Roomy high wing options?

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
15,397
Location
Memphis, TN
A 390 in a 177RG would be a sweet plane. Not cheap.
Flying with some water ballast in the cargo is an easy way to help CG. 5 gallons of water in a couple of sturdy jugs makes life easy. Get somewhere you need the cargo capacity, dump out the water on the ramp. Most 4 seat planes would benefit from this.
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
9,549
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
The question is where can you put the 5 gallon jugs, both legally and physically? 5 gallons is a lot of weight. Putting a much smaller weight further behind the CG will of course give you a better result. Tungsten tail skid... :)
 

PMD

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
493
Location
Martensville SK
A 390 in a 177RG would be a sweet plane. Not cheap.
Flying with some water ballast in the cargo is an easy way to help CG. 5 gallons of water in a couple of sturdy jugs makes life easy. Get somewhere you need the cargo capacity, dump out the water on the ramp. Most 4 seat planes would benefit from this.
Since I usually flew my tiger with only front row loaded I rigged a bit of reflex into ailerons and flaps to accomplish same thing. All "within limits" of course.

On the Cardinal, if you are going to spend the bux for a 390, might as well go all of the way and put on composite prop to take up the weight difference at most effective moment arm.
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
15,397
Location
Memphis, TN
Cargo is cargo.
I’m not saying stuff it along the longerons, and a tungsten tail skid when you are four up with bags will require a wrench and hopefully no one watching. It was an arbitrary number. Hopefully the pilot does a weight and balance to know what weight would help his nose heavy condition.

I know the flight school knocked the nose gear three times out of the same 182 flown solo. Twice it required a firewall. I think if it happens again they either have to scrap it or put new forward sheet metal on it.

Just like trim, people tend to manhandle instead of going easy. It’s been a while since I have really flown a plane other than steer around playing Otto the pilot, but my best landings were in a AA5 with a passenger in the back. Yes takeoff sucks, but this is about balance. You could land the thing and hear when wheel bearings roll at touchdown. A buddy puts water ballast in his AA1B. I put the 160 on the front and have the envelope with one aboard at forward limit and Max seat and baggage is at the rear limit. I actually had to ballast the tail with 5 lb. Water is the difference between being able to hold the nose off and aero brake, or thump the nose after the mains. Another buddy with a RV8A has 60 lb of ballast behind the seat for solo. He was in a car wreck years ago and has range of motion issues but still holds a straight up third class. If the plane is not in a center CG , he is uncomfortable trying to flair.

Up trim is slow too. Trim drag. Once in the air, you don’t want to be lifting the nose.

Did the reflex give any speed advantage?
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
9,549
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
Half-assed guess, but I'm guessing that if his Tiger was light then the reflex probably scrubbed some cruise drag off of it because the fuselage wasn't angled downward at cruise speed. The Tiger wing is sized to make lift for for 4 people, and with 1 or 2 people it was making extra lift, and going faster. Especially the big flat bottom wing they used on all the Grummans after they changed the original Yankee wing. Just like any other airplane, rigging the flaps and ailerons for cruise can work to o ne degree or another, and of course you pay the piper (or the Grumman) when you want to climb.
 

PMD

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
493
Location
Martensville SK
Did the reflex give any speed advantage?
It seemed to, but was done in conjunction with a dozen other details. I was typically seeing 143 knots @ 75%. Maybe 4 knots over book, but a significant thing when doing hundreds of hours a year commuting long distance. That airplane really came into its own going Eastbound into middle altitudes. Could cross the rockies at 17,000 with ease. Once tried flying a 172RG on same routes and simply couldn't get that porky pig over the peaks, never mind into the clean, fast air. I have always wondered what a 177 would do with all of the Maple Leaf Aviation cleanups, as they are a great people hauler down low and slow, but LOOK like they could jump tall buildings in a single bound.
 

b7gwap

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
325
Location
UT
Back on topic, I am leaning toward to OP restoring a nice 206 or 210. Just my 2 cents since we were all technically asked. :)
 

Little Scrapper

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
5,972
Location
Wisconsin
When it comes to 4 seaters a certified airplane is just a better value it seems. Piper Archer with a partner or 2 and share the expenses is hard to beat.

I know, the two things you don’t want, low wing and certified. But hey, it’s a great airplane.

Is a Cozy is a 4 seater? That’s a pretty neat airplane.
 

PMD

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
493
Location
Martensville SK
Something that might be worth injecting in this conversation: I don't honestly know, but I have never seen ANY sub-200HP four place airplane that can carry 4 full size adults and any fuel - legally. I spent years in low/low (low altitude, VERY low temperature) country so my attitude is highly compromised, but I suspect if you speak with the hot and/or high crowd, you will find that your are going to need a LOT more engine - usually with 6 big cylinders - before those back seats, never mind the baggage bin - become really useful.

Now, here comes my cynical self observes: why hasn't anyone used just the basic design/engineering skills required to MAKE such an airplane with 200 HP????? It CAN be done, and IMHO it would become a winner in the marketplace to that small component (and let's face it, ALL of our markets are nothing but "small components" in the transportation world). Now, if Lyc would drop the price of a 390 a fair bit, that would be a tremendous help....that and fully interactive electronic ignition. Even better if Conti could sell their SMA 235 HP derivative for competitive price.
 
