| From: | Paul Jonathan Adam <Paul@********.DEMON.CO.UK> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Aircraft Speeds |
| Date: | Wed, 19 Jul 1995 20:36:24 GMT |
> increase of the speed of planes ? The group I am in are currently in
> negotiations to buy one of the those amphibious babies mentioned in
> the RBB, however the speed it a little slow for our liking (not to
> mention the rediculiously small fuel tanks)
Well, to double your speed you need to roughly quadruple your power...
which is one reason aircraft haven't in general become hugely fast
in the civil field. Compare the 180 knots of a 240hp Cessna to
the 1200 horsepower needed to make a Spitfire do 330kt. That translates
to a lot more fuel burned, a lot more maintenance (the engine is a highly
tuned cranky short-lived nightmare instead of a nice solid reliable brick)
and *much* higher operating costs.
Also for most real applications the speed difference isn't too important.
Amphibs do suffer a *big* speed penalty from the compromises necessary to
let them land on water, too. The range should yield to persuasion, though:
amphibians (e.g. the PBY Catalina) are actually notoriously long-legged,
if very slow.
Buy your amphib and crank up the engines to the max: just expect to have
to do total overhauls every fifty hours.
There are reasons military aircraft haven't become massively fast, mostly
due to the inability to go around corners and the enormous cost in fuel
and time to get to Mach 2, let alone anything faster. But civil planes
are generally designed for the lowest cost.
After all, why spend big money on a fast plane? Buy a cheap old plane and
put a spirit or elemental on it with Movement. Magic changes the equation.
--
When you have shot and killed a man, you have defined your attitude towards
him. You have offered a definite answer to a definite problem. For better
or for worse, you have acted decisively.
In fact, the next move is up to him.
Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
