dougmeyer
Needs a job
moderated
Posts: 2713
|
posted August 05, 2007 09:10 PM
OT- Why did I switch careers?
Stop by your local magazine emporium and check out the August issue of Plane & Pilot magazine. Yup, that's me looking at you from the left seat of the Columbia 400 on the cover.
Lots 'O Fun. 
Doug
  
|
VincentHill
Needs a life
Posts: 6520
|
posted August 06, 2007 04:48 AM
Always at the Head of the "Class" and in that catagory you are #1
|
entropy
Moderator
Posts: 8671
|
posted August 06, 2007 06:51 AM
 Edited By: entropy on 6 Aug 2007 07:54
"Entry-level price for the Columbia 400 is $475,000, but in this case, the entry-level cost buys a fully IFR-equipped airplane. It includes dual Garmin 430s, an STEC-55A autopilot and virtually everything to let you leap in and fly. There also are options such as speed brakes, a hot-wing de-ice system (still to be certified), the aforementioned climate control unit and more. Lancair has packaged many of the options to cut production incorporation costs, and that's definitely the best way to go if you want a totally decked-out Columbia 400."
YIKES!!! And i thought foolin' with MC's was expensive...
____________
This moderator uses moderation in moderation
|
Megabyte
Pro
Posts: 1047
|
posted August 06, 2007 10:46 AM
Yes, but can it beat my 12 in the 1/4 
____________
We First make our habits and then our habits make us.
|
dougmeyer
Needs a job
moderated
Posts: 2713
|
posted August 06, 2007 02:34 PM
Nope
|
VincentHill
Needs a life
Posts: 6520
|
posted August 06, 2007 03:11 PM
DM, I go all of the way back to and 85 HP Lycoming powered Piper Cub and my first flight was a Bonanza with the "V"Tail! Favorite Airplane Cessna UC-78 that Sky King flew!
|
CrotchRocket
Moderator
Bracket Racing with Betsy
Posts: 8038
|
posted August 06, 2007 03:54 PM
Hey Doug, what oil did you put in her
____________
Jason Miller StreetBike Seminars
*****DragRacers do it better, because they dont cut Corners*****
|
dougmeyer
Needs a job
moderated
Posts: 2713
|
posted August 07, 2007 05:59 AM
Castrol Aviator S100
Karl,
That's "old data" the one sitting just outside my office door is about $575,000. It has the climate control (a $27,500 option) 
Seriously check out the Plane & Pilot it's a cool article, we did the photography in Monument Valley AZ.
See flycolumbia.com
|
entropy
Moderator
Posts: 8671
|
posted August 07, 2007 06:37 AM
Doug,
very damn SWEET aircraft, nice lines and all, but i gotta say, you are getting HOSED on the "climate control (a $27,500 option) "
I just put an 18000BTU AC unit in my garage for $475 INSTALLED!!!
____________
This moderator uses moderation in moderation
|
VincentHill
Needs a life
Posts: 6520
|
posted August 07, 2007 09:17 AM
quote:
Doug,
very damn SWEET aircraft, nice lines and all, but i gotta say, you are getting HOSED on the "climate control (a $27,500 option) "
I just put an 18000BTU AC unit in my garage for $475 INSTALLED!!!
Karl, you are a Hard Man to please!  I do like the lines! Too bad the added complexity of Retractable Gear cost so much! Even with Pants and Skirts the Drag is still very high!
____________
Made History @ Daytona and still one fast old man!!
|
dougmeyer
Needs a job
moderated
Posts: 2713
|
posted August 07, 2007 01:26 PM
Not so much Vincent.
This aircraft was designed to be fixed gear. The gear was designed to be very low drag (as obvioiusly is the whole airframe, which is where the speed (270mph), the range (1300nm), and fuel efficiency (15-21 GPH) come from. This low drag landing gear is very different from a retractable landing gear that is designed completely without consideration to drag, and in fact sometimes is designed specifically to to create extra drag to slow down to landing speeds. Where, on your old Bonanza or flyboy's 210 the gear can slow you down 30-40 knots, removing the gear on a Clumbia will net you only about an 8 kt. increase at cruise.
Clearly not worth the complexity, maintenance, and added insurance costs to pay for that ultimate memory lapse when those wheels are forgotten. The Columbia has aerodynamic speeed brakes which extend from the top of the wing which allow you to slow for descent or descend without exceeding Vne.
Doug
|
aliveagain
Needs a life
Posts: 5033
|
posted August 07, 2007 04:41 PM
Even get it in the faster green color!!! Why did they detune it to the lower hp?On that tax relief page,I would need the plane to comprehend what was said, being so far over my head.
