Challenger 2?
Tony Roberts
I'm currently studying for my PPL and I'm looking to buy a 2 seater plane
with as high a range as possible, decent top speed, safe, a useful load of
500 lb or above. Some of my flying will be done over mountains at
8000/9000 feet with a trip length of 200+ miles (and few good emergency
landing places, so it needs to be very reliable). I'm looking at advanced
ultralights as I could not afford the operating costs of a 152 or 172. So
far the Challenger 2 looks to be the best suited to my needs. Would anyone
be prepared to share their experience with the Challenger 2, or make
alternate recommendations for any other aircraft that would meet my
requirements.
Thanks
Tony
Mark Smith
with 500 pounds on board, I hope not 'plus gas', at 9000 feet MSL, you
will need a very special Challenger !!
--
Mark Smith
Tri-State Kite Sales http://www.trikite.com
1121 N Locust St
Mt Vernon, IN 47620 mailto:ma...@trikite.com
Ken Kennedy
in aviation design. Hence their popularity. Their strengths are "Bang for
the Buck", good performance on small engine, excellent dealer support,
strong owner group (especially in Canada). Drawbacks are small size for two
people, light construction, difficult yaw control (some Challenger fanatics
think that this is actually a good thing, in that it "separates the men
from the boys") and (I think) being limited to the R503 or smaller.
As you plan to carry two people at high altitude over relatively long
distances, the Challenger compromises may not be the best combo for you. I
think it is difficult to add tankage to the Challenger. With a 500 pound
payload, I think the 503 would totally inadequate at high density
altitudes.
Why not look at the Chinook and Beaver, manufactured right out there in
God's Country? Contact ASAP in Vernon.
<http://www.ultralight.ca/>.
Given the long flights you plan, the Challenger, Chinook, or Beaver might
be a little slow for your liking. Maybe a Titan Tornado with a big engine
would better fill your needs.
kk
Fr. John
If you're going to take trips like that, wouldn't you want to have a
four-stroke instead of a two-stroke for reliability's sake? Yes, many of my
friends in the Denver Wings Club flew over the mountains, but if you're
going to do it on a regular basis, I would think you'd like to increase your
odds a little bit. Engine outs over mountains could be just a little
inconvenient, don't you think?
Fr. John
"Ken Kennedy" <ken.k...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:39A07DF2...@sympatico.ca...
Ross Carlisle
even with 2 people on board. Either that or you could go with a HKS 4
stroke. I havent had any issues with 2 strokes yet, so I wouldnt be afraid
to go mountain flying with one. Most of the flying I do is in the mountains
of New England (Well...We call them mountains, Hills to you westerners). If
I lose an engine, Im either in the trees or a lake. There are no open
fields.
Ross
Tony Roberts <tonyr...@home.com> wrote in message
news:tonyroberts-20...@24.69.239.94...
buzkil
You mentioned the Titan as a possible choice, but it's size
limitations are greater then the Challenger II. But they do go fast!
Just a thought.....
Raymond Hines
Ray
On 21 Aug 2000 21:30:49 GMT, "Ross Carlisle" <rrc...@concentric.net>
wrote:
>Try an enclosed Flightstar with a 582. It has impressive climb performance
>even with 2 people on board. Either that or you could go with a HKS 4
>stroke. I havent had any issues with 2 strokes yet, so I wouldnt be afraid
>to go mountain flying with one. Most of the flying I do is in the mountains
>of New England (Well...We call them mountains, Hills to you westerners). If
>I lose an engine, Im either in the trees or a lake. There are no open
>fields.
>
>Ross
>
>Tony Roberts <tonyr...@home.com> wrote in message
>news:tonyroberts-20...@24.69.239.94...
