08 Jun 2025, 17:58 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 03 Aug 2015, 21:16 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/03/08 Posts: 16227 Post Likes: +27267 Location: Peachtree City GA / Stoke-On-Trent UK
Aircraft: A33
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The two friendliest single engine piston airplanes ever built are the Champ and the Bonanza. Both perform extremely well within their design limits. I know a lot of Cub owners/drivers who will say that the Champ is a better airplane. Ford/Chevy? Probably so but I'm not very fond of riding in the front of a Cub; it's just too small. They are fun to fly though, same with the Chief but it is pretty tight quarters. I could also add to the list: Tcraft, Luscombe, 120/140.... I love them all but am very selective in what I'd own. Ever try to mount a Tcraft? Yes, a champ is very easy, of all taildraggers it requires the least amount of footwork. And it's much easier to get in and out of than a cub. Similarly, of all ag planes a pawnee is the most benign. A travel air is light and easy to put exactly where you want it, it was a great trainer for people with few skills. And a king air 90 can be flown by a trained chimp who can do little more than stay awake. <==== check the airplanes I fly regularly. Easy does it.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 03 Aug 2015, 21:48 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 20293 Post Likes: +25435 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: And a king air 90 can be flown by a trained chimp who can do little more than stay awake. Ah, that explains it. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 03 Aug 2015, 22:06 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 08/11/09 Posts: 940 Post Likes: +297 Location: KAOH Lima, OH
Aircraft: B58 AC11
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Does anyone have real world ownership cost numbers on an Aeronca Chief? I know they're low but I'm trying to build it into a budget spreadsheet. For insurance: 25 tailwheel in a 7DC, 3100tt, $20k hull.
They can be had for a few thousand less than a Champ and can carry a little more. I want a pre-war model with sticks, not yokes. I co-own a 1946 Chief, 65 HP. $600 yr. insurance, 20K hull, coowner w 800+ tailwheel hrs., me -0-. Same broker as my G33. We burn 4-4.5 gal/hr. With owner assist inspection plate removal and cowl, prebuy/annual was $250. Fun plane and I feel like a peeping Tom at 500 ft and 50 Kts.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 03 Aug 2015, 22:19 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/06/11 Posts: 2922 Post Likes: +1668 Location: Missouri
Aircraft: C-120 RV8
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I've never liked the idea of extenders. They're a solution to a problem caused by bad habits; if you need them you're doing something wrong. The Champ spoiled me. I could lazily plop it on and not be punished with a bounce.
The rental has extenders. I should find one without before I rule out the series. I like "boing-o-matic." That's exactly what it is.
Yes, principles can get pricey. I'd stagger the wings and fuselage to make that pill easier to swallow. I'm not an expert but this is my understanding. The extenders move the axles forward about 3". There are two styles of gear legs for the 120/140. The early straight legs and the later swept forward legs. It is also my understanding the the extenders are not to be used on the later swept forward legs. My 120 is an early model and has the original early straight legs. I do not have extenders. It seems that most folks are no longer fans of extenders. My only experience is with my airplane, without extenders, and it seems to handle well. I do stay off the brakes. I make full stall landings. When done right, the tailwheel rolls on first and the boing-o-matic main gear just plunk on without much fanfare. YMMV Robert
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 05 Aug 2015, 17:46 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 08/24/13 Posts: 804 Post Likes: +562 Company: Retired Location: Farmersville, TX
Aircraft: 2007 RANS S-6ES
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Strictly personal preference and perhaps not reflected by the market as a whole, but I don't perceive those to be positives. I like wood and I like simple. I don't disagree but I'm amused at the number of ads for Citabrias and the like that mention metal spars and a starters. If those things are important to the buyer, most of the 120's and all of the 140's came with these. I do have a fairly light 120 and concede many have become fat over the years. The little 120's are cheap and I've learned to like mine. Robert The reason Citabria ads highlight the metal spar wings (when they've been so modified) is that this removes a repetitive AD that at every annual, the spar must be inspected. Also, the "factory" metal wings give you a 100 lb gross weight increase, and only weigh about 20-25 lbs more than the wood, so you gain about 75-80 lbs useful load - important for us "larger" guys...
