X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail-fx0-f52.google.com ([209.85.161.52] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.2) with ESMTPS id 5301869 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:03:50 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.161.52; envelope-from=rwstracy@gmail.com Received: by faap14 with SMTP id p14so241435faa.25 for ; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:03:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=Hs4U8G4cgWiGcCBQd17gyBqahRdvKUiFJAX8V7P6cXM=; b=YRheyx6uXRSw6PFEKzV5YWtlvLXpoy55A//pB0NYwNycEOP2Vq138HIITbKZIAAdYB sf9ldlgcxk9HSBMotPRgT7YImzh6+vndaTozDsF2Lflw2vhfvqrHxssVYLACWW4ROyUL vJquTNIfWefpPPgjKZqCuk8/A7yzPFdpgT/wo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.180.84.33 with SMTP id v1mr23826204wiy.4.1323723793786; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:03:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.216.54.197 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:03:13 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 16:03:13 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: RV7 for sale... From: Tracy To: Rotary motors in aircraft Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0442863e826be504b3eb7601 --f46d0442863e826be504b3eb7601 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I've been enjoying the takeoff, climb and slow-flight performance of my RV-8 with extended wings that it's got me thinking about extending the wings of my RV-4. With it's lower weight AND more wingspan it would be even more STOL-like than the -8. Makes me think I would really like an RV-9 built with a rotary. Tracy On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Tom Walter wrote: > Take Off with a Bearhawk is impressive. > > In Mark Goldberg's (N303AP) 0-540 fitted machine, we're up in 300' without > trying (admitted not loaded). Mark had dropped me off at home (40XS) one > time, and we had a 5 to 10 mph wind. He took off with his noise pointing > into the wind. It caught him a little off guard, as he must have been > climbing at 2000 fpm. At the end of the 3000 ft runway he was well over > 2000 ft AGL. > > I just don't picture an RV7 needing that much room to take off or land. > So if I RV7 doesn't have enough room, I really don't see a Bearhawk being > viable. > > Tom > > > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Charlie England > *To:* Rotary motors in aircraft > *Sent:* Monday, December 12, 2011 1:35 PM > *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Re: RV7 for sale... > > On 12/12/2011 09:14 AM, Ernest Christley wrote: > > Ben Schneider wrote: > >> Thank you Kelly. I don't know if it will or not. I suppose it will > >> depend on the airframe I choose. I really like and believe in the > >> rotary engine for aviation purposes, and would certainly use it if the > >> airframe would handle the weight and HP. > >> > > What do you think of the BearHawk? > I'd second that question. I got to see the prototype several years ago, & > meet the designer. Impressive plane. But runway requirements might not be > that much better than a 180-200 hp RV-7; RV's are actually quite good short > field a/c. Of course, the Bearhawk could take off in RV-7 distance with an > RV strapped to its belly. :-) > > It would be a good candidate for the rotary, if flown light. A buddy of > Dave's in CA came to our Pumpkin Drop last month & told me he was building > one with a rotary. > > Bummer on the required change of plans.... > > Charlie > > > -- > Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/ > Archive and UnSub: > http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html > > > --f46d0442863e826be504b3eb7601 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've been enjoying the takeoff, climb and slow-flight performance of my= RV-8 with extended wings that it's got me thinking about extending the= wings of my RV-4.=A0 With it's lower weight AND more wingspan it would= be even more STOL-like than the -8.=A0=A0 Makes me think I would really li= ke an RV-9 built with a rotary.=A0=A0

Tracy

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 3:51 PM= , Tom Walter <roundrocktom@yahoo.com> wrote:
Take Off with a B= earhawk is impressive.

In Mark Goldberg's (N30= 3AP) 0-540 fitted machine, we're up in 300' without trying (admitte= d not loaded).=A0=A0 Mark had dropped me off at home (40XS) one time, and w= e had a 5 to 10 mph wind. He took off with his noise pointing into the wind= . It caught him a little off guard, as he must have been climbing at 2000 f= pm.=A0 At the end of the 3000 ft runway he was well over 2000 ft AGL.

I just don't picture an RV7 needing that much= room to take off or land.=A0 So if I RV7 doesn't have enough room, I r= eally don't see a Bearhawk being viable.

Tom





From: Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net>
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancair= online.net>
Sent: Monday, December 12, = 2011 1:35 PM
Subject: [F= lyRotary] Re: RV7 for sale...
On 12/12/2011 09:14 AM, Ernest Christley wrote:
> Ben Schneider wrote= :
>> Thank you Kelly.=A0 I don't know if it will or not. I su= ppose it will
>> depend on the airframe I choose. I really like an= d believe in the
>> rotary engine for aviation purposes, and would certainly use it if= the
>> airframe would handle the weight and HP.
>>
&= gt; What do you think of the BearHawk?
I'd second that question. I g= ot to see the prototype several years ago, & meet the designer. Impress= ive plane. But runway requirements might not be that much better than a 180= -200 hp RV-7; RV's are actually quite good short field a/c. Of course, = the Bearhawk could take off in RV-7 distance with an RV strapped to its bel= ly. :-)

It would be a good candidate for the rotary, if flown light. A buddy of= Dave's in CA came to our Pumpkin Drop last month & told me he was = building one with a rotary.

Bummer on the required change of plans....

Charlie

--
Homepage:=A0 http://www.flyrotary.com/
Archive and UnSub:=A0 = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/flyrotary/List.html



--f46d0442863e826be504b3eb7601--