Hello to the group. 2 questions today. I see some of the W10s windshield forward base looks to be raised by maybe 1.5 inches. My drawings don¡¯t show it. Wondering about the benefit and how it affects cowl fit. 2nd question is, what is the preferred glass thickness. My plans say 1/8 min. That seems thin by my experience on other home builds. 3/16 seems more reasonable, but I don¡¯t know about the ability to conform to the proper shape. Thanks to all.
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I think I am the only lurker on this site that has experience in kit airplane sales.? ?I imported the Sky Ranger, which was a two-place Ultralight Trainer back in the days of that exemption.? It was possible to build a Rotax or Jabiru powered craft in less than 200 hours, from box to flight.? I told people it was like lawn furniture covered by a pup tent powered by a lawn mower engine.? ?When the Light Sport regulations hit, it went from selling all we could get to no sales at all.? Why? Because of what people wanted.? ?We could sell completed SkyRangers for about $30-40 thousand but the same person who wanted that could write a check for $100 thousand for an Arion Lightning.? So we became a build center for Lightnings.? ?
From my experience, which also includes plans building a Zenith 601 HD,? I don't see people flocking to build a Tailwind.? ?Too much work.? ?Too much skill required.? Too many little parts to make.? Not enough profit margin.? And then what about supporting a particular engine application?? Everybody who is initially attracted wants to put a car engine in an airplane!? ?Zenith solved this by not supporting any engine installation. But as the manufacturer you will need to build and demo a couple different engine selections.? ? We tested and demoed 4 for the SkyRanger, which required building or having built 4 airplanes and testing them.? Do you like engine-outs on a new installation?? I had my share.? ??
And then don't forget avionics.? These days, people want a full glass panel,? ADSB, auto pilot,? lights that wig-wag,? and custom interior.? ?All that for something to fly the pattern a couple times a month!? ?They want full IFR capability including deice !
I won't do it here, but? when you detail out the costs, detail the labor involved, add overhead and then at least 30% profit margin ( I would recomend more like 50%) , factor in the cost of producing a build manual (with videos), stocking costs and all the issues to solve with a lot of single-point suppliers,? and a chunk of money for advertising, demo flights, OshKosh, Sun n Fun and flight instruction,. it gets really expensive.? ?I only lost $40,000 on my efforts and consider myself fortunate!
My point here is that offering airplane kits is not for the fainthearted or the poor.? There is never enough money.? ?The headaches are huge.? Few kit suppliers avoid bankruptcy.? Who would have thought that success would bankrupt Van's?
Doug Koenigsberg
On Sunday, January 19, 2025 at 10:15:31 AM EST, Mike S via <standleys= [email protected]> wrote:
Hello everyone, I'm near civilization today so wanted to see whats going on it the TW world. I very much agree with the sentiment that runs through this thread. I'm scared to be " one of those guys" who talks about my great plans that never materialize BUT, I think the TW could/should be kitted. The reason I'm pursuing a composite version is so it can be. IMO, a welded steel fuselage is not conducive to that goal. Thinking out loud here so don't poke me too hard-
We'll look, really hard at #1168, figure out how to cover it with a superlite molded skin. Next since the wings were junk, I'll make a new wood set, cover and make absolutely perfect so we can get some molds from them. The beauty of Steve's wing is we can get P/S sides T/B skins from one set of molds. Tips and inboard ends would be separate molds flanged to either side of the main molds. Next we'd make molds for horizontal and vertical.? Put it all together, build and install the O290 that came with it and see what happens with the wood wing first. The fuselage skin molds would become the basis for future molded hulls. I would convert the steel control systems to a bolt together aluminum assembly group to speed up the build. If the Jabiru guys can build one of theirs in 600 hours, I don't know why you couldn't achieve that with a TW if we do everything with the builder in mind...back to the woods
Rgds, Mike
|
I think I am the only lurker on this site that has experience in kit airplane sales.? ?I imported the Sky Ranger, which was a two-place Ultralight Trainer back in the days of that exemption.? It was possible to build a Rotax or Jabiru powered craft in less than 200 hours, from box to flight.? I told people it was like lawn furniture covered by a pup tent powered by a lawn mower engine.? ?When the Light Sport regulations hit, it went from selling all we could get to no sales at all.? Why? Because of what people wanted.? ?We could sell completed SkyRangers for about $30-40 thousand but the same person who wanted that could write a check for $100 thousand for an Arion Lightning.? So we became a build center for Lightnings.? ?
