> Re IFR and the 914: If you go for vacuum gyros, the only pad for
> either a CS prop governor or a B&C secondary alternator is taken up.
> Rotax has a belt-driven alternator option, but the XS cowling
> interferes. If you opt for electric gyros, you lose redundancy in the
> event of electric failure. But secondary alternator and batt solves
> that. For a controllable-pitch prop, there are electrics (e.g.,
> Airmaster) and a newly announced mechanically controlled one
> (Proplink).
I like the idea of having a redundant alternator and all electric panel -
the electrical system is much more reliable than the vacuum and the total
weight can be less, since you don't need a very hefty battery anymore.
> For pitot heat, you'll need both the much extra alternator juice and a
> way of mounting it so it doesn't cook the fiberglass. The airframe
> cannot stand a lightning strike, and how the laminar flow wings and
> all-flying tail will react to even small am'ts of rime is unknown. So
> between these problems and opting out of pitot heat means you're
> committing to no "Ohio-style" IFR in cloud above the freezing level
> and any possibility at all of TRWs whether embedded or in bad haze.
In *any* small plane I am going to avoid icing and lightning like the
plague. Icing conditions really need a twin with anti-ice boots,
which is far beyond what I am planning.
Brian
|