What's with these A36's
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
What's with these A36's
Flew an A36 today, nice machine, 91 model, and it was a slug!
Half the climb rate of the V35B I flew 30 min before hand.
IO550 and no go.........my plastic plane would have blown it away!
Seems the FTDK is onto something....
Seriously.......it was pretty new too! Very uninspiring. 90% fuel (standard) and 310kg payload.
What's the problem Chuck?
Hoo Roo
J
Half the climb rate of the V35B I flew 30 min before hand.
IO550 and no go.........my plastic plane would have blown it away!
Seems the FTDK is onto something....
Seriously.......it was pretty new too! Very uninspiring. 90% fuel (standard) and 310kg payload.
What's the problem Chuck?
Hoo Roo
J
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Cairns
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
recently picked up a factory new G36 from Wichita and flew as a flight of 2 with 2 POB each aircraft from ICT to SFO, on every let the SR22 GTS we traveld with blew the 36 away in climb and quickly got 15 - 20 nm in front. At bull head city in Arizona we swapped our luggage out of the 36 into the Cirrus but it still outclimbed and outrun us !
Grandpa Aerotart
You would have been not far below MTOW in a late model 36 with '90% fuel and 310kg pax'.
I wold expect a Cirrus to outperform an A36...same engine and prop attached to a LOT less aeroplane.
I wold expect a Cirrus to outperform an A36...same engine and prop attached to a LOT less aeroplane.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Couple of thoughts, yes we were a bit below MTOW, but lets say a V tail today in very HOT conditions at MTOW did better.
1. Prop, the Scimitar on the V is a big blade compared to the one (same one with the AD limiting revs etc)
2. The vortex generators on the leading edge may have some degrading effect, and they look UGLY.
3. Equine Flu.......Even with 15 more ponies......
J
PS.... Gear???? thought it was fixed!
1. Prop, the Scimitar on the V is a big blade compared to the one (same one with the AD limiting revs etc)
2. The vortex generators on the leading edge may have some degrading effect, and they look UGLY.
3. Equine Flu.......Even with 15 more ponies......
J
PS.... Gear???? thought it was fixed!
Grandpa Aerotart
Did you pull power to 25/25 after takeoff?
No better way to make an aeroplane feel a little doggy...max cont on IO550 is full throttle/2700rpm...leave it there until well into the climb and then maybe just pull rpm back to 2500...makes a huge difference to 'get up and go' factor.
No better way to make an aeroplane feel a little doggy...max cont on IO550 is full throttle/2700rpm...leave it there until well into the climb and then maybe just pull rpm back to 2500...makes a huge difference to 'get up and go' factor.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps it was a SR22 TURBO GTS. Nice! Only US$533k so at the current 92 cents it great value at AUD$580k!
This puts the base model at $220k at the moment, including airbags, 200hp, parachute, terrain awareness, and an optional front wheel fairing! WFT?
This puts the base model at $220k at the moment, including airbags, 200hp, parachute, terrain awareness, and an optional front wheel fairing! WFT?
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Cockatoo Australia
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An SR22 will take out an A36 on speed just about every day of the week. The 22 is simply a faster machine in the climb and cruise, but generally doesn't have the payload capability.
The G36, and indeed many late model A36s don't have the performance of many of the early A36s because they have put on a lot of weight over the years with luxury fittings, air conditioners and so forth. Up until 1984 the A36 had a 285 HP donk, that year being the first fitted with the 300HP engine. However, many owners have retrofitted the 300HP engine to the earlier airframes, giving them extra payload and speed over the later models because the airframe is lighter.
To illustrate: the 1972 A36 (285 HP) had a BEW of 925 kg and an MTOW of 1632 kg. The 1990 A36 (300HP) had a BEW of 1027 kg and an MTOW of 1655 kg. The usable load had diminished from 707 kg to 628 kg.
The G36 figures are 1148 kg and 1656 kg respectively. Hence you might find the later models a 'slug' compared to a pre-1984 A36 that has been retrofitted with the 300HP Connie.
Walrus
The G36, and indeed many late model A36s don't have the performance of many of the early A36s because they have put on a lot of weight over the years with luxury fittings, air conditioners and so forth. Up until 1984 the A36 had a 285 HP donk, that year being the first fitted with the 300HP engine. However, many owners have retrofitted the 300HP engine to the earlier airframes, giving them extra payload and speed over the later models because the airframe is lighter.
