You've always wanted to try it.

AirFrame · Post by **AirFrame** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 7:10 am

7ECA wrote:Vans, I'd like to try out the RV-7 and RV-8. They all look like very fast, capable aircraft. The question of course becomes what is more practicable, tandem seating, or side by side...

Having flown both tandem and side-by-side RV's, the side-by-side models win hands-down for practicality. While travelling you can hand your passenger the map and still be able to read it, etc. But if your plan is aerobatics and formation, with little travel, the tandem seating is the way to go for its amazing visibility.

The -4 is the most "wear it like a glove" RV (well, the -3 I guess is more so, but we were talking about two-seaters). The -6 and -7 are very similar. The -8 feels like a big -4, but with less foot room. It felt cramped to me.

Rockie · Post by **Rockie** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 8:41 am

Citation X - empty, with only about an hour's worth of gas.

I'd love to see what that thing can do in those circumstances...

FenderManDan · Post by **FenderManDan** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 9:48 am

Pitts S1(any), extra 300. Would not mind to strap a jet to my butt as well.

New_PIC · Post by **New_PIC** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 10:03 am

Another vote for a Citation.
I had just called downwind while doing circuits towards my PPL when one crossed mid-field and joined in front of me. It looked like the inside wing tip stayed at exactly the same altitude while the rest of the plane banked through the turn. I'm sure he only banked 59.9 degrees too and it was only my inexperience that made it look like more.

Just a single turn but it looked like precision ballet and fast!

And a Pitts, any 2 seat model to start.
Maybe the reality wouldn't match my imaginations but I'd like to try something aerobatic. I've seen some Pitts aircraft up close, static and in shows. There may be new and hotter aerobatic machines but the Pitts is a classic.

Maybe some kind of purpose built STOL aircraft too, off-strip, but I'm not fussy about the type.

iflyforpie · Post by **iflyforpie** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 10:10 am

I remember reading a story about the Citation (an old JT-15D Slowtation) in the P&WC book I think... where they were flying it down from Montreal to Wichita and got intercepted by a US Navy Grumman A-6 just south of the border.

Well, this pilot--an ex-RCAF Sabre jockey--was having none of that... so he whipped it around and got on the A-6's tail... and the A-6 could not shake him.

The 500 Series Citations are the largest planes that (barely) fit in and out of my home strip... I wouldn't mind trying one out too....

Rockie · Post by **Rockie** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 10:42 am

iflyforpie wrote:I remember reading a story about the Citation (an old JT-15D Slowtation) in the P&WC book I think... where they were flying it down from Montreal to Wichita and got intercepted by a US Navy Grumman A-6 just south of the border. Well, this pilot--an ex-RCAF Sabre jockey--was having none of that... so he whipped it around and got on the A-6's tail... and the A-6 could not shake him.

The A-6 was strictly a ground attack aircraft and not designed for air combat, plus the pilot probably had minimal experience in it as well except defensively. At slow speeds older fast military jets really have a lousy turning radius and basic straight wing trainers can wipe the floor with them if the fast jet guy is foolish enough to get in a turning fight with them.

One of the most absurd movie scenes I've ever seen had F-14's in a turning fight with WWII Japanese Zero's and winning.

cgzro · Post by **cgzro** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 11:02 am

Rob Hollands Mxs
su-31

Adam Oke · Post by **Adam Oke** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 11:15 am

What planes are we talking about? Ones you see everyday. For the responses, they have to be flying ones, so no museum pieces or fantasy picks. Planes you see on a regular basis. Maybe something another company flies, someone's bird in the tie down spot or hangar next to yours, those guys you run into at the FBO and have probably chatted them up about it, but you've never had any time at the stick.

Shiney, we must fly out of some boring airports! I don't commonly see Sabres, P51's, Concords, AN2's. I need to get out more.

Shiny Side Up · Post by **Shiny Side Up** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 11:38 am

Rockie wrote: One of the most absurd movie scenes I've ever seen had F-14's in a turning fight with WWII Japanese Zero's and winning.

I'm hoping that wasn't the most absurd part of that movie for you.

Adam Oke wrote:
What planes are we talking about? Ones you see everyday. For the responses, they have to be flying ones, so no museum pieces or fantasy picks. Planes you see on a regular basis. Maybe something another company flies, someone's bird in the tie down spot or hangar next to yours, those guys you run into at the FBO and have probably chatted them up about it, but you've never had any time at the stick.
Shiney, we must fly out of some boring airports! I don't commonly see Sabres, P51's, Concords, AN2's. I need to get out more.

I know! But to be fair I suppose I used to see an AN-2 frequently since there was one parked at Airdrie, haven't seen it for a while though.

Rockie · Post by **Rockie** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 11:51 am

Shiny Side Up wrote:I'm hoping that wasn't the most absurd part of that movie for you.

Not by a long shot, but I was restricting my comment to air combat maneuvering since I know more about that than sending entire aircraft carriers back through time to the 1940's. But then again an F-14 pilot has a better chance at sending his carrier back through time than he does out-turning a Japanese Zero so maybe it still stands as the most absurd part of that movie.

