Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihnp4.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!cfiaime
From: cfiaime@ihnp4.UUCP (Jeff Williams)
Newsgroups: net.aviation
Subject: Re: Primary Aircraft Proposal (long and warm)
Message-ID: <693@ihnp4.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 18-Dec-84 13:52:12 EST
Article-I.D.: ihnp4.693
Posted: Tue Dec 18 13:52:12 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 19-Dec-84 02:37:10 EST
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 75

I am all for the primary aircraft proposal.  I am also all for
cheap, two-seat, VFR aircraft.  I like antiques, old 150's, and
the like.  

What is a bummer about this particular conversation is the statement
that old aircraft should be scrapped because of high maintenance 
or to allow the manufacturers to sell new airplanes.  Sure, old
airplanes cost money to maintain.  It cost me over $40 in parts 
and manuals to rebuild the Eisman magnetos on my Funk.  The last
annual on my brother's J-3 Cub ran almost $200.  Heck, a total restore
on the Taylorcraft in the family will run almost $3500 by the time
everything is done on it.  And old tail-wheel airplanes will cause
everyone a bunch of trouble because they are so hard to land.  I 
guess we all need to go out and buy brand new Cessna P-210's just to
fly to Lake Lawn for lunch (IFR, of course).

Really, gang, the slow two-place airplane is really a good thing 
to have around.  Sure they are slow.  The Funk is about 100 mph.
In the last two years I have taken it (known as Phoebe) from the
Chicago area to New Jersey (for business), then to Kitty Hawk,
and finally home.  It tool almost 25 flight hours for the whole
trip.  There were two days in New Jersey where I would not have wanted
to fly Phoebe, and one day where I would not have wanted to fly a
King Air.  I also used Phoebe to fly to Montgomery, Alabama for a
Civil Air Patrol school.  The trip took one day, VFR.

I am firmly convinced that a Cessna 150 or Funk or Taylorcraft
or any other of the cheap two-seat airplanes can be used for 
(dare I say it) TRANSPORTATION when the limits for the aircraft
are known.  Typically, I feel that there is a 90% or better chance 
that a VFR flight in one of the two-seat airplanes can be completed
as planned.  Certainly you need to plan for stops fairly frequently
for fuel, but the Cessna 150 is still faster than driving, and almost
as fast as a Cessna 172.

Years ago, I used to ferry Cessnas from the factory in Wichita
to Canada, Miami, Chicago, and other points.  Fewer than 1 in 10 trips
got cancelled or even got into trouble because of weather.  Wichita
to Winnipeg would take stops at Lincoln, Nebraska, Watertown, South
Dakota, Grand Forks, North Dakota (if it exists), and Winnipeg.  We 
would plan on eight hours from Wichita to Winnipeg.  We never had a
flight go over eight hours, and frequently we would be in Winnipeg in
less than six hours.  In a Cessna 152.  VFR.

These airplanes as transportation, or even as valuable local aircraft,
depends on the attitude of the pilot.  If you are not comfortable
in something with less than 4 seats, or with only one radio (or no radio
for that matter), or without a full IFR panel, then this class of airplane
is not for you.  If, however, you are willing to get your hands dirty,
fly low and slow, and put some effort into learning about your airplane
and the environment in which you fly, this class of airplane is a good
alternative for you.

Of course, these are my opinions.  But, they are based on a bit of
experience.  My credentials include:
	Airline Transport Pilot - Multi engine
	Commercial Pilot - single engine
	Certified Flight Instructor - single engine, multi engine
		and instrument
	Ground Instructor - advanced and instrument.

	Over 3000 hours of flight in over 75 different types of
		airplanes.  (This doesn't mean that I count a
		1971 Cessna 172 and a 1981 Cessna 172 as different
		types, either, in spite of the fact that they have
		different wings, flaps, and engines.)

As a piece of advice, do look at the low and slow airplane.  They
are fun.  Support the joint AOPA and EAA primary aircraft proposal.
Don't sell the idea of a primary aircraft short.  The industry needs
this type of airplane.

				Jeff Williams
				AT&T Bell Laboratories
				ihnp4!cfiaime