>I sent out a similar e-mail a couple of weeks ago. I am co-building
>with David DeFord, and we also want to use the aux pad for the
>Whirlwind constant speed prop governor. We have been told that
>the optional, front mounted, alternator does not fit the cowl.
>The responses I got back can be summarized as follows:
>
>1. Get rid of our power hungry strobes (Whelen A600's) and use some
>others that use less current.
> We fly in an area with a lot of traffic, and with an all white airplane,
The whiter airplane is almost as visible as the strobes IMHO. Go lower power?
2. Use an electric prop, allowing an alternator to be located on the aux
>pad.
> We really want a hydraulic constant speed prop, particularly for
>aerobatics. It's not clear to me that the electric constant speed will
>keep up with the changes in load.
I think its a mistake expecting to do aerobatics that require a CS prop.
Airplane wasn't designed for that. It has low enough drag anyway to allow
nice, graceful positive G type aeros with a fixed pitch. If you want the
brute force and ignorance type go rent a Pitts. BTW don't forget if you
fall out of a loop you will see VNE extremely quickly.
>We are seriously considering the 914, which is already heavier up front,
>and
>needs one electric fuel pump on all the time and another part time. We are
>not sure what to do yet. Please keep us advised of any solutions you may
>come up with in this area.
Decide what you really want from the airplane then decide what you are
prepared to compromise. It is an efficient touring airplane and the 914
will take you hot and high like nothing you saw before. And you can take
the bird home easily afterwards.
Graham
|