_________________ Jim Parker 2007 Rans S-6ES
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 05 Aug 2015, 17:52 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/03/08 Posts: 16227 Post Likes: +27267 Location: Peachtree City GA / Stoke-On-Trent UK
Aircraft: A33
|
|
but not to important for a champ
on the plus side, if someone put a wingtip in the dirt i can splice onto the broken end of a wood spar a heck of a lot easier than with metal
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 08 Aug 2015, 18:53 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 08/24/13 Posts: 804 Post Likes: +562 Company: Retired Location: Farmersville, TX
Aircraft: 2007 RANS S-6ES
|
|
Username Protected wrote: but not to important for a champ Well, most of the Champs I've seen have useful loads around 500 lbs (give or take a bit). When I put my 300 lbs in there, and fill the tanks (25 gal = 150 lbs), it leaves about 70 lbs left over for the other seat. Even if I drop the fuel to 1/2 tanks (75 lbs), it only leaves about 145 lbs for the back-seater. I can't seem to find any 145-lb CFIs in the Dallas area - much less 70-pounders! That's where the extra 80-or-so pounds of useful load from the factory metal spar would come in handy. I can probably find a CFI <= 225-lbs!
_________________ Jim Parker 2007 Rans S-6ES
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 09 Aug 2015, 03:46 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/03/08 Posts: 16227 Post Likes: +27267 Location: Peachtree City GA / Stoke-On-Trent UK
Aircraft: A33
|
|
Username Protected wrote: but not to important for a champ Well, most of the Champs I've seen have useful loads around 500 lbs (give or take a bit). When I put my 300 lbs in there, and fill the tanks (25 gal = 150 lbs), it leaves about 70 lbs left over for the other seat. Even if I drop the fuel to 1/2 tanks (75 lbs), it only leaves about 145 lbs for the back-seater. I can't seem to find any 145-lb CFIs in the Dallas area - much less 70-pounders! That's where the extra 80-or-so pounds of useful load from the factory metal spar would come in handy. I can probably find a CFI <= 225-lbs! ths 7AC's i've seen with metal spars had no change in gross weight
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 09 Aug 2015, 09:14 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 03/01/14 Posts: 2280 Post Likes: +2042 Location: 0TX0 Granbury TX
Aircraft: T-210M Aeronca 7AC
|
|
I've heard that the real benefit that a metal spar brings to the table would be for those flying off the water. Wood works for me.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 09 Aug 2015, 09:39 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/23/13 Posts: 9138 Post Likes: +6891 Company: Kokotele Guitar Works Location: Albany, NY
Aircraft: C-182RG, C-172, PA28
|
|
I'm curious why the AD doesn't also apply to the Champ. I thought they were the same wing? Username Protected wrote: The reason Citabria ads highlight the metal spar wings (when they've been so modified) is that this removes a repetitive AD that at every annual, the spar must be inspected. Also, the "factory" metal wings give you a 100 lb gross weight increase, and only weigh about 20-25 lbs more than the wood, so you gain about 75-80 lbs useful load - important for us "larger" guys...
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 09 Aug 2015, 10:17 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/29/10 Posts: 2760 Post Likes: +2598 Location: Dallas, TX (KADS & KJWY)
Aircraft: T28B,7GCBC,E90
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Yes, a champ is very easy, of all taildraggers it requires the least amount of footwork. And it's much easier to get in and out of than a cub.
I fly a cub, but don't have any champ time, so excuse the ignorant questions... Do you solo a Champ from the front? Does it have doors or windows like the cub so you can fly with the door/window open? Is there any semblance of cargo space in a champ? Robert
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 09 Aug 2015, 15:50 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/29/10 Posts: 2760 Post Likes: +2598 Location: Dallas, TX (KADS & KJWY)
Aircraft: T28B,7GCBC,E90
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Solo from the front. The door is more like a 150's door than a cub's door so, unless you take it off completely, there's no way to fly doors open. The left windows do slide open though. Thanks John! Robert
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aeronca Chief Posted: 09 Aug 2015, 16:57 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 03/01/14 Posts: 2280 Post Likes: +2042 Location: 0TX0 Granbury TX
Aircraft: T-210M Aeronca 7AC
|
|
Robert, you can fly mine anytime you want.
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|