From my experience, which also includes plans building a Zenith 601 HD,? I don't see people flocking to build a Tailwind.? ?Too much work.? ?Too much skill required.? Too many little parts to make.? Not enough profit margin.? And then what about supporting a particular engine application?? Everybody who is initially attracted wants to put a car engine in an airplane!? ?Zenith solved this by not supporting any engine installation. But as the manufacturer you will need to build and demo a couple different engine selections.? ? We tested and demoed 4 for the SkyRanger, which required building or having built 4 airplanes and testing them.? Do you like engine-outs on a new installation?? I had my share.? ??
And then don't forget avionics.? These days, people want a full glass panel,? ADSB, auto pilot,? lights that wig-wag,? and custom interior.? ?All that for something to fly the pattern a couple times a month!? ?They want full IFR capability including deice !
I won't do it here, but? when you detail out the costs, detail the labor involved, add overhead and then at least 30% profit margin ( I would recomend more like 50%) , factor in the cost of producing a build manual (with videos), stocking costs and all the issues to solve with a lot of single-point suppliers,? and a chunk of money for advertising, demo flights, OshKosh, Sun n Fun and flight instruction,. it gets really expensive.? ?I only lost $40,000 on my efforts and consider myself fortunate!
My point here is that offering airplane kits is not for the fainthearted or the poor.? There is never enough money.? ?The headaches are huge.? Few kit suppliers avoid bankruptcy.? Who would have thought that success would bankrupt Van's?
Doug Koenigsberg
Hello everyone, I'm near civilization today so wanted to see whats going on it the TW world. I very much agree with the sentiment that runs through this thread. I'm scared to be " one of those guys" who talks about my great plans that never materialize BUT, I think the TW could/should be kitted. The reason I'm pursuing a composite version is so it can be. IMO, a welded steel fuselage is not conducive to that goal. Thinking out loud here so don't poke me too hard-
We'll look, really hard at #1168, figure out how to cover it with a superlite molded skin. Next since the wings were junk, I'll make a new wood set, cover and make absolutely perfect so we can get some molds from them. The beauty of Steve's wing is we can get P/S sides T/B skins from one set of molds. Tips and inboard ends would be separate molds flanged to either side of the main molds. Next we'd make molds for horizontal and vertical.? Put it all together, build and install the O290 that came with it and see what happens with the wood wing first. The fuselage skin molds would become the basis for future molded hulls. I would convert the steel control systems to a bolt together aluminum assembly group to speed up the build. If the Jabiru guys can build one of theirs in 600 hours, I don't know why you couldn't achieve that with a TW if we do everything with the builder in mind...back to the woods
Rgds, Mike
|
You are correct.? Any aircraft that meets the definition of a light-sport aircraft is eligible to be operated by sport pilots, regardless of what category the aircraft is certificated in. ? When it comes to Homebuilts, it is up to the builder or person performing the flight tests to carefully document the speeds.? However, if you make unreasonable claims the FAA will likely look to published performance figures to determine whether the aircraft is eligible or not.
Joe
On Sun, Jan 19, 2025 at 11:44?AM Karl Kleimenhagen via <kwk= [email protected]> wrote:
Experimental Light Sport is only available through kits that comply precisely with the SLS airframe sold by that mfgr but built by others.?
?
I think any EAB that was certified at LSA limits and remained so is legal for a Sport Pilot to fly. The trick might be establishing it met the clean stall and top speed limits. If you built a WagAero Cub or Vagabond and registered it at the 1320 LSA limit, I doubt anyone would question the speeds are out of limits.
|
Experimental Light Sport is only available through kits that comply precisely with the SLS airframe sold by that mfgr but built by others.?
?
I think any EAB that was certified at LSA limits and remained so is legal for a Sport Pilot to fly. The trick might be establishing it met the clean stall and top speed limits. If you built a WagAero Cub or Vagabond and registered it at the 1320 LSA limit, I doubt anyone would question the speeds are out of limits.
|
A welded tube fuselage could be part of the kit - provide the Oratex to cover it and you have the fuselage taken care of. No need to make a composite one.
