As close as you’ll get to a fighter plane

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ส.ค. 2024
  • The 2024 Tarragon is highly maneuverable. However, you are only burning 6 gallons per hour.
    The landing gear was created from scratch by the company. Why is it so beefy? The intended customers were country farmers with rough grass strips for landing sites.

ความคิดเห็น • 11

  • @dustdevilz4771
    @dustdevilz4771 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    It’s close….its only missing about 2000hp ….but it’s close.

  • @tobberfutooagain2628
    @tobberfutooagain2628 24 วันที่ผ่านมา

    I confused it with a P51 there for a second….

  • @KapitanPoop
    @KapitanPoop 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    How much?

  • @JMGlider
    @JMGlider 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I fly sometimes a Rotax 912 equiped aircraft.
    And for the oil check in preflight a 912 needs to be 'gorgolled', which is the burbling sound the engine makes after turning it over by hand after ~20 times. The sump is then filled with oil and then you do have an accurate oil reading.
    Maybe the 915 doesn't need that, or maybe you did do that and cut it out the video. But I just wants to say a 912 does use quite a bit oil, so you're quote 'it's not using any oil' surprises me.
    I don't want to be the internet troll, just hoping you check your oil correctly for your safety. ;)

    • @thomasaltruda
      @thomasaltruda 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I believe they call that “burping” the engine, and actually you aren’t “filling the sump” with oil. You are using engine compression past the rings to pressurize the sump and move the oil OUT of the sump and into the oil tank. I’ve never seen a 912 or 914 use any oil, so I don’t know if your experience is a sick engine. Also if you are taking 20+ blades on the prop to get the gurgle, try turning the engine really slow, you sorta hold the compression so it has time to leak past the rings and pressurize the crankcase. You might be able to get the gurgle in 5 to 10 blades.

  • @louisallen5727
    @louisallen5727 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Heck yeah.

  • @apennameandthata2017
    @apennameandthata2017 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Fighter plane? Its not even aerobatic! 🤡🤡🤡🤡

  • @tztz1949
    @tztz1949 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Yea, nice, but I have a hard time mimicking the sound of a real engine on long flights.

    • @submechanophobia768
      @submechanophobia768 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      What do you mean the Rotax is not a real engine. it's got Pistons valves and and a fuel ratio management system. It runs a lot smoother than your "real engine" which will make it less noise and vibration fatiguing over long flights.

    • @cwhitty05
      @cwhitty05 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@submechanophobia768the Rotax engines have a bad reputation for being unreliable. I’ve never flown one, so I can’t attest to that, but around the FBOs and flight schools, there is a lot of distain for Rotax engines.