Thanks for contributing your 2 bits Corrie... read below...

(Corrie) wrote in message . com...
My tuppence-worth comments on the goals listed at the bottom of the
linked page:

Goals:
IIRC, inline-twin is a separate category. Just because you're rated
to fly a 337 doesn't mean you can strap on an Apache. The feds
already recognize the distinction.

I should go correct that, what I mean is to put it in the same
catagory as singles, so you only need a type checkout, like going from
a C-150 to a Piper Tomahawk.

Doesn't make sense. The complexity of a system drives the inspection
/ MX schedule. The location of the system's components has little to
do with its complexity.

Think of Christmas tree lights. Type A puts 'em all in series, lose
one and you've lost 'em all, type B puts 'em in parallel, loose one,
and you've only lost 2% of your christmas spirit.

If your car brake system didn't have 2 parallel and independant
circuits you'd have more regular service required, but since its a
cross coupled redundant system, you can get away with all sorts of
abuse and neglect and still hardely ever have a total brake failure.
Its the same idea here with the in-line twin, since you have a fail
soft condition, you can afford to spend less money inspecting and
reinspecting your known working system.

The way in which the system is arranged has everything to do with its
composit reliability.

3) Petition FAA to allow otherwise compliant twin aircraft with a
single line of thrust (but 2 engines) to be part of the new "Sport"
aircraft classification.

Works fer me.

great!

4) And regarding Sport classification, remove top speed limitation,
the stall speed requirement is sufficient; if someone can build a wing
with low speed stall characteristic and high top speed, then we'd all
like to have it.


A wing with those characteristics needs moving parts such as Fowler
flaps and slats. Think 727. That's likely to either be so heavy as
to outweigh the category, or require such exotic materials as to be
unaffordable.

If thats REALLY the case, why make the rule then? The other rules
(and those of nature) would seem to dictate this top speed by default.
But in the mean time, maybe we'll see something people hadn't
considered because they've been made possible by recent materials
developments or computer technology.