On Sunday, January 19th, 2025 at 9:15 AM, Mike S via groups.io <Standleys@...> wrote:
Hello everyone, I'm near civilization today so wanted to see whats going on it the TW world. I very much agree with the sentiment that runs through this thread. I'm scared to be " one of those guys" who talks about my great plans that never materialize BUT, I think the TW could/should be kitted. The reason I'm pursuing a composite version is so it can be. IMO, a welded steel fuselage is not conducive to that goal. Thinking out loud here so don't poke me too hard-
We'll look, really hard at #1168, figure out how to cover it with a superlite molded skin. Next since the wings were junk, I'll make a new wood set, cover and make absolutely perfect so we can get some molds from them. The beauty of Steve's wing is we can get P/S sides T/B skins from one set of molds. Tips and inboard ends would be separate molds flanged to either side of the main molds. Next we'd make molds for horizontal and vertical.? Put it all together, build and install the O290 that came with it and see what happens with the wood wing first. The fuselage skin molds would become the basis for future molded hulls. I would convert the steel control systems to a bolt together aluminum assembly group to speed up the build. If the Jabiru guys can build one of theirs in 600 hours, I don't know why you couldn't achieve that with a TW if we do everything with the builder in mind...back to the woods
Rgds, Mike
|
I took a look at the Sonex web site.? ?The predicted crew-and-fuel?allowance at a 1500-pound gross weight, was 430 pounds.? 2 'standard' 170-pound people and 15 gallons of fuel.? Instant overload.?
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 6:25?PM Jeff Hebron via <jnhebron77= [email protected]> wrote: I am very curious to see the final design and real world performance numbers for the Sonex High wing as I believe a metalized high wing?with even marginally similar performance to the Tailwind will be very appealing (at least it is to me).? I think Sonex has a real opportunity to corner a very much ignored portion of the market, that being kit built, all metal, high wing cross country cruisers.? Why Van's elected to get into an already very saturated "STOL" market with their high wing offering is baffling to me and personally, I?think they really missed what could be a huge opportunity in the GA/EAB market to fill what I believe is a significant void.
I guess time will tell...
Jeff Hebron
Yeah, but you don't see too many RVs sitting tied out on the ramp (unless they are on a cross-country).? People who put that much money and effort into an airplane are very likely to have or find a hangar for it.? While they "could" be parked outside, they very seldom are.?
Tailwinds are great, but you can park an RV on the tie-downs forever.? Difference between hangar?rental and tie-downs adds?up pretty fast, and in many parts of the country all the hangars are filled with grandma's antiques and old cars.
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 at 12:12, Peter Havriluk via <Phavriluk= [email protected]> wrote: Van's might be well-served by adopting this one in the line, as a historical artifact to keep it away from competing with their tin Cherokees.? Design?and kit metal wings, supply all the small stuff plansbuilders?scratch around for...
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 2:14?PM Don Norris via <danorrisfly= [email protected]> wrote: There is no doubt that the Tailwind is a superior design. To become as popular as the RVs, it needs to be produced as a kit with a fast build option. Everything provided, instruction manual to follow step-by-step.
On Friday, January 17th, 2025 at 11:38 AM, red via <redswing= [email protected]> wrote:
I would say that it is close to a toss-up ; ) Red ? ? I am about 2% more tolerant of the Oregon Cherokee's than Red.? The "pinched" inboard end of the wing on the Tailwind was designed to reduce wing/fuselage interference drag. It has the added benefit of causing the inboard portion of the wing to stall first with the stall progressing outward.? The RV's do not have that benefit. Base to final, overshooting the turn, stomp on the rudder and hold the wing up with opposite aileron and You are a few seconds from hitting the ground.?
--
Peter Havriluk
|
One challenge with the Sonex High Wing is going to be interior size. ?I sat in the High Wing fuselage at Oshkosh, and my feet were flat against the firewall with?my knees bent, leaving no room for rudder pedals or a seat cushion. ?I didn¡¯t see any way to adjust the seat back. Will be interesting to see if?Sonex makes any?changes for pilots of average height or above. ?As is, the Sonex High Wing is going to miss a big chunk of the market.
On Friday, January 17, 2025, 5:25 PM, Jeff Hebron via groups.io <jnhebron77@...> wrote: I am very curious to see the final design and real world performance numbers for the Sonex High wing as I believe a metalized high wing?with even marginally similar performance to the Tailwind will be very appealing (at least it is to me).? I think Sonex has a real opportunity to corner a very much ignored portion of the market, that being kit built, all metal, high wing cross country cruisers.? Why Van's elected to get into an already very saturated "STOL" market with their high wing offering is baffling to me and personally, I?think they really missed what could be a huge opportunity in the GA/EAB market to fill what I believe is a significant void.
I guess time will tell...