To illustrate: the 1972 A36 (285 HP) had a BEW of 925 kg and an MTOW of 1632 kg. The 1990 A36 (300HP) had a BEW of 1027 kg and an MTOW of 1655 kg. The usable load had diminished from 707 kg to 628 kg.
The G36 figures are 1148 kg and 1656 kg respectively. Hence you might find the later models a 'slug' compared to a pre-1984 A36 that has been retrofitted with the 300HP Connie.
Walrus
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Under the Equator
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CC:
Not sure what you mean by the SR22 being a LOT less an airplane.
Same engine
SR22 has fixed gear and G36 is a retract.
SR22 has wider and higher cabin.
Yes, the SR22 has 4 seats and the G36 has a 4 + 2 cabin.
Having flown both in the USA, it simply comes down to the SR22 (and others of it's generation like the Columbia) is a modern design with less drag and better performing wing etc.
The G36/A36 is an older design. Great in it's day but now outclassed, as i'm sure the SR22 will be outperformed one day by a future design. That's progress and aviation has been waiting some time for the Cirrus/Columbia/Eclipse/Diamond designs to kick things along.
But, as suggested, a G36 or SR22 operated at 25/25 after take-off is not throwing out full muscle.
Not sure what you mean by the SR22 being a LOT less an airplane.
Same engine
SR22 has fixed gear and G36 is a retract.
SR22 has wider and higher cabin.
Yes, the SR22 has 4 seats and the G36 has a 4 + 2 cabin.
Having flown both in the USA, it simply comes down to the SR22 (and others of it's generation like the Columbia) is a modern design with less drag and better performing wing etc.
The G36/A36 is an older design. Great in it's day but now outclassed, as i'm sure the SR22 will be outperformed one day by a future design. That's progress and aviation has been waiting some time for the Cirrus/Columbia/Eclipse/Diamond designs to kick things along.
But, as suggested, a G36 or SR22 operated at 25/25 after take-off is not throwing out full muscle.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
We are going to have to do a scientific test when Chucks A36 comes out of the paint shop some time before Christmas 2012
So why then does a V35B at 25/25 out run the A36.....and we have tested them at FULL load? If we ran the V Tail at full stick all the way it would go even harder.
Have a good book here by John Eckalbar which I am going top read from the comfort of the Esplanade Hotel in Freo.....see what it has to say.
I guess an SR22 or the GTS would do the job, lotsa $$$
J
So why then does a V35B at 25/25 out run the A36.....and we have tested them at FULL load?
If we ran the V Tail at full stick all the way it would go even harder.Have a good book here by John Eckalbar which I am going top read from the comfort of the Esplanade Hotel in Freo.....see what it has to say.
I guess an SR22 or the GTS would do the job, lotsa $$$
J
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Somewhere around 27degrees
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A mate once had his A36 painted and engine/prop overhauled in the one go. When I asked him how much difference the new donk made, he said that the re-rigging of the gear doors (done with the paint obviously) was by far the greatest improvement of them all and that the thing now took much longer to slow up!
Who would've thought.
The point being: There are apples and there are apples!
Maybe the V35 was just a much better rigged, straighter example. Gear doors, trim tabs etc etc.
Who would've thought.
The point being: There are apples and there are apples!
Maybe the V35 was just a much better rigged, straighter example. Gear doors, trim tabs etc etc.
Last edited by Reverseflowkeroburna; 1st Nov 2007 at 06:38. Reason: Pilot-like grammar
Here you go J'wok. The A36 I fly always TAS's at 172/173KTAS without fail. Pics taken last Wednesday.
Even if Victor managed to get another 15hp out of an IO-520 (and I doubt that they would) you would only expect to see around a 4 kt increase in cruise IAS at the very most.
re-powered by a Power By Victor powerplant, thing was quite different than a standard 36
M082: If 'your' (perhaps 'you're'?) serious, I'd suggest that 2600 (or even 2550 - the actual indication) is easy for the 'ole girl', and that zero on a centre-zero ammeter is actually a normal reading.
I certainly like seeing both when I'm flying A36s.
I certainly like seeing both when I'm flying A36s.
Last edited by Creampuff; 2nd Nov 2007 at 10:56.
your running the ole girl pretty hard there budgie! 2600rpm!
Last edited by gassed budgie; 2nd Nov 2007 at 21:43.
If I'm at FL125 it's spun up to 2700RPM. It won't hurt it.
if the angle of the photo appears to make the tacho overread then the ammeter must be showing discharge!!!