If there were 25 million active GA pilots...

How about one of those fan type generators you can lower into the
slipstream? Don't some airliners have something like that or is it just
something I saw in a movie?

mike regish

P.S. I'm a federal employee with a couple of bosses I'd like to deck. How do
I do it without getting fired? ;-)

"Tom S." wrote in message
...

The real "best of both worlds" is a dual bus electrical system with a
vacuum
for backup/redundancy.

I wonder how soon that arrangement might make it's way into the lower
echelon of GA aircraft now that miniaturization is becoming so prevalent.

Tom
--
"Federal personnel data show that just 434 civilian federal workers were
fired for poor performance in 2001. Just 210 non-defense workers,
or 1 in 5,000, were fired for poor performance. Firing rates were
similarly low in prior years, and are low across all agencies."

NOTE: "Poor performance" is pretty much limited to sexual harassment,
theft,
assault, and other criminal actions. Even that is not often enough for a
federal
employment termination.

mike regish wrote:

How about one of those fan type generators you can lower into the
slipstream? Don't some airliners have something like that or is it just
something I saw in a movie?

Dunno about airliners, but the Cessna Owners Organization magazine used to carry
ads for those things. In 1995, one cost $1,495 and STCs were available for a
Cessna 210 and Piper PA-32. Sold by Basic Aircraft Products in Evans Georgia.

George Patterson
You can dress a hog in a tuxedo, but he still wants to roll in the mud.

wrote in message
...

The real key to even getting to that level of GA use would be to make it
practical for GA airplanes and pilots to safely operate IFR in pretty much
the same mix of weather that the airlines fly in. The biggest challenges:
practical and low cost ice protection and weather visualization (the
latter

Even with a terrific TKS known-ice system and 5-minute weather datalink from
Weatherworx, my plane is nowhere near as capable as an airliner. Airliners
have advantages in altitude, speed, and range that make a big difference
compared with my piston single.


--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

On 23-Oct-2003, "Richard Kaplan" wrote:

Even with a terrific TKS known-ice system and 5-minute weather datalink
from Weatherworx, my plane is nowhere near as capable as an airliner.
Airliners have advantages in altitude, speed, and range that make a big
difference
compared with my piston single.


I think you missed my point. In order to attract 25 million active pilots a
vast majority of them would have to view GA aircraft as a reliable means of
transportation for trips of modest length. That means reliably being able
to operate in IFR environments in all seasons and in all regions of the
country. That does NOT mean they would have to match the airlines in speed,
range, or altitude capability, or that they would have to be able to go in
unusually nasty weather. But they would have to be able to operate safely
in TYPICAL bad weather. Put another way, how many people would own and
drive cars if they could only be used for sightseeing around town on sunny
days?
--
-Elliott Drucker

wrote:
I think you missed my point. In order to attract 25 million active pilots
a
vast majority of them would have to view GA aircraft as a reliable means
of
transportation for trips of modest length. That means reliably being able
to operate in IFR environments in all seasons and in all regions of the
country.

....which I personally regard as an impossibility in any practical sense.
That was the main reason for my OP, to generate discussion about why there
*aren't* 25M active GA pilots. There is no reasonably economical airplane
that I can envision that could fulfil the requirements you describe - NASA's
silly Advanced General Aviation Transports Experiment notwithstanding.

Put another way, how many people would own and drive cars if they could
only be used for sightseeing around town on sunny days?

Bingo.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

mike regish wrote ...
How about one of those fan type generators you can lower into the
slipstream? Don't some airliners have something like that or is it just
something I saw in a movie?

mike regish


Indeed, it's the RAT or ram air turbine. Its purpose is to generate enough
power to keep the plane flying. In
some planes it pressurizes the ciritcal hydraulics too, as
well as the more important avionics.

Reminds me of the venturi tubes used to generate vacuum for the attitude
indicator in old Tiger Moths. I guess it was pretty reliable. Maybe these
things still have a place in modern airplanes alongside the computers ;-)

/ Nils

Reminds me of the venturi tubes used to generate vacuum for the attitude
indicator in old Tiger Moths. I guess it was pretty reliable. Maybe these
things still have a place in modern airplanes alongside the computers ;-)

/ Nils

You don't have to go back that far! The vacuum system in my IFR equipped
1953 Cessna 170 was powered via a venturi. Works perfectly well
(as long as you don't run into to much ice) But that's why you
have an electric T&B

~Paul Mennen

On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 00:38:40 GMT, mike regish wrote:
How about one of those fan type generators you can lower into the
slipstream? Don't some airliners have something like that or is it just
something I saw in a movie?

I think they are called a 'ram air turbine'.

On the Diamond DA-40, with all electrical IFR instruments, there is a
battery backup for the AI which is totally separate from the normal
electrical buses (activated by a guarded switch). The backup is powered
by a pack of alkaline (Duracell) batteries (with expiry date), and IIRC,
lasts quite a long time if you need to use it.

I'd much rather have electric AI and DG and vacuum TC in the traditional
set-up. I've seen numerous vacuum failures, but in over 1000 hours of
flying I've yet to see an electrical failure where I've had no power
at all. I'd rather have the most useful instruments powered by the most
reliable source.o

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

I'd much rather have electric AI and DG and vacuum TC in the traditional
set-up. I've seen numerous vacuum failures, but in over 1000 hours of
flying I've yet to see an electrical failure where I've had no power
at all. I'd rather have the most useful instruments powered by the most
reliable source.o

I experienced two complete electrical failures in my first 100 hours. Of
course, that's more a commentary on the condition of the rental fleet back
then...

I've never seen a vacuum failure, in over 800 hours of flying. (Although I
did experience a vacuum attitude indicator failure a couple of months
ago...)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" writes:

I've never seen a vacuum failure, in over 800 hours of flying. (Although I
did experience a vacuum attitude indicator failure a couple of months
ago...)

I experienced my first vacuum failure about 100 hours after I bought
my Warrior. I was about 10 miles back at night in excellent VMC. I
reduced power to start a gentle descent, and immediately the vacuum
indicator lit up (it was impossible to miss). I crosschecked the
suction gauge, which read 0. By the time we touched down, the AI was
seriously tilted and the HI was barely moving.

My plane was imported to Canada in 1988 and got a new set of logs then
(as is typical). I have found no reference to a vacuum pump
replacement in the logs, so the pump that failed had at least 1,000
hours and 15 years on it.


All the best,


David