Impressed with the BC-12D

[tcrate]

I am just getting acquainted with the Taylorcraft BC-12D and want to take a closer look (sit in one, see how it fits and hear more). I'm in Colorado Springs so looking for someone who may have one, or see if there are some flyins this summer where I might see a flock or two and get a lot smarter.

My guess is I would need a minimum of 85 hp, maybe a C90 or a stroker. Want to try and stay light sport.

thanks for any leads!

Mike

[kona4breakfast]

Re: Impressed with the BC-12D

I have a C90 in my BC12D. I'm 6'3" 220 lbs. Helps that I have seaplane doors. Keep it light. She kicks ass here in AK. I bought it to learn how to fly airplanes. Safe tailwheel to learn in, cheap to operate, and if she's light. If you can manage to land somewhere, you know you can get out of there.

[astjp2]

Re: Impressed with the BC-12D

Anchorage is something like 100'msl, springs is about 7000, big difference in DA, I have flown off of 7K strips, they suck if you don't have enough power and a climb prop. Add some heat and you have the makings for being at max altitude before you ever leave the ground. Be wise and know your limits then learn what your airplane is capable of. I took of at Smiley Creek ID in a 65 hp tcraft, (7700 msl grass strip) almost didn't make it over Galena pass, outside temps were about 80, I was climbing at about -30 fpm once I got airborne, had to fly down hill down the valley to get enough airspeed to try and climb out. I should have waited until it was cool. Not trying to burst a bubble, just trying to make you aware that there are limits that need to be considered. Tim

I have a C90 in my BC12D. I'm 6'3" 220 lbs. Helps that I have seaplane doors. Keep it light. She kicks ass here in AK. I bought it to learn how to fly airplanes. Safe tailwheel to learn in, cheap to operate, and if she's light. If you can manage to land somewhere, you know you can get out of there.

[Dick Smith]

Re: Impressed with the BC-12D

Tim (astjp2) has it pretty well figured out...Kenai (about 60 miles from Anchorage) this a.m. was reporting a Density Altitude of minus 400 ft.
Not exactly supercharging, but it makes a difference. Anything that enhances or detracts from the development of power is especially noticeable on floats. "High, Hot and Heavy" conditions can make for an interesting takeoff. Dick

[kona4breakfast]

Re: Impressed with the BC-12D

Yes, the little continental doesn't do very well at high DA. Neither do any motors, unless they've got a turbocharger on them. I am presuming that since he's looking into a Tcart and not a 185 he already knows the limitations of either the airplane or his wallet. There are other machines out there that could be better suited, but I don't want to be promoting the competition on Mr. Taylor's forum.

[astjp2]

Re: Impressed with the BC-12D

There is a HUGE difference between a 180 lyc and an O-200 in a taylorcraft, go over to Merrill and find Danny Clum, he has one and his uncle built several with 180's in the 1970-80 timeframe, makes a cub look like a tinker toy in comparison for the same horsepower, but cubs are more popular. My point is, the 150 lyc would be like having the o-200 at sea level. Tim

[PA1195]

Re: Impressed with the BC-12D

If I had to have a Taylorcraft at high DA I'd opt for the O-200 with the long Mac 75/38 or Catto prop. Plus the proper intake and exhaust. Turn some power and give up some of the cruise speed. There's not much left if I climb to that DA and power-up what I've got. It's easy to simulate and note the climb performance. Or, figure out the equivalent power settings (MP-RPM) and use them at a lower elevation and do some T/O's to see if it's adequate.

Edit: The F-21's would be my other choice of course. I've never seen or flown one but the extra power might be nice without too much penalty. There was a 150 Lyc engined Taylorcraft here on Aqua 1500's for a few years. The comments I heard from flight instructors was that it was nose heavy and lacked fuel capacity for any extended range mission. I believe the prop was a 74-50 (something) likely not well suited to big thrust in that configuration. The same instructor flew a Cessna C-150/150 on EDO 1650's and loved it so there's an opinion of the two. I have no experience with the C-150/150 either.

Cub pilots get that deer in the headlight stare when asked if they ever takeoff at partial throttle, especially on floats or skis. Most never have especially when really loaded to learn and appreciate the DA performance.

Gary

[kona4breakfast]

Re: Impressed with the BC-12D

I'm guessing that Mike knows what he wants, which is why is asking about the BC12D.

