( Shipping ) company .

This list' could ' be endless. 

spacesailor

 

[BrendAn]

2 hours ago, spacesailor said:

P O

Pilot & Owners ( Association ) .

Pilot Operators.  ( Handbook )  .

PACIFIC &ORIENT ( Insurance )Company.

Pacific & ORIENT ( Shipping ) company .

This list' could ' be endless. 

spacesailor

 

only those who crack the turbo cryptic code understand.

[turboplanner]

1 hour ago, BrendAn said:

only those who crack the turbo cryptic code understand.

Or those who've had formal training on Performance & Operations.

[spacesailor]

And in my list goes  ! .

Performance and Operations .

( fast into hospital for hip replacement ) sorry couldn't resist .

spacesailor

[BrendAn]

12 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Or those who've had formal training on Performance & Operations.

yes i did find it after much searching.   i am only a dumb truck driver.

i bow to the mighty one  once again. don't tell raaus how dopey i am when you do your report, it looks bad on my logbook.😁

[turboplanner]

1 minute ago, BrendAn said:

yes i did find it after much searching.   i am only a dumb truck driver.

i bow to the mighty one  once again. don't tell raaus how dopey i am when you do your report, it looks bad on my logbook.😁

The good thing today is reports aren't needed for people who aren't qualified to fly or opt to "fly on instruments" through cloud etc. because we operate on self-administration these days.

[spacesailor]

Also applies to the ' illiterate ' that can't  ' compose a letter , nevermind the " grammar & spelling " .

spacesailor

[Kenlsa]

On 16/5/2024 at 5:48 PM, skippydiesel said:

 

It seems to me that you two are about aggressive argument not factual discussion - Try sticking to fact, do not quote me or others out of context, by all means go off on an interesting tangent but above all remain polite. 

Skippy, as above.

 

Ken

[facthunter]

Using facts. That could be a good idea.  Nev

[F10]

The biggest criteria by far (I'm married....I know!) is COST - COST - COST! (both purchase and running cost). End of discussion. I love pootering around Gippslands on a Saturday, in my trusty little Gazelle. Would I prefer a Sport Cruiser of a Carbon Cub? Hell yes! But hey, getting into the air, was the priority! 

[BrendAn]

21 minutes ago, F10 said:

The biggest criteria by far (I'm married....I know!) is COST - COST - COST! (both purchase and running cost). End of discussion. I love pootering around Gippslands on a Saturday, in my trusty little Gazelle. Would I prefer a Sport Cruiser of a Carbon Cub? Hell yes! But hey, getting into the air, was the priority! 

i watched you land on 23 on the weekend.  nice looking aircraft.  

[facthunter]

Gazelle. The easiest aeroplane to fly , ever.    Nev

[skippydiesel]

1 hour ago, F10 said:

The biggest criteria by far (I'm married....I know!) is COST - COST - COST! (both purchase and running cost). End of discussion. I love pootering around Gippslands on a Saturday, in my trusty little Gazelle. Would I prefer a Sport Cruiser of a Carbon Cub? Hell yes! But hey, getting into the air, was the priority! 

 

I don't have the breadth of experince, to know if there are any genuinely bad recreational aircraft, so I tend to think they are all good and all have their particular characteristics, that the pilot must come to terms with. That aside I agree with F10's sentiment - it's all about that magic feeling of flight - an uncommon privilege. 

 

I think one of  F10"s criteria, for selecting the appropriate aircraft, is coved to some extent by the heading "Mission" or objective . His (& mine) is in large  part, minimising cost .

[facthunter]

There are some things you don't skimp on. It's false economy and time wasting. A cheaper plane is often achieved with a simpler one. . A plane that is very controllable and has a nice control feel is important. Something you feel is an extension of you and doesn't bite you easily.  Nev

[facthunter]

I wouldn't leave any U/L out in the weather, either. I wouldn't do it to a lawnmower. .   Yes flying is DIFFERENT. There's nothing but aerodynamics keeping it up.Nev