denverpilot
Tied Down
I just keep wondering when retract will fall off of the Commercial requirements, and become an endorsement across the board. I think eventually that'll happen...
..but, for a mental exercise, wouldn't the retractable gear version of any plane have less drag, and as such more speed than the non retractable variant of the same? The Cessna TTx keeps coming up, as a fixed gear high water mark for speed, being faster than some other retracts out there. fine. but if there was an RG variant of the TTx would that still not be faster by pure virtue of their being less drag?There are no fixed gear Mooney's so you can't say how much faster yours is than a fixed gear one.
I just keep wondering when retract will fall off of the Commercial requirements, and become an endorsement across the board. I think eventually that'll happen...
Of course, but not as much as you think. A well faired fixed gear has very little drag. Nobody is saying retracts aren't faster, just that they may not be faster enough to justify the added cost and complexity...but, for a mental exercise, wouldn't the retractable gear version of any plane have less drag, and as such more speed than the non retractable variant of the same? The Cessna TTx keeps coming up, as a fixed gear high water mark for speed, being faster than some other retracts out there. fine. but if there was an RG variant of the TTx would that still not be faster by pure virtue of their being less drag?
I doubt it, as most airplanes commercial pilots fly bring uo their gear...
Of course, but not as much as you think. A well faired fixed gear has very little drag. Nobody is saying retracts aren't faster, just that they may not be faster enough to justify the added cost and complexity.
And beyond a certain size, they're a type rating, anyway... so... as the low end of the fleet loses retracts...
Of course this also assumes the insurers don't put their own rules on it, which is really how this stuff gets done... "Must have X number of hours of retract time to be insurable under this policy..."
I think it looks weird because it kind of just goes straight down... if it had some angle to it then I think would help make it look a little more sleekThe nose gear is a little funny but it doesn't bother me.
There are no fixed gear Mooney's
That is the upcoming M10. That will also have a retract version. Mooney did make a fix many years ago, but very few were produced, and I think most were later converted to retract.Wow... well will you look at that! learn something new every day. Incidentally, when I started Googling "fixed gear Mooney" I found this very sharp looking FIXED GEAR diesel: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2014/november/11/mooney-unveils-diesel-m10t-m10j
**as much as I like retracts, THAT is a sharp looking plane... love that they retained the signature "backwards" tail and those gear look sharp. Unfortunately the "3 seat" and "140 knot cruise" and "160 knot Vne" kind of kill it for me. Oh well.
View attachment 52413
Wow... well will you look at that! learn something new every day. Incidentally, when I started Googling "fixed gear Mooney" I found this very sharp looking FIXED GEAR diesel: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2014/november/11/mooney-unveils-diesel-m10t-m10j
**as much as I like retracts, THAT is a sharp looking plane... love that they retained the signature "backwards" tail and those gear look sharp. Unfortunately the "3 seat" and "140 knot cruise" and "160 knot Vne" kind of kill it for me. Oh well.
View attachment 52413
At the end of the day we are all splitting hairs here. Many more factors will impact your trip other than 7 knts or a few gallons of fuel. I mean someone in the market for an SR22 or TTx or Acclaim isn't going to loose sleep over a few gallons of gas, a few hundred dollars at annual, or a few hundred dollars more on insurance. What will make the decision is when you tell your significant other that one of the airplanes you will be flying your family and friends in has a rather nasty stall reputation, one has a gear that may not always come down or stay down, or one has a parachute but your 600 mile family vacation to the Hamptons will take 30 minutes longer but they will be more comfortable during the trip. Just look at the sales numbers if you think I'm wrong lol
...true, and ultimately the purchase of a high end plane, yacht, or sports car comes down largely to taste... but that's not to say people don't get pedantic about why what they fly is the bestisn't going to loose sleep over a few gallons of gas, a few hundred dollars at annual, or a few hundred dollars more on insurance.
The thread is about retract singles going obsolete. What causes a product to go obsolete.... sales. What affects sales, reputation and perception. Which is why I included Cirrus as it's the biggest manufacturer on the market that makes a fixed gear turbo single that competes against the Acclaim and TTx.Once again you keep making this about Cirrus. Look at the thread title.
Having a chute has nothing to do with having or not having retractable gear in a design.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Kind of drives the point home then about retractables being "real" planes... their trainer has fixed gear, and I bet their retract version at least had some people in the boardroom thinking "when they finish training they can graduate to this, feel like a real certificated pilot, and build complex time" <- am I stirring the pot?The M10 is intended as a trainer. There is one flying as a prototype.
I'd respectfully disagree. I think that for people that have the money, ratings and mission for a multi, there is no other plane to fill that role.I interpreted the statement more as a "state of mind" than necessarily based on one sales figure or another. From what I've read here and from the pilots I've talked to at airports and owners multis are really not something that people seem to look enviously towards anymore.. at least not in piston GA planes. Retracts on the other hand still hold a romantic place in the hearts of most people. So even if production of retractables ceases and multis continue here and there I still get the impression that RGs have a higher echelon in the minds of most pilots
And the low end of the commercial fleet isn't losing retracts. Just the 4/5 seaters which are personal planes and trainers.
I just keep wondering when retract will fall off of the Commercial requirements, and become an endorsement across the board. I think eventually that'll happen...
Hopefully never, I think expecting a professional pilot to be able to make a CS prop and gear all work in unison isn't asking much.
It's not, but there's commercial jobs where it's not required. The CS prop is *already* just an endorsement, so you're kinda shooting your argument in the foot, eh?
Fair enough... if you have the mission for a twin and the means to own and operate one then that's another "real pilot" thing to have two throttles in your hand and two props out there, and even if some pilots can't manage to fly safely on one engine there is a definite safety advantage (both real and perceived) to having that second engine out there, I would argueThat said, I don't think people don't look enviously of twins anymore. I just think that people that don't have a mission for a twin simply don't want to pay the added cost associated with having them.
Don't shoot the messenger just stating the facts and answering the thread topic. Keep in mind I fly a retract too. The old saying goes... The only time you or anyone else will see your plane with the gear up is when they are picking it up off the runway with a crane. Who is the silly looking one then?Sorry do all the math you want, fast and fixed gear looks silly to me. Prob won't ever buy one.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They may not be extinct yet but they are definitely endangered of doing so.
Everyone has their own mission, wants and desires. I don't do a lot of mountain flying. I like the twin for: a) need 6 seats at times b) need the increased useful load at times c) like having a second engine for traveling over water d) like having a second engine while flying over/through areas of low IMC. An additional bonus is having a heavier plane makes for a more stable platform.A twin engine airplane wouldn't benefit me here in Florida. If I lived in a higher altitude city like Denver I would consider it. It's better to have a second engine going over the mountains than say a parachute.