Recent content by Tiger Tim

Same deal on the Garretts, of course. In a steep enough descent the prop would start driving the engine, the negative torque would be sensed, the prop blades would be forced into coarser pitch, and the engine would once again be driving the prop which would then put the pitch back on governed...

You’re going to have to speak up… 🤣

No but as a data point a poorly rigged Garrett engine in a steep descent at flight idle can go into a condition commonly called NTS’ing that can damage the reduction gears and/or prop coupler. Worst case scenario you crack a gear tooth or in rare cases suffer a prop coupler failure where the...

Sonex have side-hinged canopies, right? Would it be feasible to just adjust the opening limit so that it swings over farther and just let gravity do the work?

Here’s a little clearer elevation of the thing

Wild work for 1965

Could just be marketing. It’s like dressing carefully for a job interview.

It’s probably a bit large for our purposes but this general concept would make a lovely light plane to experience. I’m thinking sized for a Rotax 912 and definitely keep the stadium seating.

Still the highest risk place to be. Also that ‘runway’ potentially has waves, rocks and boats in the way if you’re planning on going anywhere.

I get the feeling that if not for the impressive and mysterious Ekranoplans these ground effect craft would be a weird footnote in aviation/marine history and we’d move on. Instead we tend to romanticize what we imagine they could have been and try to capture that fantasy. Personally, ground...

Well that’s cute as a button, isn’t it?

You could take two friends flying in a 5/8 RCN Avenger …or be antisocial in a replica sprayer conversion

That Fury in Victoria looks lovely, too bad it would make two-stroke noises. I wonder if it’s been lightened or anything to allow the little Rotax to drag it around. For someone who’s going to trailer it home and go over everything before flying anyways, I still have the O-290 powered example...

It begs the question, does the cheapest airplane have to last forever? What if it’s so cheap it can be considered disposable the day it fails some established go/no go test?

Have some of the other variables been eliminated? Same altitude to measure TAS? ASI position error minimized and instrument verified? Is your M2 as aerodynamically clean as the test example? Hard to believe those things could add up to the 55(!)mph difference but given the variances in...