Hahahaha, the good old symptoms of airplane ownership: there is always a next step with better payload and better performance. When I started out in my private license C152 was the king. Then a PA28 stole its place, soon to be replaced by PA28R (Arrow). I never liked C172 (hence the name Gutless Cutlass) but a 2000 model C182 in year 2000 was a great airplane to fly. A Seminole , that I got my commercial multi in was the king of airplanes even though it was a 20 years old beat up airplane. After that great PA30 a Twin Comanche stole my heart with its performance despite its engine size. I still love the airlane, but when I stepped into a Cessna 340 I said to myself "This is the airplane!" .. Looks like a PA28-II or even a Saratoga might be a TEMPORARY solution to your problem Mike. But watch out! You may desire a Malibu or a TBM700 right after that :) BAHA Fan of flying.. and missing it :( -----Original Message----- From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU]On Behalf Of Mike Gammon Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 5:39 PM To: AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU Subject: Re: A non-aviation posting You should try a Cherokee 140 on a high density altitude day. I recently took mine out at full gross, from a 3000' density altitude strip (1400 ft actual altitude). It was a gravel strip, 3000 ft long with trees at the end and gently upsloping terrain beyond. The book numbers, factoring in 10% extra for the gravel runway (it was a no-wind day) said 2750 ft to clear a 50' obstacle, using a max. angle of climb speed of 78 mph. You'd normally think a 3000' strip was enough for a Cherokee in Eastern Canada but in this case, it was marginal to say the least. At least when we coaxed it up to 5500' for the 1 hr or so cruise home, we could nurse about 128 mph true out of her at 75% power. For a Cherokee 140, anything over 110 mph is gravy! Book value gives pretty close to 130 mph under those conditions and it's amazing that a 26-y.o. bird could still produce that close to book. Now imagine a 140 with air conditioning. Believe it or not they actually offered this option and when it was turned on, a big trap door opened up outside, dragging in the wind, to send air through the condenser. No wonder the manual said to turn it off until well past your obstacle clearing height. Mine, fortunately is not so equipped. The useful load of a 140 is bad enough without it. Mike "dreaming of a bigger plane" Gammon ----- Original Message ----- From: <WaterskiPilot@aol.com> To: <AIRLINE@LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 10:36 PM Subject: Re: A non-aviation posting > In a message dated 9/19/2002 6:32:31 PM Central Standard Time, > jim.fulton@talk21.com writes: > > > > Jim, what are you flying now? Your signature still says J41s. Were they any > > better than Saabs for hot weather? > > > > Well Jim, > No offense to our readers from the British Isles but the 41 was > designed and built in a rather cool climate. Summer on the bird is a bit, > ahem, tough. The white airplanes here in STL are much better than the "Easy > Bake Oven" paintjobs out on the East Coast. In the MOM IV (Manufacturers > Operating Manual, Volume 4) there is a page in the Air > Conditioning/Pressurization section labeled "Performance," in class we > relabled it "FICTION." I will say one thing, it warms up well in the winter > once we start the screaming Garrett sisters, we do not have the auxiliary > cabin heaters. > Takeoff and Landing performance is okay up to about 90F (@32C) then it > starts to get really soggy. Our 41s are actually 4101s with 1650shp vs. ACA > with 1500shp so we do okay, but we normally temp out pretty quick after > takeoff. > > Jim > > Jim Hann > Waterski J-41 Captain > Lambert-St. Louis Airport (STL/KSTL) >