Battson wrote:Do you have the mobile App to remotely switch your GoPro on and off?

Yes, but it really eats battery life. Instead I put a big battery pack on it and let it run. The battery lasts longer that way. Only downside is editing, but I don't miss any thing IF I turn it ON to begin with.

New page so time to add another video! Just finished editing this one last night.

This was taken from Yakutat south towards Juneau. We (Rose and I) are behind another 180 this time. Scolopax and his Lady are in that ship. Must be something to that, I'm beginning to think they like us following them around

We saw many miles of coastline and I've picked out some highlights. When the video slows to less than normal speed, look for critters in the water or on the ground.



https://vimeo.com/176420666

Hey Mike, curious how your cruise is compared to the 180s? I don't want ymto derail the awesome thread you have going on here. Just a quick question as I weigh out my kit options.

David

A1Skinner wrote:Hey Mike, curious how your cruise is compared to the 180s? I don't want ymto derail the awesome thread you have going on here. Just a quick question as I weigh out my kit options.

David

David,

The BH airframe has more drag so while I can run about the same cruise as they do, I burn about 1 to 2 gph more to do so. I'm happy just to pull back to about 125 mph TAS and 9 to 10 gph depending on altitude. We averaged 11.1 gph for the trip which included low altitude flying and at times keeping up with WOT Rob. My fuel burn at WOT was 14 to 16 gph (altitude dependent). The Bearhawk Bravo should do better than that.

Awesome! Thanks for the info. Next time tell Rob to slow down! Haha.

I loved the waterfalls and the coast!

Where were the waterfalls? I want to add them to my route north next time I fly up there.

CamTom12 wrote:I loved the waterfalls and the coast!

Where were the waterfalls? I want to add them to my route north next time I fly up there.

Might be easier to get at them on the way back. They are at 53 54' 4" N, 120 26' 34" W.

If you are coming from the east and can go over the top of the Rockies that would be easiest plus you could also see Banff and Jasper NP's. Or fly the Highway from Jasper to McBride to stay low.

If you have ever flown the southern trench route (roughly Cranbrook to Mackenzie) you know it has about 100 mile stretch where the only put down options are water or trees (over Kinbasket Lake). Instead of looking for landing zones, I was instead scanning for SZ's (survival zones). Pretty neat country but at the same time, not many options. I was more concerned in that stretch than what we flew over in the videos, Most of those places weren't good either, but there were landing options every 10 miles or so.

We were forced to overnight in McBride after taking the video. The combination of low fuel, low visibility, and darkness made us really glad to be on the ground. It poured and blew all night long. By 9 am it was all clear again. So many places to see and so little time and money!

Hope you get over to see them.

Really, really liked the Yakutat vid and really, really like that I'm not the only one who lands, and the wanders about aimlessly taking it all in, while completely forgetting the camera is still rolling At least you didn't take out another camera to video yourself videoing someone that's already in the first camera


Take care, Rob

Rob wrote:Really, really liked the Yakutat vid and really, really like that I'm not the only one who lands, and the wanders about aimlessly taking it all in, while completely forgetting the camera is still rolling At least you didn't take out another camera to video yourself videoing someone that's already in the first camera


Take care, Rob

Now that is funny right sh!t right there! LOL

blackrock wrote:

Rob wrote:Really, really liked the Yakutat vid and really, really like that I'm not the only one who lands, and the wanders about aimlessly taking it all in, while completely forgetting the camera is still rolling At least you didn't take out another camera to video yourself videoing someone that's already in the first camera


Take care, Rob

Now that is funny right sh!t right there! LOL

Wonder if the video editor can handle a triple shot?

blackrock wrote:Wonder if the video editor can handle a triple shot?

Just wait till you see the rest.... there are plenty more of those

A1Skinner wrote:Hey Mike, curious how your cruise is compared to the 180s? I don't want to derail the awesome thread you have going on here. Just a quick question as I weigh out my kit options.

David

If I may add another datapoint -

My BH has 26 GY tires whereas Mike has the 31s on. I also have all the fairings, no cowl outlet lip, and streamlined horizontal stab. Consequences are, I have no trouble keeping pace with a fast 180, or a 185 on bushwheels, and I burn 11.0 GPH to "keep up". That's my go-to power setting anyway.