Last edited:

cluttonfred

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
8,571
Location
World traveler
It's a question beyond the scope of this thread, but I think a lot of it is buyer self-deception and sales department numbers games. People say they want a four-place airplane but rarely fly it with four people, so it ends up being a two or three people plus baggage application. Sales departments know that they need to compete on the speed and range numbers to sell airplanes, and a true four-adults-plus-fuel-and-baggage airplane would look stodgy on paper. Here's a homebuilt, wood-and-fabric example, though it's a low-wing design:

Dahu2.JPG Dahu.JPG

Peña Dahu
Wingspan: 9 m (29 ft 6 in)
Wing area: 15 m2 (160 sq ft)
Empty weight: 600 kg (1,323 lb)
Gross weight: 1,200 kg (2,646 lb)
Fuel capacity: 200 litres (44 imp gal; 53 US gal)
Powerplant: 1 × Lycoming O-360 four cylinder, air-cooled, four stroke aircraft engine, 130 kW (180 hp)
Propellers: 2-bladed metal constant speed propeller
Maximum speed: 310 km/h (190 mph, 170 kn)
Cruise speed: 230 km/h (140 mph, 120 kn)
Stall speed: 80 km/h (50 mph, 43 kn)
Rate of climb: 6 m/s (1,200 ft/min)
Wing loading: 80.0 kg/m2 (16.4 lb/sq ft)

What's interesting to me is that weights and power are basically LSA numbers x 2, which makes sense if you actually want to carry four people and their stuff. Payload with full fuel is 457 kg/1005 lb, so you could actually carry four adults and their stuff. The kicker is that you won't win any races because you need a big, high-lift wing and low weight -- cruise speed is 140 mph.

I don't honestly know, but I have never seen ANY sub-200HP four place airplane that can carry 4 full size adults and any fuel - legally.
 

Tiger Tim

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
3,925
Location
Thunder Bay
Seems to me like this thread’s target was hit at the first mention of a BD-4. Just a wild guess but I bet there are a few knots to be found in it yet too...
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
15,397
Location
Memphis, TN
The real quest is not a four adult airplane. To the FAA, two FAA men and two FAA women makes a 4 seat plane. To someone selling an airplane, you are giving away performance to your competitors if you break from the FAA standards. Volume sales are more important than a fringe group. Four guys with their bellies hanging over their belts that are 6-4 is what everyone is looking for. That is called a 6 seater.
 

akwrencher

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
1,383
Location
Gustavus, AK
Boss has an old 182. It hauls whatever we put in it, with 4 large adults. Not sure what the cruise is, they run it easy at about 10-11 gph of pump gas. 206 would be nice, but they have a commercial market still, which drives the value way up vs a 182. 210 would be nice, but cost more to maintain.
 

Chilton

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2014
Messages
180
Location
Jersey, channel islands
Something that might be worth injecting in this conversation: I don't honestly know, but I have never seen ANY sub-200HP four place airplane that can carry 4 full size adults and any fuel - legally. I spent years in low/low (low altitude, VERY low temperature) country so my attitude is highly compromised, but I suspect if you speak with the hot and/or high crowd, you will find that your are going to need a LOT more engine - usually with 6 big cylinders - before those back seats, never mind the baggage bin - become really useful.

Now, here comes my cynical self observes: why hasn't anyone used just the basic design/engineering skills required to MAKE such an airplane with 200 HP????? It CAN be done, and IMHO it would become a winner in the marketplace to that small component (and let's face it, ALL of our markets are nothing but "small components" in the transportation world). Now, if Lyc would drop the price of a 390 a fair bit, that would be a tremendous help....that and fully interactive electronic ignition. Even better if Conti could sell their SMA 235 HP derivative for competitive price.
Depending on the variety and fuel capacityy, several of the Auster 5 J series can carry 4 and full fuel if the adults are 1940s average not 200 kg each! Also the classic British pre WW2 example the DH 83 Fox Moth which could carry 5 adults with reduced fuel or 4 and full fuel on 130hp of Gipsy Major.

Neithe Auster or Fox Moth necessarily fill the original roomy high wing brief, but it can be done.
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
9,549
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
A few pieces of 12 inch 4130 tube right on the centerline of the cabin would make this thing much more "roomy". Might even take a whole weekend to accomplish too.

View attachment 112140

Mike is that still available? I want to put a potential (potential, not guaranteed) buyer in touch. I remembered this airplane and described the project to him, and he lit right up. Nothing but hot air at this moment, but the guy is based here at WHP and could come look at it easy enough, professional welder, has a flying Luscombe and hasn't wrecked it yet :)
 

Victor Bravo

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Jul 30, 2014
Messages
9,549
Location
KWHP, Los Angeles CA, USA
Something that might be worth injecting in this conversation: I don't honestly know, but I have never seen ANY sub-200HP four place airplane that can carry 4 full size adults and any fuel - legally.
If you define "full size" as maybe 200 pound people, then:

Cessna 175
Cessna 172/180HP
Piper PA-22-160 180HP conv.

If you define "full size" as 240 pound people shaped like bowling pins then you have to go over 200HP, but the stock older Cessna 182 probably gets pretty close.
 
Top