Navions

"rip" wrote in message . com...
Ron, are you sure your brakes aren't dragging? Mine taxis quite
sprightly, though coincidentally I call my plane "The Pig".

They're not dragging. I do have the 7.00x8 (original) on it. Actually, it's not
all that bad (unless you're in a crosswind, lots of sail area to a Navion). But, you
may be immunized to it. Go back and try something light on the wheels. I used
to pop back and forth between my Navion and a friends 170. The 170 is like
roller skating.

"Tri Pacer Pilot" wrote
I've looked at Cherokee 180s, Cessna 182s / 210s and am becoming more and
more interested in Navions. The popular culture says that they are well
(0ver) built and very stable and allegely easy to fly. I'm hoping someone
could help me with ...

How do they perform on the E185 Continental
Are the hydraulics hard to maintain or troublesome
Are there any major AD gotchas that I should be careful of
Would they be harder to fly than, say, a Piper Arrow in terms of being a
complex aircraft?
Are they certified in Normal and Utility catagories (ie, can they be spun
intentionally?)

I have my commercial and instrument ratings and about 500 hrs TT.

Any help or advice would be much appreciated.

I don't own a Navion, but I know someone who does. I've flown his,
and I've helped him work on it - but very little of both, so take this
with a grain of salt.

You will not have a problem flying it. Few airplanes are more stable
than a TriPacer, but this is one of them. It's a rock-solid
instrument platform - if you're only going to fly a little IFR, this
is perfect. I've safetied for the owner, who really doesn't fly all
that much, and I could sit there and watch him periodically fixate,
but the airplane is so stable and solid it just keeps going in a
straight line. There is no complexity to speak of, and nothing
happens very quickly. I've flown a Piper Arrow, and consider it to be
the second-easiest 'complex' airplane I've flown. The easiest? The
Navion.

The plane is VERY roomy. I've never been in the back seat, but the
front seat has more cabin room than a Bonanza. Two fat guys can sit
there in comfort. The control and instrument layout is haphazard, but
that's common for planes of that vintage. Ergonomics? What's that?

The E-185 engine is an orphan, and conversion to something else is NOT
cheap. Performance on the E-185 is actually OK - no worse than the
TriPacer in climb, and definitely better in cruise. Most people only
convert once the engine needs very major work and they discover how
difficult it is to get parts.

The downside is the maintenance. Unless you're planning to do a lot
of your own wrenching, stay away. Nothing is particularly
complicated, but everything is time consuming. There are two kinds of
Navion hydralic systems - those that are maintained by people who
really understand them (a distinct minority among A&P's these days)
and those that leak constantly and are nothing but trouble.

Michael

"Michael" wrote in message om...
] The downside is the maintenance. Unless you're planning to do a lot
of your own wrenching, stay away. Nothing is particularly
complicated, but everything is time consuming.

Nothing is particularly time consuming. Much of it is actually easier than the
Arrow. However, Navion's are different. The biggest problem is dealing
with an ignorant mechanic who won't spend the time to read the book or
call someone about Navion-specific issues. Airframe parts availability is
also not a major issue. The major parts problem, are as you alluded to,
the availability of engine/accessory parts for the older engines.

There are two kinds of
Navion hydralic systems - those that are maintained by people who
really understand them (a distinct minority among A&P's these days)
and those that leak constantly and are nothing but trouble.

I have no idea what the above statement is intended to mean. With the
exception of the master control valve (which most mechanics are probably
advised to send out for repairs), there is nothing odd about the Navion
hydraulic system. It's just a bunch of tubing. If it leaks, anywhere other
than the MCV, then it's just a fitting or actuator that needs attention, just
like any other hydraulic device (even your beloved Arrow). The MCV
leaks are readily apparent as pilot gets red stains on his right knee. I've
never had a problem with my hydraulic system and it's never been "maintained"
by any extraordinary means. There was a leak in the flap actuator when
I bought it which was easily fixed by a mechanic who'd never seen a Navion
before.

I have no idea what the above statement is intended to mean. With the
exception of the master control valve (which most mechanics are probably
advised to send out for repairs), there is nothing odd about the Navion
hydraulic system. It's just a bunch of tubing. If it leaks, anywhere other
than the MCV, then it's just a fitting or actuator that needs attention, just
like any other hydraulic device (even your beloved Arrow). The MCV
leaks are readily apparent as pilot gets red stains on his right knee. I've
never had a problem with my hydraulic system and it's never been "maintained"
by any extraordinary means. There was a leak in the flap actuator when
I bought it which was easily fixed by a mechanic who'd never seen a Navion
before.


That has been my experience as well. I had to have the MCV rebuilt
after the plane was down for a couple of years, probably due to air in
the lines and the O-rings drying out. Other than that, I have had no
problems. If there is a leak elsewhere, a couple of O-rings will
usually correct the situation. Over all, the hydraulic system has
been very reliable and trouble free.

Ron French
Navion N4969K