____________
I wondered why the baseball kept getting bigger. Then it hit me.
|
VincentHill
Needs a life
Posts: 6520
|
posted August 07, 2007 05:51 PM
Never thought about gear not designed for Drag because when the gear comes down the Brakes are ON!! Beautiful Airplane!
|
dougmeyer
Needs a job
moderated
Posts: 2713
|
posted August 08, 2007 07:44 PM
Alive,
It's not uncommon in aircraft engines. In the case of the Continental TSIO-550 (Turbosupercharged,injected, opposed, 550 Cubic inches) that engine was certified by the mfg to produce a max power of 350hp and has a recommended TBO (time before overhaul) of 2000 hours. Columbia simply chose to operate the engine at a max power of 310 hp by reducing the boost about an inch and the rpm about 100. That way when the engine is operated at "full power" in a Columbia, it is really being operated at 90% of the engine's certified potential ensuring that the 2000 hr TBO is easily reached, creating happy customers. The full power takeoff performance of the C-400 is more than adequate (and impressive) even at the 310 hp level. (A lightly loaded Columbia weighs about 3000 pounds. As far as single engine airplanes go, it flat gits it.)
|
aliveagain
Needs a life
Posts: 5033
|
posted August 09, 2007 08:54 AM
I remember talking to a commercial pilot at an airport one time and asked if he ever got bored with the overahead view.He said the cloud formation and city lights are always changing.I was just wondering how much one would actually notice the speed in flight and whether the flying would get mundane after awhile.Quite a bit of change to hand over for lofting about.
Good point about lowering about 10%.Not alot of room for error up there.What is the coast rate?If the term isn't correct,whats the ratio of glide /drop in a stall?
____________
I wondered why the baseball kept getting bigger. Then it hit me.
|
blueford
Needs a job
Posts: 2984
|
posted August 09, 2007 09:48 AM
Edited By: blueford on 9 Aug 2007 10:49
quote:
The Columbia has aerodynamic speeed brakes which extend from the top of the wing which allow you to slow for descent or descend without exceeding Vne.
Not Vne doug, it would be (A) shock cooling the engine and (B) Vno.
quote:
That way when the engine is operated at "full power" in a Columbia, it is really being operated at 90% of the engine's certified potential ensuring that the 2000 hr TBO is easily reached, creating happy customers.
Not a chance on a 2000 hr TBO, Malibus are getting like 500 to 800, turbos eat engines, flown low or high.
Fuck the turbo, I'm getting a Columbia 350 and only inexperienced pilots get turbos in unpressurized aircraft.
Just being honest, I've spent hundreds of hours above 18,00o ft. sucking ox.
Unless your flying out of ski resorts in summer with some fat peeps, skip it, no advantage whatsoever.
And a normally aspirated airplane will almost always beat a turbo when an upwind and downwind round trip are compared.
And I can imagine descending through icing conditions in the teens with FIXED gear??
|
dougmeyer
Needs a job
moderated
Posts: 2713
|
posted August 09, 2007 05:06 PM
Edited By: dougmeyer on 9 Aug 2007 18:08
Blu,
Vno on the Columbia is 181 kts, Vne is 235. We often operate in the yellow in smooth air but my point was that the speed brakes can keep you from exceeding Vne in virtually any case.
You are right about the shock cooling, of course, but its much less a factor than getting this aircraft slowed down. Shock cooling is not nearly the problem people believe it to be. You really have to operate your engine like an idiot to damage it by shock cooling it.
Which do you think is worse, pulling out a couple inches of manifold pressure at altitude, or rolling out onto the runway on a -20F day and cramming in the throttle going to max power in 15 seconds? The whole topic riles me up.
Probably 90% of of our operations are in the teens, with a cannula, I also rarely fly in the FL's due to the cumbersome mask, but this airplane does real well in the mid levels (200+ kts)
Ice accretion on the gear leg fairings has not been a problem. We're in the Northwest, ice is a fact of life. Our systems are not known ice anyway.
Gotta disagree with your comments about the NA vs Turbo Big Time, though. It's because of the rate of climb. The 400 maintains 1200 fpm into the 20's. No time wasted climbing.
The differences aren't great but when a couple of use leave the factory with a 400 and a 350 the 400 guy always gets there first by a fair margin.
I flew a Malibu (Rob Muzzy's) for four years. It went to 1600 hrs on the original cylinders, needing one on the presale insp. Flew Lean of Peak nice and cool. It's all how you operate it. Also, the 550 is not the same animal as the 520 ( OR the Lyc. for sure) at all. Much better engine.
Come to Bend and I'll take let you fly a Columbia!
Doug
|
blueford
Needs a job
Posts: 2984
|
posted August 10, 2007 06:54 AM
Edited By: blueford on 10 Aug 2007 09:14
Sorry Doug, I didn't know who you were! Awesome!
Anyways, mostly joking, nothing wrong with turbo if money is not a factor.
Beautiful plane, Neibauer is a genius. Please post some more about it some time.
Plane & pilot mags are scarce these days, any scans you could post?
What do you do in aviation now, do you own a FBO?
|
dougmeyer
Needs a job
moderated
Posts: 2713
|
posted August 10, 2007 11:22 AM
I was a little late with the topic- I'll scan up the whole deal next week when I'm back in the office. I'm Marketing Manager for Columbia AIrcraft.
No worries- I 'm just another gearhead!
Doug
|
H2 to ZX12
Needs a job
two stroke power
Posts: 3674
|
posted August 12, 2007 04:17 AM
quote:
"
nice pic of the Oregon coast Doug? who took the pic and what were they in? I wanna be you when I grow up 
|
|
|
HOME
NEW TOPIC