For me it's about 120 -140 mph or better is good cruise speed . This is True airspeed -not over the ground ,this will vary with wind. I like to to see 3 or 4 cruise -stall speed ratio. With SPORTSMAN STOL 182 I can land/take off in 40 mph range and cruise (TAS) at 160 mph . In Cub land /takeoff in 30's and cruise 80-90 mph. 210 will land /takeoff in 50's and cruise in 160-170 range. Depends on Mission .

Hey Bill, why don't you cruise over to Kinko's and burn off those copies you've been promising me for TWO YEARS. Either that or send my cash back to me... Better yet, send it to Zane.

I never liked knots, too slow.... MPH look faster. Here in Quebec, kilometer per hour are even faster...

I bought a 120mph maximum airspeed. 90mph looks faster on that airspeed indicator. Another good thing is that it can read bellow 30mph...

1:1 Scale wrote:Hey Bill, why don't you cruise over to Kinko's and burn off those copies you've been promising me for TWO YEARS. Either that or send my cash back to me... Better yet, send it to Zane.

Was money paid for product or services advertised on this site and never fulfilled?

Cruising back from a solar job today at 75 mph on a perfect morning this thread popped into my mind. The premise of the OP is kind of like saying you just want to get to the "happy ending" when making love to your significant other, and forget enjoying/prolonging the time spent getting there. Maybe I'm over thinking it

I didn't realize spending more time FLYING was a bad thing, that I was "tolerating" it, I thought I was enjoying it . Having said that, I think we all want a 200 mph cruiser that can land at Cub speeds, I sure do. The Lllano STOL contest coming up is a good example, sure I'd have fun going there and back, but it'd take too long (too long as in missing work etc., not in not having fun) at my speeds! I think 182 STOL numbers sound pretty damn good..... if less then 4 GPH fuel burn, I'd get one, there's always a catch.

The little Patrol LSA gets me a bit hot, I'd like to fly one, that Riblett wing seems pretty good. I have yet to see an owner built one though with big Airstreaks, and also am not sure it lands as slow and short as I can now with the S-7S. I don't want to give up any STOL for faster, it's too much fun.

Hammer wrote:

Barnstormer wrote:What's a knot?

No need to know...you have my tie-downs.

Nicely done. Or as the hipsters would say "Well played."

courierguy wrote:Cruising back from a solar job today at 75 mph on a perfect morning this thread popped into my mind. The premise of the OP is kind of like saying you just want to get to the "happy ending" when making love to your significant other, and forget enjoying/prolonging the time spent getting there. Maybe I'm over thinking it

I didn't realize spending more time FLYING was a bad thing, that I was "tolerating" it, I thought I was enjoying it . Having said that, I think we all want a 200 mph cruiser that can land at Cub speeds, I sure do. The Lllano STOL contest coming up is a good example, sure I'd have fun going there and back, but it'd take too long (too long as in missing work etc., not in not having fun) at my speeds! I think 182 STOL numbers sound pretty damn good..... if less then 4 GPH fuel burn, I'd get one, there's always a catch.

The little Patrol LSA gets me a bit hot, I'd like to fly one, that Riblett wing seems pretty good. I have yet to see an owner built one though with big Airstreaks, and also am not sure it lands as slow and short as I can now with the S-7S. I don't want to give up any STOL for faster, it's too much fun.

Overthinking only slightly perhaps.

It's not about the premise of "tolerating" the flights, but rather to have the ability to fly more often, and keep life, family, and time trimmed out in a nice attitude. Much of which will be compromises, dependent on what takes priority - STOL or Distance. Much of the best flying is done looking out the open door of a J3, but at some point in everyone's flying career they want to "go" too. Meaning that fly-in in Maine next weekend, or the breakfast coffee and sugar donuts in PA, or simply that quick trip to drop off some parts for a customer that you could make in the airplane....if your speed and range permits.
Many here it seems have found that "middle ground" - a 182 is a great workhorse for some, and the Rans works great for others. Like cars and boats, there's no one brand or model that fits everyone's desires, needs and wallet. Skywagons to Beavers, there are some great mail-hauling machines.
But, it also seems that pilots in the 60-70 mph range fly it for one purpose only, the love of flying. And it's wonderful they have secured the time to do so. Others have been able to go the multi-plane route, with hangar housing two j3's, a Stearman, a 182, a 210, etc. They have mission specific aircraft selection! (But no real STOL yet).

So as Courierguy stated, there is always a catch - 4gph doesn't come with a 182. And yes, right now, right here, reasonable speed matters. Cars and Balloons shall not pass!

pb

Twice as fast as a car. That's my minimum. I like to tell the wife we can get there twice as fast as driving. In the 182 that holds true for anything in the 100-200 mile range. Further than that and it gets to be even faster, especially with straight lines in lieu of roads.

The 182 will cruise 140mph but it takes a heckuva a lot more fuel to 140 vs 120mph.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Farmboy asked:

in *your* backcountry taildragger, nosedragger or other airborne carrier, what's your minimum tolerance for cruise speed? 50 kts? 60 kts, 70 kts, 100 kts? How slow of an airplane will you fly before pulling your hair out?

My kitfox cruises 85 mph on 52 horse power and 4 gals/hr. Can anyone top that for MPH per HP? It's not a question of what can I tollerate. It's what can I afford.

tcj wrote:
My kitfox cruises 85 mph on 52 horse power and 4 gals/hr. Can anyone top that for MPH per HP? It's not a question of what can I tollerate. It's what can I afford.