>> Hi from BC Canada
>>
>> I'm currently studying for my PPL and I'm looking to buy a 2 seater plane
>> with as high a range as possible, decent top speed, safe, a useful load of
>> 500 lb or above. Some of my flying will be done over mountains at
>> 8000/9000 feet with a trip length of 200+ miles (and few good emergency
>> landing places, so it needs to be very reliable). I'm looking at advanced
>> ultralights as I could not afford the operating costs of a 152 or 172. So
>> far the Challenger 2 looks to be the best suited to my needs. Would anyone
>> be prepared to share their experience with the Challenger 2, or make
>> alternate recommendations for any other aircraft that would meet my
>> requirements.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> Tony
>
>
---
Remove OUCH from both sides of my email address to send me email. :)
Ray
Raymond Hines
>> distances, the Challenger compromises may not be the best combo for you. I
>> think it is difficult to add tankage to the Challenger. With a 500 pound
>> payload, I think the 503 would totally inadequate at high density
>> altitudes.
He can put a 582 on a Challenger II and be okay there. There's room
for you to put a 15 gallon fuel tank in the Challenger II as well,
where the existing tank is. A dealer sells one already made and
fabricated for it -- can't remember the URL off-hand though. Anyone?
A few Challenger folks placed fuel pods under the wings on both sides
to add capacity -- nifty solution as well, but I imagine it would be
much easier to just pop a 15 gallon tank where the existing tank is.
Ray
Ross Carlisle
also prefer a tractor configuration over pusher. They feel more stable to
me...
Ross
Raymond Hines <ray...@OUCHhinesfamily.com> wrote in message
news:39a1f876.90911646@news...
Bald_Eagle
If you feel that the Challenger II may fit your needs, check out the
Excalibur at www.excaliburaircraft.com.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Fr. John
Fr. John
"Raymond Hines" <ray...@OUCHhinesfamily.com> wrote in message
news:39a1f8ca.90996392@news...
Raymond Hines
wrote:
> If you feel that the Challenger II may fit your needs, check out the
>Excalibur at www.excaliburaircraft.com.
Didn't see any Challenger IIs for sale there?
Bald_Eagle
> Didn't see any Challenger IIs for sale there?
Hahaha - indeed! Guess I should have made that clear. The Excalibur
does have the tried and true airframe of a Challenger II, with many
improvements tho. Does that count?
Scrappman
Check out this sight..... http://www.skyraider.com
It is a small bush plane, in every way you could imagine.
Scrappman
Charlie Sewell
1993 CHALLENGER II • FOR SALE!! .. RIGHT SIDE .. 503 Rotax dual
CDI, dual carbs 52 hp. Electric start, full panel of gauges, fiberglass
nose
cone, big tires, tall drive, 60 in prop, good fabric and paint, engine was
top oh
5 hrs ago. Doors, breaks, etc. White, blue with red pin stripe. This plane
was
owned by western singer Doug Stone. $11,500 or best. Contact Harry Alberty
located Clarksville TN USA. Telephone: (931) 905-0780. Fax: (931)
905-0780.
-- Posted 23 August 2000 -- Show all Ads posted by this Advertiser
Rucky840
ggle...@minn.net
>
> Greetings,
>
> If you feel that the Challenger II may fit your needs, check out the
> Excalibur at www.excaliburaircraft.com.
Yes, check it out at the web site. You certainly can't check it out at
Oshkosh or SnF, because the manufacturer never shows up. You can't
check it out at the local fly-ins, because there are so few in
existance. You can't check it out in articles in Experimenter or
KitPlanes, again because there are so few in existance.
Become a test pilot! Check out Excalibur!
gil leiter
MAPLEWOOD, MN
Mark Smith
Spohen like a true follower !!!!!!!!!
of Challenger,
BTW, did some blasphemy last week, friend was really disappointed with
503 performance on CH II so we installed a 592, bolt up and a really
neat radiator installation too, no changes to the aileron controls or
anything,,,,,
Bald_Eagle
Gil,
You should check out the website as well. Not only are there
articles in Experimenter and KitPlanes, but in Ultralight Flying! as
well. I don't know how many there are in existance, but anyone is
welcome to check out mine. I live in Indiana and the door is always
open. If you have anything specific that concerns you as to it's
airworthiness, I would really appreciate you telling me now. If the
only thing you have to say is that there are only a few of them, thanks
for your comments.
