Recent content by DMD3.

I think the idea was the extra time spent in climb with a cruise prop, particularly when loaded, was harder on the engine. But higher RPMs makes sense.

I’m very sorry and sad to read about this. Nevertheless, it looks like you’ve had a nice, long, aviation-saturated life. If a crystal ball revealed that I had until age 77 before I would have to be grounded, I’d be ecstatic.

I overheard a conversation yesterday at the FBO where a guy who owns a Piper Cherokee likes to cruise at around 10-11k feet on X/C’s, and I heard him say that he actually prefers a climb prop over a cruise prop, as the extra RPMs due to the finer pitch helps him maintain thrust at that...

I figured the lack of the nosewheel could potentially affect the CG by not having enough weight at the front. But in any case, someone on the Vans board said they asked and the fwf kit would work on both the nosewheel & taildragger version. Also, spin recovery is not much of a concern, as I...

Interestingly, N179RV was originally a tailwheel before the Rotax engine was installed. I’ve read some articles and watched the video, but Lockwood makes no mention whether or not the kit could be done on a tailwheel. Would the CG be different? Would the long nose make taxiing more difficult? If...

JMB VL3, though if I could pick two, the TL Sparker would come in a close second.

One thing is take a beer bottle, rinse it out and fill it with water, then take it out and proceed to drink it while in flight. Don’t say anything, just start drinking and see if he notices.

I’ve read about STC’s for this in the past, and True Flight Aerospace is offering an STC as well as fuel injection conversion, though so far only their prototype is the only aircraft currently flying. https://trueflightaerospace.com/latest-news/ For Grummans that have had this conversion, how...

Fuel cap missing on a C150. Found it at the end of the runway where it fell off the aircraft when someone forgot to put it back on after checking the fuel for water (if there’s no water in the fuel, we’d simply pour it back in instead of pouring it out).

I wonder if these aircraft had come around decades ago at around the same time Vans began selling kits, if they’d be super popular today. At a time when experimental was far less expensive. Experimental today can still be more affordable than going certified, but the gap has diminished...

It seems that every time you turn around there’s a new kit aircraft manufacturer on the market. Just came across this on Dan Johnso’s website. Another competitor to the RV. Does anyone know anything about this aircraft? Here’s the artical on Dan’s website...

The Dakota has better climb, ceiling, cruise speed AND a roomier cabin than the 235. The only thing the 235 wins on is payload (it can literally carry its own weight), but that’s not saying much. The Dakota still has a very good payload and is a true four-person hauler. And speaking of the...

If I ever got to fly one and do some spin training, I could request flight following and use “Traumahawk“ in my call-sign. I wonder how ATC would react. :D

At the self-serve pump I’ve been to, it asks you to type in the ‘N’ number for the aircraft being fueled. I’ve never heard of anyone getting aircraft fuel for non aviation purposes.

Again, are hangar & ramp fees any lower?