Cessna Cardinal 177 RG II v. Piper Arrow III (70s) v. Piper Arrow III (brand new)

"Dan Luke" wrote

My airplane has been parked 2 mi. from Mobile Bay for nearly 7 years and
has
no corrosion. It gets Corrosion-X'd at every other annual.

Tell us more about that. What is it, that you do, on every other annual?
--
Jim in NC

Newps wrote:



wrote:

Jay Honeck wrote:

Call me fickle, self-oriented, greedy, snobby, what have you, but I do
not fly and will not own a fixed-gear plane.


That's the goofiest thing I've read here in a long time.



It's not about speed it's about the landing gear lever.


Which is understandable with a high performance plane. But a Cardinal
or an Arrow? Please. Those are toy planes. There's no prestige in
either of those.

Prestige requires burning kerosene.

Matt

Prestige requires burning kerosene.

Heh. We had a guest this weekend who arrived in a Pilatus. We spoke
at length about the aircraft, but the thing he was most impressed with
was the "economy" of flying a Pilatus, as it "only" cost $565/hour to
operate...

Thus proving that EVERYTHING is relative...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...
Prestige requires burning kerosene.

Heh. We had a guest this weekend who arrived in a Pilatus. We spoke
at length about the aircraft, but the thing he was most impressed with
was the "economy" of flying a Pilatus, as it "only" cost $565/hour to
operate...

Thus proving that EVERYTHING is relative...

Yummy!

Have you ever calculated what it costs to operate Atlas, per hour, including
everything?
--
Jim in NC

In article . com,
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

Prestige requires burning kerosene.

Heh. We had a guest this weekend who arrived in a Pilatus. We spoke
at length about the aircraft, but the thing he was most impressed with
was the "economy" of flying a Pilatus, as it "only" cost $565/hour to
operate...

hmmmm


Thus proving that EVERYTHING is relative...

What's the per mile cost?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

("Newps" wrote)
That would be close. At 45%(19"/2100) I get 130 kts indicated.


What's the fuel burn in that sweet-spot?


Montblack

Montblack wrote:
("Newps" wrote)

That would be close. At 45%(19"/2100) I get 130 kts indicated.



What's the fuel burn in that sweet-spot?

I burn 8 gph, that's about 50 lean of peak.

No......certainly not the Cutlass RG. It was introduced after the cutoff
date(I think it was fall of 1978) for the GI bill.

The other three wouldn't exist without the GI bill students. Thousands of
these students got their commercial in the basic three trainers.


"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"karl gruber" wrote:

Both the Arrow and the Cardinal...........and for that matter the Sierra,
were produced for ONE reason only. 200HP, retractable gear for commercial
students.

BS.

True in the case of the Cutlass RG, perhaps; not true in the case of the
Cardinal RG.

And what's 200 hp got to do with it?


--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Newps wrote:

It wouldn't be three times. My 67 182 was usually right at $1000 for a
$70K hull. My Bo is $2200 this year with a $90K hull. That's on its
way down as I got the Bo with zero retract time last year. I would
expect the premium to be in the $1800 range next year.

Congrats on the upgrade.. hope you like it.. I've always liked the
Bonanza ride.. just not the bonanza price/cost of operation/cost of parts..

Dave

karl gruber wrote:
No......certainly not the Cutlass RG. It was introduced after the cutoff
date(I think it was fall of 1978) for the GI bill.

The other three wouldn't exist without the GI bill students. Thousands of
these students got their commercial in the basic three trainers.



So what you're saying is that a plane that was able to take the abuse
of flight schools for decades while not putting them in the hole would
for some reason be an impractical and uneconomical airplane?