A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old July 19th 04, 02:31 AM
Dan Luke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Thomas Borchert" wrote:
In Europe, the Diesel is a total winner.


It should be here, too.

IMHO, a creating a new 172/Archer makes a lot of sense,
since both leave a lot to be desired - speed among them.


I suppose so. It just disappointed me when such a good-looking airplane
appeared but didn't quite manage to be a replacement for the one I
already have.

Even if you only think of the Star as a 172 that's 20 knots
faster, you stilll have a winner.


We'll see.

And that doesn't take into account how well it flies and the great

visibility.

As I said, it's an attractive airplane.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM


  #52  
Old July 19th 04, 09:19 AM
Thomas Borchert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Dan,

In Europe, the Diesel is a total winner.


It should be here, too.


A totally new concept for an engine? In the US pilot community? Come
on, you gotta be kidding. half g

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

  #53  
Old July 19th 04, 09:19 AM
Thomas Borchert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Stefan,

Then the DA42 might be your new plane.


Same cabin, basically. So you might gain load, but not space.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

  #54  
Old July 19th 04, 09:19 AM
Thomas Borchert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

PaulaJay1,

It can be
changed with some effort but not during flight.


well, the effort consists of reading the manual and pushing some
buttons. It's EASY!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

  #55  
Old July 19th 04, 10:39 AM
Stefan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Then the DA42 might be your new plane.


Same cabin, basically. So you might gain load, but not space.


Dan asked for more load and more range, the DA42 provides both. Plus
more speed.

Stefan

  #56  
Old July 19th 04, 10:59 AM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bob Noel wrote:

In article , "Peter Duniho"
wrote:


Why not? I'm right handed, but have flown yoke equipped airplanes
left-handed since I started flying.


I presume that the problem Bob foresees is how to write things down while
flying the airplane.



bingo.


I guess that rules our flying a stick equipped airplane or a chopper
also, right?


Matt

  #58  
Old July 19th 04, 02:46 PM
Dude
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

As the numbers dwindle the ability for you to continue your enjoyment is
more threatened than by it increasing.

Much of the cost of GA is due to lack of economy of scale.

If you want to ever sell your plane, you will need a pilot to buy it.

Your ability to keep your airport open is a direct function of how many
voters your local pilot population can speak to or know.

Our ability to keep the majors (and the ever increasing threat from bizjets)
from punting us from the skies and airports) is dependent on our ability to
keep the piston friendly FBO's and flight schools in business.

I think perhaps you are letting this issue get ahead of you, and in the long
run it will end flying just the same as letting the plane get ahead of you.
Perhaps I am a bit of a chicken little on this, but the sky IS falling,
albeit slowly.





"Jeremy Lew" wrote in message
...
I don't understand many peoples' obsession with growth in the popularity

of
GA. The skies are plenty crowded enough as it is around where I fly.

"Dude" wrote in message
news

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

"Dude" wrote:
So what interests you?

Something that will take my daughter, my grandson, me and some luggage
to Houston, against a 15kt headwind, nonstop, with comfortable IFR
reserves.


There are always mission trade offs, perhaps its just not the plane for

you.
That doesn't make it any less a good design, just not designed for your
purpose.


The SR20 is interesting, but I am still thinking the wingload is
too high for a new pilot (less than 300 hours).

Let him rent Skyhawks awhile.


This is what has been killing GA for years. There have been surveys to

find
why more wealthy people do not take up aviation as a hobby. They found

a
number of problems that will not change FAA hassles, pimple faced
instructors with no people skills, etc.

The other thing was the flight schools are mostly dumps with a bunch of

old
ratty planes. Even a new Skyhawk is essentially an old plane.

How do we expect to grow general aviation if we REFUSE to change what we

are
doing to attract new pilots? Isn't this the definition of insanity?

Cessna
is unconsciously doing to aviation what Microsoft and IBM did to
technology - killing fast growth and innovation in favor of predictable
business.



Sure, 100 pounds would be more interesting, and I bet
they could go to 200 hp and get it, but would that really
make it more marketable?

It would to me.

You have to remember that these planes now come with a lot more
weight requirements due to the new FARS.

Like what, for instance?


Better crash protection for one. This necessarily adds weight.

Everyone
wants more avionics now too. I wonder if the 40 could make your trip if

it
only had a single 430 and long range tanks.

The only thing better in my book is the Lancair, and it's a lot more
money.

It's really in a different class, along with the SR-22. If it didn't
have a side stick, I'd rather have an SR-20 than a D-40 for the better
range & load.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM








  #59  
Old July 19th 04, 04:45 PM
Tom Sixkiller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Dude" wrote in message
news

How do we expect to grow general aviation if we REFUSE to change what we

are
doing to attract new pilots? Isn't this the definition of insanity?

Cessna
is unconsciously doing to aviation what Microsoft and IBM did to
technology - killing fast growth and innovation in favor of predictable
business.


No. Cessna is doing it deliberately. Cessna did not really want to

re-start
manufacturing piston singles in the first place. They promised to do it

when
some kind of tort reform was passed. Bob Dole got the tort reform passed

and
leaned hard on Cessna to start building airplanes.

Cessna sees the construction of new airplanes as a threat to a very
lucrative business: building parts for old airplanes.


So, those old planes would no longer need to be fixed?


  #60  
Old July 19th 04, 05:06 PM
G.R. Patterson III
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Dan Luke wrote:

"Thomas Borchert" wrote:
In Europe, the Diesel is a total winner.


It should be here, too.


There's no good argument for using them in the States. Gas isn't that much more
expensive (if at all) than Jet-A, and gas is readily available in the lower 48. When
that changes, you'll see more diesels here. Do a comparison of the diesel and gas
Maules. The diesel costs more, is slower (due to cooling drag), and carries less
weight (the engine weighs more). I also think it's pretty ugly, with that Hawker
Typhoon style cowling, but that's a personal opinion.

George Patterson
In Idaho, tossing a rattlesnake into a crowded room is felony assault.
In Tennessee, it's evangelism.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SWRFI Pirep.. (long) Dave S Home Built 20 May 21st 04 03:02 PM
Garmin 1000 turn co-ordinator? John H. Kay Instrument Flight Rules 21 December 31st 03 04:37 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.