Battson wrote:

A1Skinner wrote:Hey Mike, curious how your cruise is compared to the 180s? I don't want to derail the awesome thread you have going on here. Just a quick question as I weigh out my kit options.

David

If I may add another datapoint -

My BH has 26 GY tires whereas Mike has the 31s on. I also have all the fairings, no cowl outlet lip, and streamlined horizontal stab. Consequences are, I have no trouble keeping pace with a fast 180, or a 185 on bushwheels, and I burn 11.0 GPH to "keep up". That's my go-to power setting anyway.

Great info Jon. I may have to think about cleaning mine up!

blackrock wrote:

Battson wrote:

A1Skinner wrote:Hey Mike, curious how your cruise is compared to the 180s? I don't want to derail the awesome thread you have going on here. Just a quick question as I weigh out my kit options.

David

If I may add another datapoint -

My BH has 26 GY tires whereas Mike has the 31s on. I also have all the fairings, no cowl outlet lip, and streamlined horizontal stab. Consequences are, I have no trouble keeping pace with a fast 180, or a 185 on bushwheels, and I burn 11.0 GPH to "keep up". That's my go-to power setting anyway.

Great info Jon. I may have to think about cleaning mine up!

I imagine when I fit my 31's this weekend, I'll see similar speeds to you (thanks for your help with that info, by the way!).
I have set myself up for the same quick-swap between the 31s and 26s like you described. Good idea.

If I may add to this derailment from the other side of that coin, I would like to add that Mike knows his bird/engine quite well and indeed runs it in it's 'see spot' The fact that it is a dirtier airframe really doesn't show up until you push them both to higher speeds. We flew many fuel stops together at lower cruise settings and the fill up was essentially like for like. I am also willing to bet that in the fuel burn vs speed aspect alone, it compares quite close to an O-470 powered wagon. I think the big engined wagons tend to push things like bubble windows and B-Wheels more efficiently, causing them to suffer less of a fuel hit.

Just casual observation leads me to believe it's a better load hauler tho, which wouldn't surprise me given the wing plan form. I've never been a fan of short wings, and while the BH is definitely not short winged, the deep chord leaves an aspect ratio that appears short winged. Although I'm a huge fan of the current BH wing planform, and hate to see them stray from it, I am beside myself with anticipation on this new winged model. I've often looked for an experimental replacement for the 180, and while the current BH easily fits that bill, a 'long winged BH' might be just the one to win me over

Sorry to add to the Drift Mike, More vids!

Take care, Rob

Rob wrote:If I may add to this derailment from the other side of that coin, I would like to add that Mike knows his bird/engine quite well and indeed runs it in it's 'see spot' The fact that it is a dirtier airframe really doesn't show up until you push them both to higher speeds. We flew many fuel stops together at lower cruise settings and the fill up was essentially like for like. I am also willing to bet that in the fuel burn vs speed aspect alone, it compares quite close to an O-470 powered wagon. I think the big engined wagons tend to push things like bubble windows and B-Wheels more efficiently, causing them to suffer less of a fuel hit.

Just casual observation leads me to believe it's a better load hauler tho, which wouldn't surprise me given the wing plan form. I've never been a fan of short wings, and while the BH is definitely not short winged, the deep chord leaves an aspect ratio that appears short winged. Although I'm a huge fan of the current BH wing planform, and hate to see them stray from it, I am beside myself with anticipation on this new winged model. I've often looked for an experimental replacement for the 180, and while the current BH easily fits that bill, a 'long winged BH' might be just the one to win me over

Sorry to add to the Drift Mike, More vids!

Take care, Rob

All great discussion and keeps the thread more lively and interesting! Thanks for the posting your observations.

Here is the second video from that leg of the trip with one more to come after this one.

Jake, Christy, and Poppy:



Mike & Rose:




https://vimeo.com/176555595

This is a third video compiled from the Yakutat to Juneau leg of the trip. It definitely gets wetter (greener) as we get closer to Juneau.

And to keep it interesting, a great photo of Rob Landing.





https://vimeo.com/176558033

Went through some photos of the AK trip last night and ran across this great photo of Scolopax taken by Rose. That's Mt. Fairweather in the background at over 15,000 feet.

Beautiful!

Rob showing off his Big Bore.



Crossing the Bagley Ice Field. What an amazing expanse of ice.



https://vimeo.com/174955838

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bagley_Icefield