Bald_Eagle
Mark Smith <ma...@trikite.com> wrote:
<snip>
> BTW, did some blasphemy last week, friend was really disappointed with
> 503 performance on CH II so we installed a 592, bolt up and a really
> neat radiator installation too, no changes to the aileron controls or
> anything,,,,,
> --
>
> Mark Smith
> Tri-State Kite Sales http://www.trikite.com
> 1121 N Locust St
> Mt Vernon, IN 47620 mailto:ma...@trikite.com
Mark,
When all was said and done, was the change worth it? Was the
increase in performance that noticable?
Bald_Eagle
This is a reply from Tom Karr of Excalibur Aircraft:
Thanks for your thoughts. Apparently you place a lot of importance on a
manufacturer being at Sun N Fun or Osh Kosh. Well did you know that
challenger didn't even show at Sun N Fun this year, nor did Hornet, and
some others. So what does that mean, that challenger and hornet are
going out of business?
The reason for our not going to such shows is that a) our sales are
just fine and we don't want to go to the trouble and expense of
exhibiting at a show when we don't need to, and b) I personally hate to
go. I went as a challenger or titan dealer in 93,94,95,96,97, and have
burned out on such shows.
There have been few articles its true because I just haven't felt the
time was right. There will be some soon though, and new pictures too as
we unveil our 2001 model.
There is no need for test pilots thank you. The plane, based on the
challenger airframe, has been time tested for years as you know, but we
have made more than our share of contributions to the design that have
improved performance, with better looks, and better features, that add
up to a different plane. Thats we wanted to do from the start, we never
wanted to copy Dave's challenger. Our EXCALIBUR doesn't look like a
challenger or perform like it. All changes have been approved by our
aeronautical engineer, and the people who have taken a demo ride LOVE
the plane.
If you feel you can do a better job of marketing an aircraft, please
give us your suggestions. We are always eager to learn.
Sincerely,
Tom Karr
Visit our Worldwide Website:
http://www.excaliburaircraft.com <click here
Pete
Is the plane more substantial (read: less overall flex) than the Challenger?
Is it as substantial as the Hornet?
Thanks,
Pete
"Bald_Eagle" <bald_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8pcfhs$jvk$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
ggle...@minn.net
Never intended to imply that I had any concerns as to the the
airworthiness of Excalibur. Have no opinions on that, as I have no real
information on which to base such conclusion.
I received Tom's private E-mail, and responded directly to him. Did'nt
want to bother the entire group, but have no objection if he posts my
reply here. I believe he understands better my position. My basic point
is that real first hand information is not, in general, available to
potential customers. This comes about by being able to see examples at
various fly ins and reports from the likes of Dan Johnson. If I happen
to be in your area some time I certainly will take advantage of your
invitation to see your Excalibur.
Would appreciate it if you could give me the month/year of the articles
in Kitplanes and Experimenter. Have all issues saved, so can then look
them up. Certainly do not recall reading them, but could have been in a
hurry when I read those issues and missed them.
gil leiter
MAPLEWOOD, MN
Bald_Eagle
ggle...@minn.net wrote:
I am soooo glad you didn't have anything negative to say about the
Excalibur's airworthiness! HaHa And you are right that there is little
information about the Excalibur on the web and that is one reason why I
asked this group for their opinions. I have however, been able to
contact several owners since my first posts here several months ago. I
guess it is that they are out flying and not surfing the web like I
do. :)
Anyway, to answer your question about the articles. On the
Excalibur website (www.excaliburaircraft.com) if you click on
the 'Articles' link you will see the articles. For example,
Experimenter Nov 98, Ultralight Flying! Sept 98, and Kitplanes (no date
listed for that one tho). I guess if you wanted more information you
could contact them directly or Tom Karr at Excalibur.
As I mentioned, if you find your way to Indianapolis email me in
advance and I'd be happy to schedule the time to show you my
Excalibur. Hopefully it will be finished by then! HaHa
--
Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground arise and spite thee.