ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) (07/10/85)
I may be silly, but I think the Cessna Cardinal RG is right up there. It looks kinda gawky with the wheels down, but fly formation with one sometime and you'll see what I mean.
ron@brl-tgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (07/12/85)
> I may be silly, but I think the Cessna Cardinal RG is right > up there. It looks kinda gawky with the wheels down, but > fly formation with one sometime and you'll see what I mean. It's really stupid with the wheels up on the runway. We had two Cardinals where I learned to fly and both had been bellied in at least once. However, they are the queen of the Cessna line, being the only high wing plane they have without the wing struts. -Ron
peterb@pbear.UUCP (07/12/85)
You think the Cardinal RG is gawky, try the Caravan. With its 54'
wing and the fixed gear and struts, it look like a beast in sheep's clothing!
With a useful load of 3454 lbs. and its turbine, it can and does blow doors
off of other tin cans!
As for nice looking planes, dig up a picture of the Windecker Eagle,
the first composite general aviation aircraft. It's sleek lines really make
this baby look sleek. In fact without a transponder, testing shoed that the
gear had to be lowered in order for radar to identify its image as a plane.
Also the older centurions looked good. The planes from the early 70's
looked the best. The gear stance was level unlike the Cardinal, and with the
cantilevered wing, the absence of struts gave it a look of speed and agility.
Peter Barada
{ihnp4!inmet!{harvard|cca}!ima}!pbear!peterbhwe@lanl.ARPA (07/16/85)
> I may be silly, but I think the Cessna Cardinal RG is right > up there. It looks kinda gawky with the wheels down, but > fly formation with one sometime and you'll see what I mean. Sorry, The most beautiful airplane is a 1964 PA-28/235. Most wouldn't agree, but since I own one I might be just a little prejudiced...
bob@ulose.UUCP ( Bob Bismuth ) (07/20/85)
Hmmm, the most beautiful plane ...
Seems like most people are hung up on the military, transport or
production single engine monoplanes. Maybe I'm odd, but I really think
planes look better with a tailwheel and preferrably two wings.
Military craft certainly have those fast smooooooth lines, but their
shape is almost always purely a phallic derivation. Also, I can't
help agreeing with whoever made the posting conerning their use -
whatever they look like, their job is killing people.
As for transport, seems to me that the DC-3 says it all. I'll watch
one land any day - much more interesting than watching jets expand
their wings with all sorts of lift and drag devices, only to then burn
more rubber landing than most private planes have on their wheel hubs
to start with.
Production single engine? Well, regarding struts, the Cessna Cardinal
is not the only strutless model they produced. The old 195 is
strutless, looks hideously fast and has its gear in the *right*
configuration. Modern Pipers, Mooney's and Beechcraft I can't really
appreciate. Aside from the *wrong* gear configuration, planes in each's
family look so alike that I can really only tell the twins from
singles, and both of those from V-tail Bonanzas.
Biplanes. Their real beauty is much the same as that of steam engines
- almost everything is there because it is functional and keeps it
going in any attitude. Anyone who has heard the radial in a Stearman
is sure to believe in their beauty. What pilot doesn't get a bit
dreamy about seeing him/herself, clad in goggles, silk scarf and flying
jacket, 3-pointing a Waco, Stearman, American Eagle, Parks, or Great
Lakes onto a soft grass field?
While watching a 707 do a roll is an experience I wish I could have
shared in, watching a pilot who knows aerobatics just enjoying
him/herself in a biplane is worth every minute. A Pitts or Christen
Eagle can be captivating, but if you've never seen an old Navy Stearman
trainer pulling rolls or hammerheads, you've got an experience waiting.
They're big enough to see at any altitude, and their size and slow
turning engine add a dimension that is impossible to describe in words.
It's really summed up in something I heard at our local field not long
after a brand new Great Lakes (N7GL - the feature plane, not so long ago
of Private Pilot, AOPA Pilot, etc.) became a resident. It was a busy
Saturday with lots of weekend aviators shooting touch-n-go's. As I
walked down the flight line I heard the Lakes on final. Stopping to
watch his approach and landing I stood next to a small crowd of plane
watching parents and their kids. As N7GL greased it in, a father
turned to his 7 year old and said, "See that was a REAL airplane!"
-- bob
** Comments intended as personal opinions only. Any flames or criticism
of others' opinions are unintended and should please be excused.
Everyone's opinion freely accepted. **cfiaime@ihnp3.UUCP (J. Williams) (07/23/85)
> > Biplanes. Their real beauty is much the same as that of steam engines > - almost everything is there because it is functional and keeps it > going in any attitude. Anyone who has heard the radial in a Stearman > is sure to believe in their beauty. What pilot doesn't get a bit > dreamy about seeing him/herself, clad in goggles, silk scarf and flying > jacket, 3-pointing a Waco, Stearman, American Eagle, Parks, or Great > Lakes onto a soft grass field? Over the Forth of July weekend, I had the pleasure of flying in a local Confederate Air Force show. We had a formation of 3 Stearmans and the Fairchild PT-19. Talk about a pretty sight, forming up as number 4 on the three PT-17s or N2Ss. (Two were done up in Navy colors, one was a white and black civilian scheme.) Every radio call the formation leader made refered to a flight of "3 1/2 Stearmans." The Stearman outclimbed the Fairchild, but the Fairchild was faster in cruise. Note: the annual Stearman Flyin is coming in September in Galesburg, Illinois. jeff williams AT&T Bell Laboratories ihnp4!cfiaime
bl@hplabsb.UUCP (07/25/85)
> Cardinals where I learned to fly and both had been bellied in at > least once. However, they are the queen of the Cessna line, being > the only high wing plane they have without the wing struts. > > -Ron Oh ya? How about the P210?