Jeff Hebron Yeah, but you don't see too many RVs sitting tied out on the ramp (unless they are on a cross-country).? People who put that much money and effort into an airplane are very likely to have or find a hangar for it.? While they "could" be parked outside, they very seldom are.?
Tailwinds are great, but you can park an RV on the tie-downs forever.? Difference between hangar?rental and tie-downs adds?up pretty fast, and in many parts of the country all the hangars are filled with grandma's antiques and old cars.
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 at 12:12, Peter Havriluk via <Phavriluk= [email protected]> wrote: Van's might be well-served by adopting this one in the line, as a historical artifact to keep it away from competing with their tin Cherokees.? Design?and kit metal wings, supply all the small stuff plansbuilders?scratch around for...
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 2:14?PM Don Norris via <danorrisfly= [email protected]> wrote: There is no doubt that the Tailwind is a superior design. To become as popular as the RVs, it needs to be produced as a kit with a fast build option. Everything provided, instruction manual to follow step-by-step.
On Friday, January 17th, 2025 at 11:38 AM, red via <redswing= [email protected]> wrote:
I would say that it is close to a toss-up ; ) Red ? ? I am about 2% more tolerant of the Oregon Cherokee's than Red.? The "pinched" inboard end of the wing on the Tailwind was designed to reduce wing/fuselage interference drag. It has the added benefit of causing the inboard portion of the wing to stall first with the stall progressing outward.? The RV's do not have that benefit. Base to final, overshooting the turn, stomp on the rudder and hold the wing up with opposite aileron and You are a few seconds from hitting the ground.?
--
Peter Havriluk
|
Hello everyone, I'm near civilization today so wanted to see whats going on it the TW world. I very much agree with the sentiment that runs through this thread. I'm scared to be " one of those guys" who talks about my great plans that never materialize BUT, I think the TW could/should be kitted. The reason I'm pursuing a composite version is so it can be. IMO, a welded steel fuselage is not conducive to that goal. Thinking out loud here so don't poke me too hard-
We'll look, really hard at #1168, figure out how to cover it with a superlite molded skin. Next since the wings were junk, I'll make a new wood set, cover and make absolutely perfect so we can get some molds from them. The beauty of Steve's wing is we can get P/S sides T/B skins from one set of molds. Tips and inboard ends would be separate molds flanged to either side of the main molds. Next we'd make molds for horizontal and vertical.? Put it all together, build and install the O290 that came with it and see what happens with the wood wing first. The fuselage skin molds would become the basis for future molded hulls. I would convert the steel control systems to a bolt together aluminum assembly group to speed up the build. If the Jabiru guys can build one of theirs in 600 hours, I don't know why you couldn't achieve that with a TW if we do everything with the builder in mind...back to the woods
Rgds, Mike
|
Clement mods for the tailwind are available from Learn Build Fly in Wausau WI.
?
?
?
Dave Conrad
?
|
Larry- Aircraft Spruce for the plans. Make sure they provide a supplement of about 50 pages. I hope to have my builders manual available again soon.? Come to Watertown WI July 18-19 and I will give you a ride in my W10.
On Saturday, January 18, 2025 at 07:12:11 AM MST, Dom Flamini via groups.io <dflamini@...> wrote:
Hi Larry¡Not sure on the plans, but I am starting the Condition inspection on 68X over the next couple of weeks. You are welcome to come up and take a look at it, we are based out at C09/Morris Municipal Airport just west of Joliet.
?
Dom
|
Hi Larry¡Not sure on the plans, but I am starting the Condition inspection on 68X over the next couple of weeks. You are welcome to come up and take a look at it, we are based out at C09/Morris Municipal Airport just west of Joliet.
?
Dom
|
Is Aircraft Spruce the place to purchase the W10 Plans from and the Clement Mods are purchased from source in Wisconsin is that correct? I s there anyone in the Central Illinois Area that has a W10 I could take a look at?
?
Larry
|
I am very curious to see the final design and real world performance numbers for the Sonex High wing as I believe a metalized high wing?with even marginally similar performance to the Tailwind will be very appealing (at least it is to me).? I think Sonex has a real opportunity to corner a very much ignored portion of the market, that being kit built, all metal, high wing cross country cruisers.? Why Van's elected to get into an already very saturated "STOL" market with their high wing offering is baffling to me and personally, I?think they really missed what could be a huge opportunity in the GA/EAB market to fill what I believe is a significant void.
I guess time will tell...
Jeff Hebron
Yeah, but you don't see too many RVs sitting tied out on the ramp (unless they are on a cross-country).? People who put that much money and effort into an airplane are very likely to have or find a hangar for it.? While they "could" be parked outside, they very seldom are.?
