If you had a choice..

Daytonabch04 said:
Went to college in Daytona several years ago...was in Leavenworth for Army school, and stationed now at Ft. Hood, Texas for a couple years once I return from the desert. Unfortunately, I move around every 2-3 years so partnerships aren't the best. I wish I could have 1/2 of each bird.
Click to expand...


31E?
 
You can buy a brand new production certified Waco biplane with IFR glass panel. Of course, if you have to ask how much, you probably can't afford it...

Personally, I'll never own a non experimental again.
 
"if you had a choice between an IFR bird or a decently nice TW with no mission in mind, which would you choose?"

Isn't this kind of like a "should I get a motorcycle or a nice 4-door sedan?" type of question?

I mean, IFR planes are typically for getting somewhere (usually farther away)... regardless of some weather.

While a tailwheel aircraft with "no mission in mind" sounds like the objective is just short little hops exploring the local area.

Two entirely different mission plans. While it's possible to find one plane that can do both, there would be compromises in both as well.
 
I think the answer comes down to what you need the ifr capability for. If it's just for the fun and challenge, it doesn't take much to make any airplane IFR legal and safe to fly on days of MVFR or Light IFR for getting through clouds. If you are looking to fly in weather or mountainous terrain that is a whole different story. There is no place I HAVE to go in an airplane so my IFR desires are for getting through a cloud layer for better efficiency and cooler air.
 
Dana said:
You can buy a brand new production certified Waco biplane with IFR glass panel. Of course, if you have to ask how much, you probably can't afford it...

Personally, I'll never own a non experimental again.
Click to expand...
And a brand new Great Lakes, and a brand new christen eagle, Pitts etc.

When you can get an experimental, build it in one of the builder assist facilities, install every gadget and doodad you want and be able yo do your own annuals or semiannual , do your own work on it, your own mx and anything else you want for much much less than the price of a new 172! Why wouldn't you? Makes much more sense to me.
 
The big gap between experimental and certified right now is with 4 place airplanes. There aren't a whole lot of 4 place experimental aircraft and the ones that are cost considerably more than what you can get a 172 or Bonanza for. I know the Experimental one will be much newer but a well cared for certified will be just as good.
 
Daytonabch04 said:
I'm starting to see it fits my mission after looking at it more. Just wish it looked more aggressive.
Click to expand...
It's probably like me and my 2002 WRX wagon. The car was the ugliest thing on the planet until I drove it for a week, then it was beautiful in my eyes.
 
Just Aircraft.

http://www.flyingmag.com/aircraft/lsasport/just-aircraft-launches-stretched-superstol

Get the big tires for backwoods fun, runway not required. Plus they're built in S. Carolina. I just can't wrap my head around 275' takeoff roll, or 100' landing rollout. Follow the link for the full writeup and watch the video, it's freaking amazing! I could land it beside my house, but getting back out would be touchy . . . .
 
Grum.Man said:
The big gap between experimental and certified right now is with 4 place airplanes. There aren't a whole lot of 4 place experimental aircraft and the ones that are cost considerably more than what you can get a 172 or Bonanza for. I know the Experimental one will be much newer but a well cared for certified will be just as good.
Click to expand...

Velocity XL-FG: 185kts TAS, 4 seats. $109,000

Granted, Velocity's aren't for everyone. And if you don't have 2,500' of paved runway, forget it.
 
Velocitys have an undeniable cool factor, though.
 
Grum.Man said:
Still that kind of money buys a whole lot of certified 4 place airplanes. From what I've read you had better be light to come out of a 2500 ft strip unless it's clear on the ends.
Click to expand...

At 185kts? Maybe a Mooney. But those are rather... snug.

IMO, if you're going IFR, you're usually trying to cover a lot of distance. So that extra speed helps.

True about the landing distance. 2,800 is my minimum.
 
A lot of Husky taildraggers have IFR panels. I got my IFR rating in one. They have a top speed of about 125 knots and cruise at 115 or so. They a little faster than a 172. They are not terribly stable in turbulence because of light wing loading. One thing you don't have to worry much about is length of runway. They can land in 500' with little effort so if its an airport, you can get in. The instructor has to sit in the back because they are tandem. Might be hard to find and instructor but I found one. They are fun to land. They really react to the crosswind and have a TON of rudder, enough to handle 35knots of crosswind and that is about it.
 
skier said:
Globe Swift?
Click to expand...

Having only recently sold my Swift, I would recommend against one unless one really wants a Swift because of what it is. Unless equipped with big engine and CS prop, they aren't particularly fast. They are also pretty small and tight in width. I loved mine, but decided to go the experimental route with an RV-4 which is much faster and less expensive to both purchase and maintain. I infrequently have a second person with me, but I have taken a 700nm round trip in a day with an adult male in the back seat. It is tight in both seats, but not particularly uncomfortable.

I'm lucky that I also have a 1946 J-3 as my fun knock around airplane.

And to the OP, congrats on parole from Ft Leavenworth. I'm a retired 13A.
 
Last edited:
coloradobluesky said:
A lot of Husky taildraggers have IFR panels. I got my IFR rating in one. They have a top speed of about 125 knots and cruise at 115 or so. They a little faster than a 172. They are not terribly stable in turbulence because of light wing loading. One thing you don't have to worry much about is length of runway. They can land in 500' with little effort so if its an airport, you can get in. The instructor has to sit in the back because they are tandem. Might be hard to find and instructor but I found one. They are fun to land. They really react to the crosswind and have a TON of rudder, enough to handle 35knots of crosswind and that is about it.
Click to expand...

I do like the Husky's, but they do not look cheap. Hopefully I'm not flying with more than 35kts of crosswind!
 
I fly an IFR capable Maule MX7-180 and it does really well with both both backcountry work and IFR flying. I don't have an autopilot so hand flying long cross country trips in the muck doesn't interest me. If you don't like the look of Maules, there are Huskies, a variety of cubs and cub clones, Decathlons and Citabrias and a host of other planes that provide IFR and TW enjoyment. For me, having the wide panel that comes with side-by-side seating is better for packing in all of the IFR goodies, including an engine monitor, but that is a matter of preference. You have lots to choose from, so don't cut one desire short just to serve the other one.
1z1htMIl.jpg

mIdmXGAl.jpg

Weeh54Jl.jpg
 
When it comes down to it. all you need is pencil, paper, ruler, and slide rule. Design, and build your own. It will be exactly what you want,
and (probably) cost a fortune. But, it will do exactly what you want it to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top