Just to add to what Paul said, I had a conversation with my boss today about this thread. He owns one of the 100 or so Gruman Cougars built, which is a light twin very much like the 310.
In summary he said that his Cougar pretty much handles and feels the same as the Tiger (single) he used to fly and other singles he's flown before that. He said that someone who flies singles should be able to tell if the handling is about right. There are a few subtle differences, even between twins, like the ones Paul mentions. P-factor is a little lighter, but trimmed out anyway. Best, Jim paul mccann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > I couldn't agree more, I flew the c-310 back in the 80's on a night mail > run, and found it very stable to fly. It had sort of a big airplane > feel and pretty much stayed were you put it. The other thing that I > think is off a little on the flight-gear model, is when you put full > flaps and gear down, its difficult to keep the airspeed above blue line > in level flight! With both engines at full power I don't think thats > accurate. With the short stuby wings it did seem to need more power than > other twins, It was one of the only light twins I remember needing to > keep power in till touch down. The only thing that I remember standing > out about it was it did not do very well on one engine, I only saw this > in training. I think fully loaded on a summer day, you would be in a > lot trouble if you lost an engine in one. > > I don't recall it having a yaw damper though. I have a owners manual I > could send you if you if you want it. Hopefully I won't be flying mail > and bank checks at night again although the way things are in the > airline industry right now I better not say never. _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
