A few other considerations (from someone who made the same decision
recently):
1) Forced landings - the monowheel is better suited to unprepared
'runways'
2) Ditching - less chance of flipping over in a mono
3) Flaps - more options in a tri, two settings only in a mono (although
there is at least one mono being built with flaps independent to gear)
4) Motorglider wings - personally I think it would look very odd with
legs
5) Challenge - I fancy the challenge of the mono
6) Weight - 40lbs (any better calls on this?) lighter in a mono
7) Wet/long grass - better in a mono, indeed there is at least one
reported occasion when a mono got away no problem and a tri couldn't
reach rotation speed
8) Panel - slightly more room on a tri panel
9) Storage - although it's a mod that should be done with the utmost
care (and I hate to think of the work this would require under PFA
rules), I understand that some tri owners have used the centre tunnel as
storage space
10) Soft ground (very much a UK consideration, I think!) - better in a
mono
Jeremy Davey
Europa XS monowheel 537M
-----Original Message-----
From: forum-owner@europaclub.org.uk
Subject: Re: Mono wheel vs. Tri-Gear debate
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Boulet" <possible2do@yahoo.com>
Subject: Mono wheel vs. Tri-Gear debate
>
I remember a discussion last year when someone couldn't get their
monowheel
off a high altitude Bishop, California airport without partially raising
the
gear and flaps since density altitude that day was fairly high...and all
of
this was with the turbo 914 engine.
>
The engine was actually a 912S, turning a Whirlwind constant-speed prop.
I'm sure the 914 would have no problems in such conditions.
Dave DeFord
N135TD
|