That's pretty sweet. I'm close, but not that close- my 150 does about 85mph at 4.5-5 gal/hr which ain't bad but that's with just about twice the power of your kitfox.

I like the "twice as fast as the car" benchmark. While I can't come close to twice as fast MPH-wise, most trips around here (Central CO rockies) end up working out pretty close to that since driving takes forever over passes, snaking along the river, etc... So I guess I'm ok with 80-90mph cruise.

Last weekend I piddled around for 2.5 hrs at 100mph and 5-6 gph. I don't have fuel flow so that's a rough number based on fuel burned (which is also a rough number since I didn't top off or refill after the flight).

I can cruise at 140mph, but that burns around 9 to 10 gph. Lands in the 50's.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Zzz wrote:

1:1 Scale wrote:Hey Bill, why don't you cruise over to Kinko's and burn off those copies you've been promising me for TWO YEARS. Either that or send my cash back to me... Better yet, send it to Zane.

Was money paid for product or services advertised on this site and never fulfilled?

Not advertised in the proper sense, but he let it be known that product and services were available. The last time he answered my call, "everything is ready to mail, I just need your address", despite being given to him multiple times. Several months later, I still don't have the package, despite paying for it over two years ago, face to face.

I made a stupid mistake and paid for something in advance with cash, hopefully others can learn from my misfortune.

Sorry for the thread drift, it just kind of annoys me to see someone posting on the 'net instead of making good on business deals.

On cruise speed, I think 90-95 knots is is about my lower limit. I just did two cross countries from OR to FL and OH to OR. First trip in a Stinson, Second in a Maule. Battling 30 knot headwinds in the Maule, I was sure glad I wasn't in the Stinson!

tcj wrote:Farmboy asked:

in *your* backcountry taildragger, nosedragger or other airborne carrier, what's your minimum tolerance for cruise speed? 50 kts? 60 kts, 70 kts, 100 kts? How slow of an airplane will you fly before pulling your hair out?

My kitfox cruises 85 mph on 52 horse power and 4 gals/hr. Can anyone top that for MPH per HP? It's not a question of what can I tollerate. It's what can I afford.

Two stroke? Don't forget to add the cost of the needed oil per hour to your fuel burn cost. Then again, you don't have oil changes, never mind.

I just upgraded from a J3 which cruised at 80mph to a 180 that can almost get 160mph. Seat time is great - but I'm looking forward to going twice as far or getting there in half the time for sure. But for me the cruise speed wasn't the major reason to upgrade - it was the ability to haul more shit and have an electrical system. I'd say J3 speed is as low as I would be willing to go. That's about as slow as it gets though.

Mostly this is a non-issue. I'd take a Backcountry Supercubs SQ2 with slotted wings and 35" bushwheels and 75mph cruise any day of the week and twice on sunday.

I like to do a few long trips each year. By long, I mean a couple of 4 hour legs. That means going high for terrain clearance and reducing exposure to turbulence (because I can't fly all day and have it still be morning). It also means more wind. I hate seeing double digits on ground speed. 30 knots of headwind isn't that uncommon, in my experience, so I like to be able to dial up a minimum of 130 ktas. Also, if you're burning 12+ gph and there are stiff headwinds, there will be some times when you'll need decent TAS in order to make the next fuel stop. For shorter trips (less than an hour), I'd be fine with 100 ktas. For watching the sunset, 50 would be just fine.

CAVU

J3 for cruisin the hood with my lady.. 180 for everything else..........

Looking at all the replies, the topic can probably be split into the distance group and local group. Some have been able to acquire an aircraft for each sortie, but the larger population finds the best fit with one.

So let's average it out and call minimum cruise 100 mph, which should be close to the majority. Twice car speed for sure in a straight line.
What kind of seat time keeps it enjoyable per flight? Is your range 1 hour? 2 hours? Till you hit reserve fuel?

I am ok with the Maule on 35s doing 120MPH. I'm better with the 29 Air Hawks 138MPH. I really like the 8.50s doing 150MPH

Cheers...Rob

Flew for three hours used 8.4 Gallons. Thats 2.8 GPH at about 80-90 MPH..Rans S7S w/100 HP

Low and slow is where all the fun is, but speed has value too, no question about it. The good places to land don’t have lights, so twenty minutes flight time can be the difference between camping next to a good trout stream or having to divert to some asphalt armpit for the night.

And while I love flying as much as the next guy, it’s pretty pollyanna to believe that every flight is a little bit magical. Some of them just sort of really suck...

Like crossing the Great Basin IFR in heavy smoke while flying into the sun with knock-your-headset-off turbulence and a cabin temp of 91 degrees. IFR in turbulence is one thing, and breathing heavy smoke for hours on end is one thing, and being hot and dehydrated and having to piss is one thing, but you put them all together and that particular 3.8 hours was about as magical as a 1950’s root canal.

A bit faster cruise speed wouldn’t have broken my heart that day. Like maybe 290 knots or so…By the time that flight was over I’d have put two big rattlers and a hot badger down my pants before I’d have gotten back in my airplane.

Luckily the good flights far outnumber the bad ones, but there are times when increased fuel burn is a really, really small price to pay for getting there quicker.