----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]---- Larry. I know everyone wants speed and horsepower. But then everyone does not want to pay a lot for it. After evaluating the normal use of an Ercoupe I think that the speed you would have to pay for is not as important as - ease of use - two control - economy - 5 GPH or less - versatility - 2 people can fly and land anywhere What do I mean ? The mission an Ercoupe is been used for is to carry 2 people and baggage over a distance of up to 500 miles mainly on daylight and VFR. A lot of people like the two control design and for a varity of reasons it should be kept. The airframe plus engine & fuel should not weight more than 800 lbs to give enough room for 2 pilots and baggage. That way you can register it as a Sport Plane . If you can do all that with a composite airframe running a 125 hp I will buy YOUR plane. The intent to leave the Ercoupe in the lower range of speed is dictated by the difficult balance of keeping the thing stallresistent and spinproof and a two control plane. With lots more horsepower this balance is hard to keep.(the O-200 conversion callsalready for a smaller prop just for that reason) You would have to increase the rudder area a lot and make it probably a tree control aircraft with a single tail only - which then is no Ercoupe anymore. Also the use of flaps is against the ease of use, one thing more to do wrong. With the difficult airflows around the spinproof design you introduce a lot of aerodynamic problems with flaps. And in the end they will give you only a speed advantage of 5 mph on landings. Thats not enough to pay for all the difficulties of that extra flap-design. It took Weick and Sanders a while to come up with the design of the 415. I would think it is hard to develop a bigger, wider, faster Ercoupe with the same outstanding flight capabilities. That's why I think one should address the weak spots of aircraft in a sanely manner. One weak spot is the engine which will give you only 50hp on altitude. Fix that and we will see how fast we fly.(turbonormalizing) Hartmut, San Francisco ( which is leaving to the airport now) Flying is an art of living - The New Ercoupe
----- Original Message ----- From: Larry Wilkins <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Hartmut <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2002 12:07 AM Subject: Re: [COUPERS-TECH] A new Coupe What did I miss here? I thought this was a "NEW" Coupe. Composits etc. I wouldn't think a new state of the art Coupe would still only fly at 110 mph. I'm thinking more in the 140-150 range. I would guess a 125 would burn around 8 gph, so with 30 gal. fuel, range of 500 miles with 30 minute reserve. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: Hartmut <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 24, 2002 12:16 PM Subject: Re: [COUPERS-TECH] A new Coupe All. While it is very favorable to have some extra power at altitude I guess a regular 125-150 hp continental/lycoming gas powered engine will not cut it. First, these engine will weight more, so does the extra amount of fuel you'll need to run them. In the case described below the desired flying distance is 2 X 250 miles (no wind condition). Since you can't fly much faster than 110 - 120 with the Ercoupe airframe you'll need fuel for around 5 hours. That is 50 Gallons of fuel for an 10GPH engine. Twice the fuel we have now available. With the extra amount of fuel and the extra engine weight your usable weight would shrink that much that your wife would have to stay home again. The only solution would be to construct a different airframe, but that is probably not a Coupe then, or allow a stall speed of around 80 mph for your high power NEWcoupe. So what's to do? Very simple. Not always does bigger equal more. In aviation you'll have to pay a price for bigger. A staedy, reliable horse power of around 70-90hp is very sufficiant for our little planes. If we only could sustain these values up in the air..... A turbo charged or turbo normalized 85 hp engine will produce the 85 hp also at altitude, but still consume only 5 Gallon per hour. With this consumption and the lesser engine weight we are in the desired ballpark. Remember the normal gasoline engines we use for flying produce only 60 % of their power at altitude. It does not cut much if you have 60 % of 85 horse or 60% of 125 horses when you consider the additional weight of the 125 hp engine and the extra fuel to carry. Not bigger engines are the answer - the Coupe of the future will have a more sophisticated one. Engine that is. I know that, because one day I will be building that ( not as a kit , but as a ready to assemble plane)You will be able to buy it for around 50'000 Dollar, engine included and you will fly Jet fuel. Hartmut, San Francisco Flying is an art of living - The New Ercoupe ----- Original Message ----- From: Larry Wilkins <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 8:09 PM Subject: Re: [COUPERS-TECH] A new Coupe ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]---- If a "new" Coupe were to be introduced, wouldn't it be wise to bring it into the realm of the Modern world? I fly out of a 5000 msl field, and most of our flying is above 7500 ft. An 85 hp Coupe just doesn't cut it when I have to cross over a pass that's 8000 ft high. I always wanted to Fly my wife and myself down to Lake Powell, but just couldn't make it with the two of us and any food and gear. On top of that, it was 250 miles one way, which means I couldn't make it round trip. With no fuel at the airport there, I would have to have made a detour for fuel. More fuel? Wider Cockpit? More Power? All of the above!!! Many things made the Coupe a wonderfully fun little plane. A few more things would have made it a wonderfully fun, useful plane. 125 hp. That would have made my Coupe great. Larry ----- Original Message ----- From: Percy <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wood To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 11:53 PM Subject: Re: [COUPERS-TECH] A new Coupe ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]---- At 07:09 PM 3/22/02 -0500, Keith Courson wrote: ----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]---- I have recieved alot of intrest in a new Coupe being offered as a kit andpossibly a certified plane. Yo, Keith. Some of us on the `coupers list have been noodling a 'new coupe' for some time. We have come to the conclusion that it can be done, but one should try to keep the charm. Examples: * Flaps. They indeed enhance lift at slow speeds. But complicate the structure. Without flaps, the wing maintains a sufficiently small chord so as to be stable. Flaps are one more thing to compensate for. Along with engine thrust. * Wider. Could be nice. * Engine. Consensis tends towards 75 - 100 horse range. Remember, more horses = more fuel. Where you gonna put it and how we gonna pay for it? * Canopy. Part of the charm is flying with the 'top down.' Will that still be available? Now, dispite all the questions, we do wish your initive well. I remain at [EMAIL PROTECTED] should you wish to get in on a good 'new coupe' discussion. Percy G. Wood ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Sid.bAhN69 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
