----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any
advice in this forum.]----

David.
I agree with Mr.Larson to opt for a more powerful plane if you want to fly
high altitudes under all
circumstances and always with a passenger plus luggage .
If you are wise enough to learn that a hot afternoon is as much a no go in
high altitudes (above 10000
ft) as a thunderstorm then I don't see a problem in a Coupe. Flying alone
I
reach the 10000 ft
relatively fast (hot days excluded) and with someone extra on board I
consider 8000 ft not a problem.
Everything higher is doable but requires planning in a Coupe.
And that is not after everyone's taste. Most people want to fly like
driving
a car. A quick check for
oil (because they have to - uaghh , damn laws!) and off they go.
I see my aviation hobby a little different.
I like checking the oil. I like polishing the aluminum. I like the twin
tail
and the fact that it is
always coordinated in turns.
I like the low wings and the excellent view I have in her. Iwant to know
everything about her.
I do not miss flaps and I don't see them as performance enhancement
either,
they are drag after all.
Not even a Piper Seneca could give me the fun  I have with my little
Coupe.

If you are interested in buying an Ercoupe because of its unique features
and design, why would you go
with another plane?
If you are interested in buying an Ercoupe because of its relative low
price, can you afford owning and
maintaining something twice expensive ?


Any other Couper here who fly out of high Altitudes?? Maynard flies out of
Truckee. That is 5900 ft
plus he has to climb another 2000 to make it into the Valley. He seems not
to have too many problems
besides the wonderful adventures of mountainflying - 2000 ft/min
downdrafts
for example. Maynard ??

My recommendation is : Try one. Ask someone for a ride. That explains more
than we can describe her.

Oh. And  talking about the Piper Seneca. Last Summer I was asked for a
ride
by the owner of such plane
on our airport (he's got three different planes, not all Senecas). Sure I
said.
It was a hot afternoon in Q99 - 280 ft , very close to sea level. But
guess
what ? My climb
performance  was so lousy it was embarrassing. His comment was : "scary".
Of
course if you are used to
twin engine performance. But then I showed him what my plane can do.
Turns,
stalls, the nice handling .
His attention grow. But the killer was when I put down the windows. His
eyes
started to glow and he
said "This is just like in the old days of aviation".
After we landed his conclusion was: " I need one - this just pure fun".
Exactly!

That's why I keep my coupe as long as I can. Too much fun.

Hartmut
415-C/E N3330H



[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>
> David,
> I have owned an Ercoupe for three years. Click on www.ercoupe.com  and
click
> on planes, scroll down to N93555.  That is my plane that I am
considering
> selling.
>
> I have not done any flying in the mountains, nor do I plan to do so with
an
> Ercoupe. On a hot day in a high elevation situation, you just won't have
> enough power to get off the ground.  Once you are in the air, you may be
> able to manage high density altitude.  My 85 hp plane has an 1400# gross
> weight, 900# empty. So with 24 gallons of fuel at 6#/gallon, that leaves
me
> with 356# for me and a passenger and/or other payload.  On a normal
summer
> day in Minnesota, I don't have any problem fully loaded on a
hard-surface
> runway.  Grass will take longer.  Hot and humid will hamper your
performance
> significantly.
>
> Last year, I vacationed in Leadville, Colorado.  The elevation there is
> 10,000ft.
> I came to realize that an Ercoupe would not be appropriate for that
> environment.  That is much higher than most Ercoupe pilots fly their
planes.
> I would say that many coupers fly at around 3,500msl.  Most like to be
> closer to the ground to enjoy the scenery.
>
> This past February, I ascended to 12,100ft. msl one Sunday afternoon.
It
> took at least 25 minutes to reach that altitude.  I was alone and
initially,
> I was ascending at rate in excess of 500ft/min.  As I approached 10,000
ft.
> I was ascending at a rate of about 300ft/min.
>
> I'm sure some Ercoupe pilots fly around mountainous regions, but I'll
bet
> most fly through the passes and stay lower.  You will probably get some
> feedback from some of those pilots.
>
> Personally, on planes that gross out at 1400# to 1800# or so, I would
want
a
> plane with at least 150 hp and had flaps for enhancement of performance.
An
> Ercoupe doesn't have flaps.  You might even consider a tail-dragger,
which
> may give you more options.  If you wanted a higher performance plane
with
a
> turbo, mountainous terrain would be less of a challenge.
>
> The bottom line is that I wouldn't recommend purchasing an Ercoupe for
what
> you have in mind.  If you still would like to purchase one, mine
probably
> will be for sale.  I have truly enjoyed my "Spirit of 46" and is a
delight
> to fly.  It is a GREAT aircraft for most scenarios, but for your
intentions,
> probably not.  I, too, would like to spend time flying around the
> mountainous regions of the Northwest, but I think that I will decline to
fly
> an Ercoupe.
>
> The message above is just my opinion, for what it is worth. I would
> appreciate hearing from you if someone tells you that they are
appropriate
> aircraft for aggressive mountain flying.
>
> Good luck in your search for the right plane.
>
> Dallas Larson
> Lakeville, MN
> N93555
>


==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Sid.bAhN69
Or send an email To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A  -- Learn More. Surf Less.
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
==^================================================================

<<attachment: winmail.dat>>

Reply via email to