Most interesting Kim, thanks for sharing that.

I am pretty new to the coupe scene, but one question I may help with, the easy 
way to use your 0200 is to just convert it to a D Type 787 and get the 0200 
STC.  You can also just bolt the 0200 to the C and get field approval for the 
change.  I have FAA CD for a couple that were done that way.  Some pros and 
cons there, IF you convert it to a D, you can not convert it back to make it an 
LSA.  Currently LSA coupes are selling for quite a bit more than D models, so 
you might not want to convert it.  Make sense?
I will have to try hitting the gas valve with my knee next time to see how 
feasible that really is.


-- In [email protected], Kim Blackseth <kimblacks...@...> wrote:
>
> All...
> 
> I have purchased a 415C to replace/rebuild my recently damaged 415D. I  
> appreciate everyones support to have made this happen.  I used Ed's  
> very complete pre-buy checklist and the plane has "good bones". While  
> it still needs modifications for my disability and some "TLC", it's  
> going to get me flying in a few months...
> 
> The insurance company was kind enough to let me take most of my hand  
> controls and equipment for my disability out of the 415D.  I'm  
> negotiating for the rest of the plane salvage, as there are MANY new  
> pieces that would be very useful.  If I cannot make a "deal", I'll  
> just upgrade and work on the 415C, as resources permit.
> 
> However, if a do get the "D" back, I have few questions:
> 
> 1.    Can the new 0-200 in the"D" be installed on a "C"?
> 
> 2.    I hope this isn't to dumb, but as the airframes are the same, etc,  
> why is this "C" be limited to 1260 lb, but my old "D" is rated at 1400  
> lb, besides the obvious, "the rules say so". What physically or  
> mechanically limits the GW limits on these two identical airframes?  
> I.e, while illegal, does the "C" fly bad at 1400 lb?
> 
> 3.    I read in an earlier post discussing the split tail, that the  
> "landing speeds" were different between the "C" and "D". Again, what  
> physically or mechanically affects the landing speeds on these two  
> identical airframes?
> 
> By the way, the FAA and NTSB have finished their investigation on the  
> accident and tell me "preliminarily" that the pilot "must have"  
> knocked the fuel cutoff with his knee" off center slightly. I'm quite  
> skeptical and they based their conclusion on:
> 
> 1. The selector had no "positive" detents".  (Couldn't tell you as I  
> never have turned it off!)
> 2. I was in the off position when found. (It's because the pilot  
> turned it off after the incident, as he smelled gas!)
> 3. The plane started up after the crash for the investigators;
> 4. They could not find any other problem; and my favorite...
> 5. When they turned the selector off center, the engine acted "just  
> like the pilot reported".
> 
> Oh well....I guess it could have happened, but I don't see the  
> "smoking gun"...
> 
> Kim Blackseth
> 310 17th St
> Oakland, CA 94612
> kimblacks...@...
>


Reply via email to