160 hp F-19

[Dick Smith]

Re: 160 hp F-19

Pasted the following from A-696 TCDS:

Regarding the BCS12D-85
Landplane: Level flight or climb 105 m.p.h.
(True Indicated) Glide or dive 142 m.p.h.
Seaplane: Level flight or climb 95 m.p.h.
Glide or dive 128 m.p.h.

For the F-19, Looking at TCDS 1A9, we see:
Airspeed Limits VP (Maneuvering)
(Normal) 87 mph (76 knots)(True Indicated)
(Utility) 86 mph (75 knots)
Vno (Maximum Structural (Normal) 108 mph (94 knots)
Cruising) (Utility) 104 mph (90 knots)

Vne (Never Exceed)
(Normal) 136 mph (118 knots) (I couldn't find a VNE listed for a F-19 on floats...anyone out there know?)
(Utility) 141 mph (123 knots)

The 3 Taylorcrafts I have flown with the above-mentioned mods were a 135, a 150 and a 160...all 3 were not the older 1946 era machines. They were F-19's. They weren't intended to be fast...they were intended to get a serious load off the ground or water. They certainly do that. They are plenty stout. I never needed to operate them at speeds even close to VNE. As far as fuel burn, one plane, an experimental, carried 52 gals....so urine was more of a concern than petrol.

[S2D]

Re: 160 hp F-19

That would be flying in a very unsafe manner, and would probably result in some kind of damage or crash. Taking a 60 year old airplane, doing an average restoration (as opposed to a full skeletal X-ray and metallurgical test), and then flying it on a lot more power at or near the redline speed for extended periods, compounded by the extra airframe stresses from flying on floats, is stupid. I never thought I'd say this, but I hope the FAA or MOT does NOT approve that modification.

Well I hate to say this, but 2009-1975 = 34 years. this is not a 1946 B model, it is a 1975 F model, using the same exact materials as the 1990's F models that had a 180 horse engine in them, so altho I apprecieate your concerns, I think it is unfounded.

[VictorBravo]

Re: 160 hp F-19

My mistake, it is indeed not a 60 year old airplane. So the concern is indeed not quite as sever... but... unless I'm mistaken its not the same type certificate between the F-19 and the F-22. Forrest?

[S2D]

Re: 160 hp F-19

unless I'm mistaken its not the same type certificate between the F-19 and the F-22. ?

1A9 covers F19 thru F-22 and the old straight 19

Not something I would undertake, but its there, it just needs to be useful. Or restored to original and the FFWD put on an experimental.

[Robert Bradbury]

Re: 160 hp F-19

Pasted the following from A-696 TCDS:

Regarding the BCS12D-85
Landplane: Level flight or climb 105 m.p.h.
(True Indicated) Glide or dive 142 m.p.h.
Seaplane: Level flight or climb 95 m.p.h.
Glide or dive 128 m.p.h.

For the F-19, Looking at TCDS 1A9, we see:
Airspeed Limits VP (Maneuvering)
(Normal) 87 mph (76 knots)(True Indicated)
(Utility) 86 mph (75 knots)
Vno (Maximum Structural (Normal) 108 mph (94 knots)
Cruising) (Utility) 104 mph (90 knots)

Vne (Never Exceed)
(Normal) 136 mph (118 knots) (I couldn't find a VNE listed for a F-19 on floats...anyone out there know?)
(Utility) 141 mph (123 knots)

The 3 Taylorcrafts I have flown with the above-mentioned mods were a 135, a 150 and a 160...all 3 were not the older 1946 era machines. They were F-19's. They weren't intended to be fast...they were intended to get a serious load off the ground or water. They certainly do that. They are plenty stout. I never needed to operate them at speeds even close to VNE. As far as fuel burn, one plane, an experimental, carried 52 gals....so urine was more of a concern than petrol.

Did you have flaps on any of these models and if so what was the difference?

[Dick Smith]

Re: F-19 wiith flaps...

Rob, the 150 hp plane was the one with flaps on it...it has a 160 now. The flaps let you lower the nose and get a great sink-rate without building speed, all the time being able to see straight ahead, very nice when operating on a marginal strip. I use the slip like everyone else with my own plane...but every time I remember the flapped plane...I can't help but grin! Dick

[S2D]

Re: 160 hp F-19

Can't help but think one would have to do some beefing up of the rear spar if he wanted to install flaps.

[Robert Bradbury]

Re: 160 hp F-19

Can't help but think one would have to do some beefing up of the rear spar if he wanted to install flaps.

I already did that and regret not installing the flaps. My spars are as tall and
thick as the F-22. Flaps are great when you have lots of hp and are flying at
higher weights. My friend with the 0-290 doesn't have flaps and regrets this
decision as well . Light,low HP, and no flaps good, heavy lots of power and flaps good. I'm kinda in the middle, If lighter probably would have been better, still not too bad though, well at least at the lower weights.