Відео

I wonder what is red line in a fox glider

Not for sale so I don’t know

if it's any help the market is softening. Piper Cherokee is going to be the most affordable, I wouldn't touch a 210 until you have more experience, unless it's a non turbo, non pressurized, simply because of maintenance and insurance. I'm personally going towards a P210 until I can get into a Cessna 337

@@trueairspeed130 Thank you for the information. What’s your thoughts on a Mooney vs Cherokee?

@@Review-This Mooney's are good, I just don't like the single side entry. Cessnas are superior in accessibility and if you want a fast one, go for a 177 cardinal RG or a 172 RG. If you have the budget 182RG and an older C210

not sure, someone will know in the comments

@@trueairspeed130 hope so lol

True that

Can it be done without making it experimental?

@@trueairspeed130 to me it would be no different than an oversized piston. Whatever it takes to keep them flying.

Swearingen SX300?

Yes Sir.​@@trueairspeed130

I have a feeling that will end up like the Questair I bought and lost my shirt on.

Lol, I do not think you can get dinged soo many times.​@@trueairspeed130

You’d think

Sky’s the limit

It sold for $80k

Torque is only a problem if you’re stupid enough to go full power on take off. You don’t need all 840hp for take off and definitely shouldn’t apply them all at once in any situation.

Could be, next time i see him I’ll ask

clearly

controller.com was advertising one. And Stan might be interested in selling his.

good luck. They are rare so finding one won't be easy.

thanks. I did end up buying it, then didn't like the comfort for my size and ended up selling it.

is it the genre of music, or you just can't stand music at all.

not seeing it in the volume of viewership

Good to know

Yes indeed!

?

True, but It's in a different price category. I actually own a Lancair IVP Turboprop, I might make a video about it soon.

@@trueairspeed130 Weird that you removed my comment. I sold mine for 250K.

@@thomasmahoney9748 I didn't remove any comment. Good to know.

exactly why Stan chose it :)

I am looking forward to seeing a Velocity like yours upfront. I have sat in a Velocity SE, maybe my next video :)

@@trueairspeed130 Sadly, she and I had to part company after my retirement. I encourage you to contact Scott and Duane Swing and head down to Sebastian Florida for a full checkout.

Our pleasure!

👍

Seems dirt cheap for what it is. Maybe particulars we're not aware of?

I agree

My pleasure!

worth looking into.

Glad I could help!

@@GrantOakes somebody’s should give it a try :)

Continental makes a TSIO-360-FB engine and is used in the Turbo Arrow. This engine needs several mods to make it more practical: GAMI injectors, automatic wastegate, pressurized mags, and an engine monitor. I owned a T-Arrow for 14 years and had all of these mods. The turbo and intercooler add a significant bit of length to engine which would drive engine mount, cowling, and C.G. changes. The turbo would be an awesome addition performance wise as sea level manifold pressure can be maintained to 18k ft, which is the critical altitude with the automatic wastegate.

👍

Cool

Thanks for the additional info.

Yes, the plane was fairly well known among the amateur building community (early to mid- 90s, as I recall) as the fastest, and lightest 4-place fibreglass kit. It required very experienced builder who knew their way around composites, and a very experienced pilot, who knew their way around high-performance, complex aircraft.

Great idea!

👍

it's within reach, become a pilot :)

so mean :)

@@trueairspeed130 well that's probably true but that first part, what was that? It was irritating to me sorry.

@@trueairspeed130 Check with this guy before ever producing a video. He, and ONLY he, is king of video law. He's posted two videos and has 17 subs, so he knows what's up! Everyone on the planet bows to his taste & opinion 🤣

I think it stems from the obsession with fuel economy, cost that was brought about by the oil shock. People got PTSD from it and thought it was going to happen again. So they designed as economical as possible which means compromising on size. Still going on to this day, except for a few airframes.

This is a home built experimental category airplane. If you want one you have to build it. Your argument is mute.

I think what he said is valid for a lot of certified airplanes too. Kind of on the small side, not easily accessible.

@@trueairspeed130 You make a good point, for sure. ... One big factor is of course the fact that people are now getting much taller and much bigger than in the past when most of these planes were designed. But even today the Kitplane manufacturers are still making airplanes for midgets, like I found out when shopping for one. Naturally the planes I own, restored or build are all big enough for me, two of them are heavily modified plans-build, stretched for bigger (me=taller) people. Anyway it is always very disappointing when being interested in a plane and then finding out one can not even fit in it....

Get an RV10 if you're 6'4" ✅

No he is not, he loves his airplane

actually just spoke to him and I am mistaken, he said he turned 80 and insurance is getting more onerous for him and he might be interested in selling. 505-337-9355

I agree

True, but Stan rarely takes passengers if at all.

That was the only way this plane could actually safely fly. Turning the seats forward would move the centre of gravity (CG) too far aft, making it impossible to control and fly. This is the beauty of experimental amateur-built aircraft. You can design anything you want and build it yourself. Want an ultra-fast, extremely light, extremely efficient 4-place airplane? You'll need to make some design decisions that are a bit unique.

@@vasicp in my opinion it's a two person airplane with a lot of room in the back :)

Realistically you pop rear seats out and bags go right behind front seats. Maybe skis or clubs would fit with rear seats out?

@@trueairspeed130 in the experimental amateur-built community, there has always been a clear distinction between 2+2 and 4-place aircraft. The 2+2, while advertised as "4-place" tend to have narrow rear seat, where realistically, only a pair of children could fit (and the useful load makes it impossible to fill the tanks with four adults onboard), a real 4-place can realistically fit four typical adults and possibly even fill the tanks (although this may not always be the case, with overweight adults). The White Lightning has a nominal useful load of 850lbs, which allows for four adults (~650lbs) and a decent amount of fuel. The amount of space for rear passengers isn't any tighter than for the pilot/copilot. In other words, it's a genuine 4-place. Realistically, though, owners of 4-place aircraft fly alone, or with just one other person in the plane, 95% of the time (unless flying for hire).

Composite in going to guess fiberglass but it could be carbon

@@trueairspeed130 I’m pretty sure it’s primarily fiberglass.

​@@nagjrcjasonbower Yes, it was fibreglass. Wings are styrofoam core with fibreglass shell.

@@vasicp Thanks. I got a close look at the cockpit and it screamed fiberglass. I couldn’t see much else, but the airframe completion date kinda gave it away… 😎

It's pre-mold fiberglass kit. The 2 rear seats face rearward which is not very popular.

Where’s that?

@@trueairspeed130 KGMU. The owner sold it about 10 years ago.

I wish I could recall the N#… She was a beauty. I watched her fly only one time. The single pilot performance on departure was like a homesick angel scalding VFR into the hot place…

mission accomplished with Orphan

indeed

indeed, but a C not a strike eagle like I originally thought

ok :)

how much does it cost?

It has better crosswind component than a 172

Yes indeed

Fingers crossed!