|
|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
 |
| Thread Tools |
Rating: 
|
Display Modes |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
just be glad you have one and it's function-able without the meds 
|
|
#17
11-22-11, 09:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#18
11-23-11, 04:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The P-navajo is considerably heavier than the skymaster, too. Power does not equate to performance. Excess power does.
One of the single biggest mistakes a prospective or current light twin pilot can make is to view his or her aircraft as a powerful and capable machine. Instead, the forethought should be it's glaring limitations and it's drastic loss in performance with the loss of power. Overestimation of one's equipment and the actions which follow are often the dividing line between the living and the dead when it comes to aircraft mishaps. Those who plan ahead typically avoid them. Those who profess excess admiration in the capabilities of their equipment, especially limited equipment, are due for a rude awakening. The aircraft I most often fly currently has well over two hundred thousand pounds of thrust, and I can assure you is not overpowered, nor particularly powerful. In fact, there are frequent occasions when I'd like considerably more. Simply because it has power doesn't make it a wonder machine. The beauty of the Skymaster is that it's simple. It's more like a 182 with an extra motor, but it's not powerful, and it's not a high performing machine. It handles nicely, it does offer a little better performance than some comparable machines, but there is a lot of equipment in the case class and power range that does as well or better. It's loud, not particularly fast, and not an advanced platform. It's well designed, within reason, and it's loved by most of those who own them; that ought to be enough. The Skymaster is still in use commercially for operations ranging from aerial supervision to intelligence gathering to photography and charter. It's easy to fly, and easy to fly well. It lands nicely. It's not appreciably bigger than many comparable light singles; it's easy to hangar and store and to find space for on the ramp or apron. It's comfortable for long distances. It's not powerful, even by light twin standards, and it's not really a top performer, either. It's not a P-navajo, and does't have the cabin room of a P-navajo (although surprisingly, quite a bit can be fit in one with all the seats removed) or the capability. The Panther navajo conversion isn't particularly powerful, either.
|
|
#19
11-23-11, 02:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#20
11-25-11, 08:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Last edited by Red Air Rambo : 11-25-11 at 08:05 PM.
|
|
#21
11-26-11, 08:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Max twin engine climb at sea level, 1,200 fpm. Truly blistering performance. max single engine climb at sea level 350 fpm. Awe inspiring. Same basic engine, add an intercooler, heavier airplane (pressurized), and while the Rocket folks like to advertise that you'll have the sky to yourself at 20,000', that's not very high,and it's also not very alone. It just means you're putting yourself in a slow airplane in a faster airplane environment where there's a greater chance of getting run over byother traffic. It does offer more options. The skymaster is a light twin; it's not high performance and not really stellar compared to many other light twins. It handles nicely, it's simple, it's relatively efficient, and the view isn't bad. The Rocket is a very hard to deal to beat, given the advertised price, for all the modifications, upgrades, and aircraft, especially given that many singles that don't offer so much go for considerably more. Just don't overestimate what you've got. In aviation, sometimes that hurts. An old friend and co-worker did that recently, and it hurt him and his loved ones a lot.
|
|
#22
11-26-11, 10:28 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Wow!.....22 years flying fighters for Uncle Sam with 7 combat tours to Iraq and now I'm going to get run over at 20,000 feet while IFR....it's a shame.
 Last edited by Red Air Rambo : 11-26-11 at 10:59 AM.
|
|
#23
11-26-11, 05:41 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I then rolled inverted, opened the smoking window and let loose with my trusty 45...last I saw he was heading down with smoke streaming from the right engine....had my A&P put a Howard 500 image on the cowl next to the sailplane I shot down last week. 
|
|
#24
11-29-11, 02:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
While you may be impressed with the stellar performance of your aircraft, and while you may have impeccable single engine tactical experience, you're likely a very low time piston pilot, flying a low performance light twin at low speeds at the lowest of the flight levels, and at ideal altitude ranges to be caught in the worst weather, too. I flew Skymasters around a lot of former military pilots, and the only ones that damaged airplanes were...military pilots. Every incident of landing gear damage, every incident of engine mismanagement, etc, were military pilots. Does this mean military pilots are bad pilots? Not really, but generally over-impressed with their own experience, to be sure. A high time military pilot is a low time civil pilot, and a high time turbojet pilot with one hour of piston time is a one hour piston pilot. Don't get too impressed by what you perceive to be the high performance characteristics of your aircraft, or yourself. Such inflated views generally lead to tragedy.
|
|
#26
11-29-11, 11:51 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Guppy-
 Jeez....I grew up flying pistons with my dad and have always had a plane....why do you sling so much mud? Better yet why go on a Skymaster web site to bash Skymasters? My appoligies to all for the original thread getting hi-jacked....I'm done!Last edited by Red Air Rambo : 11-29-11 at 11:58 AM.
|
|
#27
11-29-11, 01:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
what you wish to read! let the individual decide what they wish to read, respond to or just IGNORE. ignoring a rant makes it disappear;usually all opinions have some merit maybe not much in others eye; but some.
|
|
#28
11-29-11, 02:39 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Does that mean no, there isn't a way for an individual to block out specific posters? I didn't ask for anyones opinion about what may consitiute censorship. Censorship is when someone else attempt to tell you what you should or shouldn't view, not what you yourself find worthy of viewing.
This thread has deteriorated into what reminds me of articles that appear at times in various aviation magazines about how often-times students are swayed away from aviation because they encounter flight instructors who are so overbearing and obnoxious that they turn people off on the whole industry. Wow, I wonder where they get those kind of ideas ?
|
|
#29
11-29-11, 10:28 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I have done it in the past. You simply remove the offending post, and the thread remains intact. Watch, my comment about being passed by a Howard is now deleted. While, the quote from that message remains intact. However, as a user, you do not have that ability.
|
|
#30
11-29-11, 11:33 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
..I thoght that was funnny.
|
Linear Mode