PilotDAR · Post by **PilotDAR** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:21 pm

I don't know much about the handling characteristics of F-14's or Zeros, but

had F-14's in a turning fight with WWII Japanese Zero's and winning

If they were winning weren't they doing it? (or was it just really poor airmanship of the Zero pilot

)

Good movie......

YYZSaabGuy · Post by **YYZSaabGuy** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 12:27 pm

Good thread, and lots of interesting choices on here. Citation would be a blast; RV-7 or RV-8 are definitely of interest, along with the TBM 850 and/or a Lancair 360. But if I had to pick one, it'd likely be the PC-12. I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet.

The day I win the lottery, my order goes in.

Shiny Side Up · Post by **Shiny Side Up** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:29 pm

YYZSaabGuy wrote: I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet.

Probably because many have probably already tried one. I even managed to scam some stick time in one once upon a time, when a sales rep happened to stop by and we managed to convince him we'd might be buyers. Didn't take a lot of convincing truth be told. Which of note if you keep your eye and ears open is a good way to try these things out if you find one in the area. Additionally to a PC-12, one has managed to scam stick time in a Caravan, a Socata Trinidad, a Cirrus SR-20, Cessna Turbo 206, a Diamond Twinstar. One of those small perks of being a flight instructor, is these guys love making a sales pitch to you, which is easy to turn into airplane play time.

YYZSaabGuy · Post by **YYZSaabGuy** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:31 pm

Shiny Side Up wrote:
YYZSaabGuy wrote: I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned yet.

Probably because many have probably already tried one. I even managed to scam some stick time in one once upon a time, when a sales rep happened to stop by and we managed to convince him we'd might be buyers. Didn't take a lot of convincing truth be told. Which of note if you keep your eye and ears open is a good way to try these things out if you find one in the area. Additionally to a PC-12, one has managed to scam stick time in a Caravan, a Socata Trinidad, a Cirrus SR-20, Cessna Turbo 206, a Diamond Twinstar. One of those small perks of being a flight instructor, is these guys love making a sales pitch to you, which is easy to turn into airplane play time.

Don't leave me hanging, Shiny - what'd you think and how did you like it? Should it stay on my list?

Shiny Side Up · Post by **Shiny Side Up** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:38 pm

Oh definitely, nice plane if you have the mission for it. Great plane for going to Vegas for the weekend, or commuting up north to work. Pretty basic to fly, If you can fly a 182, you can fly a PC-12 in terms of take off and landing. Lots of room inside. For what it is, its costs also seem reasonable if one is a buyer. Our 3000' strip was no problem for it, didn't feel like it was tight at all, and there was six of us on board for the ride.

YYZSaabGuy · Post by **YYZSaabGuy** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:53 pm

Terrific. Now all I have to do is come up with the US$4.6 million list price and the estimated $5.00 operating cost per NM.

lownslow · Post by **lownslow** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 7:40 pm

For the longest time I wanted to fly an MU-2. Really though, I'll just take time in whatever I can get.

Jasper · Post by **Jasper** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 7:37 am

Skyhunter wrote:Yep Picky.. because I can be? Maybe cause I am spoiled and have flown my dream airplane, the one I wanted to fly more than anything else, but that said, if I had the chance there are a few I would like to give a go.

Harmon Rocket... one at the Hangar in Stoney Creek, talked to the owner a couple weeks ago... working on the chance.

Citabria... don't know why, just want to.. and a blue one specifically.

Lear.. doesn't matter which one too much. Just want to see if they handle as nice as I have heard. Rumour is they are about as close as you get to military jet type handling in a civvy plane... just want to compare and see if it is true.

They are nearly identical. Especially when the military jet is a C-21A.

Jasper · Post by **Jasper** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 7:50 am

Rockie wrote:Citation X - empty, with only about an hour's worth of gas.

I'd love to see what that thing can do in those circumstances...

Go for a Global Express under the same conditions. You would be far more impressed.

NotDirty! · Post by **NotDirty!** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 8:53 am

lownslow wrote:For the longest time I wanted to fly an MU-2. Really though, I'll just take time in whatever I can get.

Well if you put your mind to it,
and work hard, maybe some
day you too can fly an MU-2.
Or you can be like the rest of us,
and let it fly you.

For me, I always wanted to try a
Bellanca 14-19 Cruisemaster. Which,
of course, was the predecessor to
the Viking, but with the third wheel
in the "right" place.

linecrew · Post by **linecrew** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:05 am

FenderManDan wrote:Would not mind to strap a jet to my butt as well.

Evidently someone already beat you to it...

xchox · Post by **xchox** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:40 am

Even though it was only flying through... Epic LT!

CYWL · Post by **CYWL** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 12:02 pm

I'd love to go for a hop around the patch in a pretty little Cessna 140.

PilotDAR · Post by **PilotDAR** » Mon Jan 26, 2015 8:17 pm

It took me a while to think of it, but the plane I've wanted to fly since first I saw it is the Gweduck amphibian!

TeePeeCreeper · Post by **TeePeeCreeper** » Mon Jan 26, 2015 11:29 pm

PilotDAR wrote:It took me a while to think of it, but the plane I've wanted to fly since first I saw it is the Gweduck amphibian!

Holy crap! The G-44 lives on! (In a modern capacity!)

You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.

Re: You've always wanted to try it.