Tailwinds are great, but you can park an RV on the tie-downs forever.? Difference between hangar?rental and tie-downs adds?up pretty fast, and in many parts of the country all the hangars are filled with grandma's antiques and old cars.
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 at 12:12, Peter Havriluk via <Phavriluk= [email protected]> wrote: Van's might be well-served by adopting this one in the line, as a historical artifact to keep it away from competing with their tin Cherokees.? Design?and kit metal wings, supply all the small stuff plansbuilders?scratch around for...
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 2:14?PM Don Norris via <danorrisfly= [email protected]> wrote: There is no doubt that the Tailwind is a superior design. To become as popular as the RVs, it needs to be produced as a kit with a fast build option. Everything provided, instruction manual to follow step-by-step.
On Friday, January 17th, 2025 at 11:38 AM, red via <redswing= [email protected]> wrote:
I would say that it is close to a toss-up ; ) Red ? ? I am about 2% more tolerant of the Oregon Cherokee's than Red.? The "pinched" inboard end of the wing on the Tailwind was designed to reduce wing/fuselage interference drag. It has the added benefit of causing the inboard portion of the wing to stall first with the stall progressing outward.? The RV's do not have that benefit. Base to final, overshooting the turn, stomp on the rudder and hold the wing up with opposite aileron and You are a few seconds from hitting the ground.?
--
Peter Havriluk
|
Made reservations for Watertown and reservations for electric scooter for Oshkosh. Planning on homebuilt camping again, Sun, Mon,Tue leave Weds morning for points East. Very happy with homebuilt camping last year.?
|
Yeah, but you don't see too many RVs sitting tied out on the ramp (unless they are on a cross-country).? People who put that much money and effort into an airplane are very likely to have or find a hangar for it.? While they "could" be parked outside, they very seldom are.?
Tailwinds are great, but you can park an RV on the tie-downs forever.? Difference between hangar?rental and tie-downs adds?up pretty fast, and in many parts of the country all the hangars are filled with grandma's antiques and old cars.
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 at 12:12, Peter Havriluk via <Phavriluk= [email protected]> wrote: Van's might be well-served by adopting this one in the line, as a historical artifact to keep it away from competing with their tin Cherokees.? Design?and kit metal wings, supply all the small stuff plansbuilders?scratch around for...
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 2:14?PM Don Norris via <danorrisfly= [email protected]> wrote: There is no doubt that the Tailwind is a superior design. To become as popular as the RVs, it needs to be produced as a kit with a fast build option. Everything provided, instruction manual to follow step-by-step.
On Friday, January 17th, 2025 at 11:38 AM, red via <redswing= [email protected]> wrote:
I would say that it is close to a toss-up ; ) Red ? ? I am about 2% more tolerant of the Oregon Cherokee's than Red.? The "pinched" inboard end of the wing on the Tailwind was designed to reduce wing/fuselage interference drag. It has the added benefit of causing the inboard portion of the wing to stall first with the stall progressing outward.? The RV's do not have that benefit. Base to final, overshooting the turn, stomp on the rudder and hold the wing up with opposite aileron and You are a few seconds from hitting the ground.?
--
Peter Havriluk
|
Don,
You are not far from the truth.? I was working at Sonex when they decided to start offering quick build kits.? Their standard kits were pretty nice, but they were wrestling with whether not to take that next step.? I worked with the FAA to have the kit reviewed by the national team, and then our team at Sonex made the decision to go ahead.? Needless to say, it was a success.? It made for a lot more work for us in the shop, but I am absolutely sure we sold some kits that we wouldn't have otherwise.?
The world is very much into instant gratification these days, and while building even a quick build kit isn't instant, it brings in a lot of builders who would otherwise not take the plunge.? Sure, there are still some scratch builders out there, but that number has not grown.? In fact, it has probably shrunk.? But as Van's and Sonex and others have found out, people are willing to pay for someone else to do as much of the work as they can.?
Sonex is going to bridge the gap between the Tailwind and the Sonex/RV market with their high wing.? It will look like the distant, all-metal cousin of the Tailwind, or maybe the half breed child of a Tailwind-Sonex relationship.? It is likely as close as we will see to a modern Tailwheel quickbuild kit.
Joe
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 1:14?PM Don Norris via <danorrisfly= [email protected]> wrote: There is no doubt that the Tailwind is a superior design. To become as popular as the RVs, it needs to be produced as a kit with a fast build option. Everything provided, instruction manual to follow step-by-step.
