Skymaster Forum  

Go Back   Skymaster Forum > Messages
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 8 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 06-27-12, 11:36 PM
wybenga wybenga is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: T31
Posts: 21
wybenga is an unknown quantity at this point
In fact the opposite is true. Your Vne is limited to the top of the green arc, generally. But if you are indicating 165 knots at 6000 and still climbing at 2000 fpm or indicating 150 knots at 20.000 you are hauling buns.

Jack
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 06-28-12, 12:46 AM
hharney's Avatar
hharney hharney is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Michigan (8D4)
Posts: 2,255
hharney is on a distinguished road
The Super Skymaster with TSIO-520 rated at 310 hp has the same structural limitations as the standard 337 airframe that it was modified from. The advantages of the increased hp is climb. The higher speed at altitude is true airspeed but the calibrated airspeed is still within structural limits. The Super is about 20-25 kt faster at altitude with a cruise of about 220 kt TAS. The positive was 2500 FPM climb but the extra weight of the engines eroded the useful load terribly.

The 73 and newer airframes were substantially different from the pre-73 models. Cessna also changed the wing spar in the H model vs the G model. There were gross wgt increase mods but all landing weight requirements remained the same except for some proprietary STC's. I am not aware of anyone attempting to increase the structural load limits. It would be very expensive (if any possible) and there just isn't enough of an audience to justify it.
__________________
Herb R Harney
1968 337C

Flying the same Skymaster for 47 years
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 08-18-12, 04:17 PM
Mayhemxpc's Avatar
Mayhemxpc Mayhemxpc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 12
Mayhemxpc is on a distinguished road
I spoke with the Delta Hawk people at OSH. They are focusing on their smaller 160 hp engine which they say delivers the equivalent of 180 hp performance. No idea how they measured that. They seem to have a "pie in the sky bye and bye" attitude towards larger engines, and in particular the 337. TF Hawk was depending on Delta Hawk producing their engine according to its original program. (I know the president of TF Hawk.) As a result, even though they had everything else ready to go, they had to suspend everything because there was no engine, and no realistic delivery date for one. Sad.

That and they had very little in the way of solid interest from prospective buyers. Last I talked to him about that particular subject, the cost of a fully re-built TF Hawk O-2/C337 was not going to be that different than a Caravan. (The USAF has modified C-208's to launch HELLFIRE missiles for the Iraqi Air Force.)

Bottom line: A good idea has money attached to it. If they don't see enough potential sales interest, there won't be much development.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.