Caveat Emptor: The BC is a wonderful little machine but definitely doesn't suffer from an abundance of power, especially at high DA. There are only a few Tcarts out there with big motors, and even less advertised for sale. It'd be a lot of trouble/cost/time to get your hands on one. You could pick up a Stinson relatively easily and inexpensively; they come with a range of bigger engines, from what I hear they fly quite nicely, and have the added benefit of not being a Piper product. If you wanted to waste your money, you could get a Super Cub. If you wanted to risk your life, you could get a Pacer. If you wanted to do both, you could get a Maule.

Gary, that 150 Lyc Tcart wouldn't happen to be 66T would it? It's for sale on Craigslist.

[PA1195]

Re: Impressed with the BC-12D

I'm guessing that Mike knows what he wants, which is why is asking about the BC12D.

Caveat Emptor: The BC is a wonderful little machine but definitely doesn't suffer from an abundance of power, especially at high DA...If you wanted to do both, you could get a Maule.

Gary, that 150 Lyc Tcart wouldn't happen to be 66T would it? It's for sale on Craigslist.

As long as the owner of a T at high DA realizes the power challenge and learns to effectively deal with it and pick their battles then it's all good. Not my choice for a challenge however as there are other options if you expect to T/O and climb routinely without special skills.

It wasn't N3666T...It was orange and white N2002* (maybe V?) F-19 or perhaps one of the later versions that had the factory HP upgrades. The Aquas are flat sided on the bottom, don't have much for effective bottom hydro-boosters compared with EDO and Baumann...the struts are short making a long prop a question...with perhaps a fairly flat AOA in that installation (not sure how they're rigged). Mine on 1320's is +4.5* ref the float tops. Never flew it just watched them bop along trying to get off the water maybe with a full load. I think it was damaged later and rebuilt.

The Maule-ism is right depending upon version. I had a short winged M-5 235 for a few years and the aspect ratio of the wings were a factor in rate of descent and glide ratio.

Gary

[N96337]

Re: Impressed with the BC-12D

Well, you don't fly during the middle of a hot day...pretty simple. Besides, it's nice and smooth just after daylight and just before dark, not to mention cooler and a better way to start/stop your day! I live at 4000', and have an 85 and short mount...42 pitch prop...seems to do just fine for all that I need. In order to get out of the valley here at home, ya better grab a thousand more. I've got 2400' of grass and haven't really needed all that...in fact usually not even half that. So I'd say the original poster is on the right track. The guy I bought mine from weighed 325 and his kid weighed 200+...they'd fill all 3 tanks, stuff it full of baggage and food, and both squeeze in and away they'd go.... It sure wasn't a rocket, but it did it.
John

[PA1195]

Re: Impressed with the BC-12D

Some day John put a MP gauge in your grossed out plane (tap the induction spider) and note the RPM and MP on a normal day...if there is one? Determine power from Continental's graphs and now you know some of the rest of this story...HP to do what you typically experience. AOA from large tires and VG's probably help along with a long efficient prop.

The OP asked about Colorado Springs (EL ~6000') and wondered about this and that. Take another ~2" on a standard day off your MP and then how's the performance of your plane...or potentially his might be there. Try yours with the 2" reduced MP sometime and see how it does.

This isn't my area of experience (high DA) but I have fought for years for every inch of MP from sea level to 4000' on float equipped aircraft. The Beaver was the only exception due to the supercharger. And in winter the DA goes low due to cold and dry air so few care.

Gary

[tcrate]

Re: Impressed with the BC-12D

thanks so much all for your thoughts and inputs

trying to stay light sport so that limits my selections; maybe I will just wait for PBR II and the removal of medical restrictions: F-19 would be a better choice up here

thanks for confirming my suspicions--100 hp min to have much utility in the summer, VGs would be installed to help things and thanks for the comments on a proper prop...

I expect most of my flying to be solo but it's nice to be able to take someone along without worries

totally agree--know the limits and stay within them

thanks!

Mike

[PA1195]

Re: Impressed with the BC-12D

Hi Mike. I'd still consider a light sport with a powered-up C-85 or C-90 if an F-19 or the FAA regs don't materialize. The STC kit to change it from the C-85 from 188 to 201ci will make more power than standard and closely approach an O-200. Use the longest prop that turns rated static rpm and install an efficient intake and exhaust system. Keep it as light as possible. Pick your density altitude battles and have some fun. There's some powered-up (maybe we should call them "DA'd") Taylorcrafts for sale periodically on Barnstormers and this Forum.

Gary