On Friday, January 17th, 2025 at 11:38 AM, red via <redswing= [email protected]> wrote:
I would say that it is close to a toss-up ; ) Red ? ? I am about 2% more tolerant of the Oregon Cherokee's than Red.? The "pinched" inboard end of the wing on the Tailwind was designed to reduce wing/fuselage interference drag. It has the added benefit of causing the inboard portion of the wing to stall first with the stall progressing outward.? The RV's do not have that benefit. Base to final, overshooting the turn, stomp on the rudder and hold the wing up with opposite aileron and You are a few seconds from hitting the ground.?
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Tailwinds are great, but you can park an RV on the tie-downs forever.? Difference between hangar?rental and tie-downs adds?up pretty fast, and in many parts of the country all the hangars are filled with grandma's antiques and old cars.
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 at 12:12, Peter Havriluk via <Phavriluk= [email protected]> wrote: Van's might be well-served by adopting this one in the line, as a historical artifact to keep it away from competing with their tin Cherokees.? Design?and kit metal wings, supply all the small stuff plansbuilders?scratch around for...
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 2:14?PM Don Norris via <danorrisfly= [email protected]> wrote: There is no doubt that the Tailwind is a superior design. To become as popular as the RVs, it needs to be produced as a kit with a fast build option. Everything provided, instruction manual to follow step-by-step.
On Friday, January 17th, 2025 at 11:38 AM, red via <redswing= [email protected]> wrote:
I would say that it is close to a toss-up ; ) Red ? ? I am about 2% more tolerant of the Oregon Cherokee's than Red.? The "pinched" inboard end of the wing on the Tailwind was designed to reduce wing/fuselage interference drag. It has the added benefit of causing the inboard portion of the wing to stall first with the stall progressing outward.? The RV's do not have that benefit. Base to final, overshooting the turn, stomp on the rudder and hold the wing up with opposite aileron and You are a few seconds from hitting the ground.?
--
Peter Havriluk
|
Tailwinds are great, but you can park an RV on the tie-downs forever.? Difference between hangar?rental and tie-downs adds?up pretty fast, and in many parts of the country all the hangars are filled with grandma's antiques and old cars.
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 at 12:12, Peter Havriluk via <Phavriluk= [email protected]> wrote: Van's might be well-served by adopting this one in the line, as a historical artifact to keep it away from competing with their tin Cherokees.? Design?and kit metal wings, supply all the small stuff plansbuilders?scratch around for...
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 2:14?PM Don Norris via <danorrisfly= [email protected]> wrote: There is no doubt that the Tailwind is a superior design. To become as popular as the RVs, it needs to be produced as a kit with a fast build option. Everything provided, instruction manual to follow step-by-step.
On Friday, January 17th, 2025 at 11:38 AM, red via <redswing= [email protected]> wrote:
I would say that it is close to a toss-up ; ) Red ? ? I am about 2% more tolerant of the Oregon Cherokee's than Red.? The "pinched" inboard end of the wing on the Tailwind was designed to reduce wing/fuselage interference drag. It has the added benefit of causing the inboard portion of the wing to stall first with the stall progressing outward.? The RV's do not have that benefit. Base to final, overshooting the turn, stomp on the rudder and hold the wing up with opposite aileron and You are a few seconds from hitting the ground.?
--
Peter Havriluk
|
Van's might be well-served by adopting this one in the line, as a historical artifact to keep it away from competing with their tin Cherokees.? Design?and kit metal wings, supply all the small stuff plansbuilders?scratch around for...
On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 2:14?PM Don Norris via <danorrisfly= [email protected]> wrote: There is no doubt that the Tailwind is a superior design. To become as popular as the RVs, it needs to be produced as a kit with a fast build option. Everything provided, instruction manual to follow step-by-step.
On Friday, January 17th, 2025 at 11:38 AM, red via <redswing= [email protected]> wrote:
I would say that it is close to a toss-up ; ) Red ? ? I am about 2% more tolerant of the Oregon Cherokee's than Red.? The "pinched" inboard end of the wing on the Tailwind was designed to reduce wing/fuselage interference drag. It has the added benefit of causing the inboard portion of the wing to stall first with the stall progressing outward.? The RV's do not have that benefit. Base to final, overshooting the turn, stomp on the rudder and hold the wing up with opposite aileron and You are a few seconds from hitting the ground.?
|
Joe Norris
Mike S
DaveC
Dom Flamini